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 06/29/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, and 2 are amended while new claims 10, and 11 are added; support for amendment can be found in paragraph [0033] of the specification, and Figs. 1, and 2; thus, claims 1-4, and 10-11 are pending and are rejected under prior art on their merits below.
The 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 1-4 of the previous Office action, are overcome by the amendment and are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cho et al. (US 20250210810 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cho teaches a battery module comprising :a plurality of battery cells ([0037-0038]; Fig. 1; all-solid-state secondary battery 1 including two, three or more unit cells 20; the unit cells 20 meet the claimed plurality of battery cells);
And a function material located between adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells, wherein ([0038, 0072, 0078, 0080-0083]; Fig. 1; elastic layer 400 is arranged between adjacent unit cells 20 and provides high compressive strength and stress relief)
the function material includes an elastic particle, and a binder in which the elastic particle is dispersed ([0071, 0073, 0078,0080, 0082-0083]; elastic layer 400 includes a binder/resin and elastic hollow reinforcing particles dispersed therein),
one of the adjacent battery cells includes a first surface located on a side where other one of the adjacent battery cells is located, the function material covers an area equal to or more than 75 % and equal to or less than 100 % of the first surface (Fig. 1, elastic layer 400 extends across substantially the entire opposing surfaces between adjacent unit cells 20; thereby disclosing coverage within the claimed range of 75-100%).
Regarding claim 3, Cho teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Cho further teaches a limitation wherein the elastic particle is a resinous hollow particle ([0011-0013, 0073, 0078, 0080, 0082]; elastic layer 400 may include elastic particles as reinforcing particles, including hollow particles; and the elastic materials may comprise polymeric/resin materials).
Regarding claim 4, Cho teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Cho further teaches a limitation wherein the binder is an acrylic resin ([0010, 0071, 0073, 0083, 0103-0104]; elastic layer 400 may include an acrylic resin and the elastic layer is prepared from an acrylate mixed resin).
Regarding claim 10, Cho teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Cho further teaches a limitation wherein the other of the adjacent battery cells includes a second surface located on a side where the one of the adjacent battery cells is located, and the function material covers an area equal to or more than 75 % and equal to or less than 100 % of at least one of the first surface or the second surface ([0038, 0072]; Fig. 1; elastic layer 400 is arranged between adjacent unit cells 20 and extends across substantially the entire opposing surfaces between adjacent unit cells 20; thereby disclosing coverage within the claimed range of 75-100%).
Claims 1, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Iwane et al. (WO 2018062172 A1, citation from enclosed machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Iwane teaches a battery module comprising :a plurality of battery cells (page 10, lines 19-31 and 39-42; Figs. 11, and 12; battery module 1 includes a plurality of battery cells 3);
and a function material located between adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells, wherein (page 10, lines 22-31; Figs. 11, and 12; heat conductive thermally expandable sheet 4 is disposed between the cells 3)
the function material includes an elastic particle, and a binder in which the elastic particle is dispersed (page 3, lines 35-36, 59-60; page 4, lines 5-9; page 5, lines 26-40; page 11, lines 43-53; the heat conductive thermally expandable resin composition includes a resin component, and an expandable material; the expandable material includes thermally expansive microcapsule having a shell formed from a plastic polymer, and the resin component includes acrylic resin; in light of specification binder is an acrylic resin (see [0021] of specification). Example 2 specifically teaches thermally expansive microcapsules in a thermally expandable resin composition)
one of the adjacent battery cells includes a first surface located on a side where other one of the adjacent battery cells is located, the function material covers an area equal to or more than 75 % and equal to or less than 100 % of the first surface (Fig. 12, page 3, lines 28-33; page 9, lines 38-50; page 10, lines 22-28, 54-57; Iwane teaches that thermally expandable sheet 4 is fixed to a surface of battery cell 3 and further teaches that thermally expandable coating 4 may cover the entire outer surface of battery cell 3, thereby teaching 100% coverage, which falls within the claimed range; Iwane further teaches that the modifications of the first embodiment may be applied to the second embodiment in which the function material is disposed between adjacent battery cells.)
Regarding claim 11, Iwane teaches all limitation of claim 1 as stated above. Iwane further teaches a limitation wherein each one of the plurality of battery cells comprises: a battery element including a positive electrode, a negative electrode and a separator located between the positive electrode and the negative electrode; and an exterior material sealing the battery element, (page 2, lines 53-60; page 3, lines 1-9; Figs. 11, and 12; Iwane teaches that "battery cell" is a constitutional unit of a battery in which a positive electrode material, a negative electrode material, a separator, a positive electrode terminal, a negative electrode terminal and the like are accommodated in an exterior member sealing the battery element.)
the function material is located between the exterior materials of the adjacent battery cells (Fig. 12, page 3, lines 21-33; page 10, lines 22-28, 54-57; Iwane teaches that the plurality of battery cells 3 are spaced apart from each other and the thermally expandable sheet 4 is disposed between adjacent battery cells 3; and further teaches that the surface of battery cell 3 is formed of an aluminum sheet laminated with a PET film or a metal and that sheet 4 may be fixed directly to the surface of battery cells 3)
and the function material covers an area equal to or more than 75 % and equal to or less than 100 % of a surface of the exterior material of one of the adjacent battery cells (Fig. 12; page 3, lines 28-33; page 9, lines 38-50; page 10, lines 22-28, 54-57; Iwane teaches that thermally expandable sheet 4 is fixed to a surface of battery cell 3 and further teaches that thermally expandable coating 4 may cover the entire outer surface of battery cell 3, thereby teaching 100% coverage, which falls within the claimed range; Iwane further teaches that the modifications of the first embodiment may be applied to the second embodiment in which the function material is disposed between adjacent battery cells.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho(2025), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cho(2023) et al. (US 20230307792 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Cho(2025), teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Cho(2025) does not teach a limitation wherein a compression force deflection at 25 °C and 10 % deflection of the function material is equal to or more than 3.0 kPa and equal to or less than 10 kPa, and the compression force deflection at 70 °C and 70 % deflection of the function material is equal to or more than 0.40 MPa and equal to or less than 0.60 MPa.
Cho(2025) teaches an elastic sheet including acrylic resin and hollow particles and teaches measuring the compressive strength of the elastic sheet after compression to 70% of its original thickness ([0081, 0084, 0119]), which is different test condition from the compression force deflection conditions recited in the instant claim. Cho (2025) further teaches the elastic sheet having a thickness of 100 μm to 800 μm before foaming, and a thickness after foaming of 1.1 to 2 times the thickness before foaming ([0075]). The disclosed thickness range overlaps with the range of 0.1 -1.5 mm escribed for the function material in the instant specification (see [0023] of instant specification).
However, Cho(2023) further teaches an elastic sheet having closely corresponding composition and structural characteristics with high compressive strength ([0014]). Specifically, Cho(2023) teaches an elastic sheet including an acrylate resin, and organic hollow particle ([0011, 0034, 0045, 0049]). Cho(2023) further discloses that the hollow particles are spherical ([0045]) and have a particle diameter of 2-100 μm ([0050]), which overlaps with the range of 75-300 μm mentioned in the instant application (see [0021] of instant specification). Cho(2023) further teaches that elastic sheet may include an ultraviolet cured acrylic resin [0034, 0038, 0065, 0184], corresponding to the ultraviolet cured acrylic resin binder described in paragraph [0022] of the instant application. Additionally, Cho(2023) discloses an elastic sheet thickness of 0.1 mm to 0.8 mm ([0070]), which overlaps with the instant specification range of 0.1 -1.5 mm in the uncompressed state (see [0023] of instant specification). Thus, in view of the similarities in composition, structure, particle shape, thickness, and particle size, the elastic sheet of Cho(2023) is a suitable known elastic material for use as the elastic material of Cho(2025) and also substantially identical or identical to the claimed function material (see specification [0019-0023]).
Cho(2023) further teaches different location for the elastic sheet 500 including, on the outermost layer surface of the electrode assembly as shown in FIG. 1, and/or inside the assembly in a structure in which two or more electrode assemblies are stacked (Fig. 1, [0033]). In addition, Cho (2025) teaches different positions for elastic sheet 400 (Figs. 1, 2; [0037, 0091]) including between adjacent unit cells 20A in a stacked battery structure and directly adjacent to an electrode layer, wherein elastic layer 400 is arranged on anode layer 200A. Thus the elastic sheet of Cho(2023) can be positioned in Cho(2025) at a location corresponding to the elastic layer of Cho(2025). Therefore, Cho(2025), as modified by Cho(2023) discloses the same type of material as claimed.
Further, Cho(2023) teaches that the elastic sheet is characterized by moderately high compressive strength and has sufficient buffering ability to relieve stress and to repeatedly compress and restore during battery operation ([0008, 0034, 0071]). Cho (2023) specifically teaches a compressive strength (CFD 40%) of about 0.27 MPa to about 0.35 MPa and explains that the elastic sheet may be appropriately compressed during pressing to provide sufficient buffering ability, relieve stress, and repeatedly compress and restore ([0071]). In other words, the compressive mechanical properties of the elastic sheet, including the compression force deflection, affect the ability of the material to provide buffering and stress relief during battery operation, thereby identifying the compressive properties as a results-effective variable ([0034, 0071] of Cho(2023)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the elastic material of Cho(2025) by applying the elastic sheet material taught by Cho(2023), in order to provide sufficient buffering ability, relieve stress, and provide repeated compression and restoration during battery operation ([0008, 0034, 0071]). It would have been obvious to substitute the elastic sheet of Cho(2023) for elastic layer Cho(2025), as it is a known material with predictable compressive strength, and such substitution represents the use of a known material for its known properties, yielding predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(B)). In addition, optimizing the compression force deflection within workable ranges, including the claimed range, would have been achieved through routine optimization. Discovering the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05(II), see also In re Aller, 220 F.2d (CCPA 1955) .
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 Lili Rassouli whose telephone number is (571)272-9760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM-4:00 PM.
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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/LILI RASSOULI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights