DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on March 22, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 3, and 6-10 are currently amended and remain pending in the application. Claims 2 and 4-5 are canceled. Claims 11-12 are newly presented and remain pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. (US 2011/0183196 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki et al. discloses a battery ([0044] and Fig. 1, secondary battery 10) comprising:
an electrode body including a positive electrode and a negative electrode ([0044] and Fig. 1, power generating element 16 with positive and negative electrode plates);
an electrolytic solution ([0054], electrolyte poured into battery case 11);
a battery case ([0044] and Figs. 1 and 2, battery case 11 containing power generating element 16) housing the electrode body, storing the electrolytic solution ([0054]), and including an electrolytic solution injection hole ([0044] and Fig. 2, liquid inlet 21); and
a sealing member connected to a portion of the battery case defining a peripheral edge of the electrolytic solution injection hole, such that the electrolytic solution injection hole is sealed with the sealing member ([0045] and Fig. 2, lid member 31 that closes liquid inlet 21), wherein
a surface of the battery case facing the electrode body includes a protrusion located around the electrolytic solution injection hole and protruding toward the electrode body (see Annotated Fig. 2 below, protrusion).
the battery case further includes a closing plate provided with the electrolytic solution injection hole and defining the surface ([0044]-[0045] and Figs. 1 and 2, closing plate 12 with liquid inlet 21),
the sealing member includes a connection where the sealing member and the closing plate are welded together ([0045] and Fig. 2, welded portion 32),
an outer surface of the closing plate includes a recess (see Annotated Fig. 2 below, recess),
the electrolytic solution injection hole is disposed adjacent to the recess (see Annotated Fig. 2 below, liquid inlet 21 disposed adjacent to fluid retention recess in recess),
the recess is provided with a second projection located around the electrolytic solution injection hole and facing a surface of the sealing member located toward the electrode body ([0049] and see Annotated Fig. 2 below, protrusions 23 in recess),
in a plan view of the outer surface of the closing plate, the second projection has a substantially annular outer shape ([0049] and Figs. 3 and 5, protrusions 23 are four arcuate protrusions) and
the recess further includes a second recess disposed outward of the second projection (see Annotated Fig. 2 below, second recess in recess), and
a third recess disposed inward of the second projection (see Annotated Fig. 2 below, third recess comprising the fluid retention recess and second space), wherein an extension of a bottom portion of the third recess defines a border between the electrolytic solution injection hole and a space located directly above the electrolytic solution injection hole (see Annotated Fig. 2 below, fluid retention recess located above liquid inlet 21).
Suzuki et al. Annotated Fig. 2
PNG
media_image1.png
442
898
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1. Suzuki et al. further discloses wherein the recess is further provided with a first projection surrounding the electrolytic solution injection hole (see Annotated Fig. 2 above, first projection), and an outer peripheral edge of the sealing member is welded to the first projection ([0045] and Fig. 2, welded portion 32).
Regarding claim 6, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1. Suzuki et al. further discloses wherein the second projection is provided with a cut-out ([0049] and Fig. 5, protrusions 23 are four arcuate protrusions that do not fully surround liquid inlet 21).
Regarding claim 7, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1. Suzuki et al. further discloses the battery further comprising: a first space defined by: an outer peripheral wall surface of the second projection of the battery case; and the surface of the sealing member located toward the electrode body (see Annotated Fig. 2, first space).
Regarding claim 8, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1. Suzuki et al. further discloses wherein the third recess includes a fluid retention recess located closer to the electrolytic solution injection hole than the second projection (see Annotated Fig. 2, fluid retention recess).
Regarding claim 9, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 8. Suzuki et al. further discloses further comprising: a second space surrounded by the fluid retention recess and the surface of the sealing member located toward the electrode body (see Annotated Fig. 2, second space).
Regarding claim 10, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1. Suzuki et al. further discloses wherein the protrusion is larger in outer shape than the sealing member in the plan view (see Annotated Fig. 2 above, outside diameter D1 of protrusion and outside diameter D2 of lid member 31).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2011/0183196 A1) in view of Takasu et al. (US 2016/0344000 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Suzuki et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1. Suzuki et al. does not disclose wherein the sealing member further comprises a central projection at a position overlapping the electrolytic solution injection hole in a first direction, the central projection having a diameter smaller than that of the electrolytic solution injection hole, and protruding toward the electrolytic solution injection hole.
Takasu et al. discloses wherein the sealing member further comprises a central projection at a position overlapping the electrolytic solution injection hole in a first direction, the central projection having a diameter smaller than that of the electrolytic solution injection hole, and protruding toward the electrolytic solution injection hole ([0041] and Fig. 2, projection portion 33 and injection hole 24).
Suzuki et al. and Takasu et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sealed batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery of Suzuki et al. with the teachings of Takasu et al., and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. Doing so would help retain inert gas in the inert gas retaining portion, which would further effectively restrain the occurrence of blowholes (Takasu et al. [0060]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Suzuki discloses the limitations of claim 11. Modified Suzuki further discloses wherein the sealing member further comprises a central recess recessed toward the central projection at a position overlapping the central projection in the first direction (Takasu et al. Fig. 2, recess above projection portion 33).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on March 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 6 of Applicant’s response, Applicant traverses the assertion that Suzuki et al. anticipates amended claim 1 because Suzuki et al. does not describe (1) the second projection has a substantially annular outer shape. As stated above in the rejection of amended claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102, Suzuki et al. discloses protrusions 23 that are four arcuate protrusions ([0049] and Figs. 3 and 5), which meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation in the instant application. Therefore, Suzuki et al. discloses the second projection has a substantially annular outer shape, and the rejection of amended claim 1 as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. is maintained.
Similarly, on page 6 of Applicant’s response, Applicant traverses the assertion that Suzuki et al. anticipates amended claim 1 because Suzuki et al. does not describe (2) the third recess is disposed inward of the second projection, wherein an extension of a bottom portion of the third recess defines a border between the electrolytic solution injection hole and a space located directly above the electrolytic solution injection hole. As stated above in the rejection of amended claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102, Suzuki et al. discloses a third recess with a fluid retention recess located above liquid inlet 21 (see Annotated Fig. 2 above), which meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation in the instant application. Therefore, Suzuki et al. discloses the third recess is disposed inward of the second projection, wherein an extension of a bottom portion of the third recess defines a border between the electrolytic solution injection hole and a space located directly above the electrolytic solution injection hole, and the rejection of amended claim 1 as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. is maintained.
On pages 6-7 of Applicant’s response, Applicant argues that Suzuki et al. does not render claim 1 obvious because at least one embodiment of the instant application achieves a technical effect which cannot be expected in Suzuki et al. Evidence of secondary considerations, such as unexpected results or commercial success, is irrelevant to 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections and thus cannot overcome a rejection so based. In re Wiggins, 488 F.2d 538, 543, 179 USPQ 421, 425 (CCPA 1973) (see MPEP § 2131.04). Applicant’s disclosure of the unexpected technical effect in the instant specification is irrelevant and cannot overcome the rejection of amended claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because amended claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jackie Liang whose telephone number is (571)-272-0880. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM - 4:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey T. Barton can be reached at (571)-272-1307. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 23 April 2026
Prosecution Insights