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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 1/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS’ filed 2/1/2024, 9/4/2024, and 2/13/2026 have been considered by examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because there are two different figures labeled Fig. 3C. Furthermore, paragraph [0052] of the filed specification refers to a Fig. 3D; however, there is no figure in the drawings labeled Fig. 3D.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: 556 in Fig. 9A, 824 in Fig. 13A, 954 in Fig. 14B, and 972 in Fig. 14C.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Paik et al. (US 2010/0151301, hereinafter "Paik").
Regarding claim 1, Paik teaches a battery with a cooling hole extending through opposing sides of the battery (“hollow battery cell”) [Abstract, “The battery includes: a frame; an electrode assembly disposed around the frame; a main body to house the electrode assembly … A cooling hole extends through opposing sides of the main body”, Paik Figs. 1-2]. The battery comprises a main body (100) (“enclosure”) including two side walls (30) and a case (40) (“side walls”) [0044, Paik Fig. 2]. When the battery depicted in Paik’s Fig. 2 is rotated, the surfaces on which the side walls are disposed may constitute a top surface and a bottom surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
466
541
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1: Paik Fig. 2, rotated
The battery further includes a cooling hole (H1) (“hollow center tube”) including a frame (10) (“side wall”) passing through the top and bottom surfaces [Paik Fig. 2, 0040, “A cooling hole H1 extends through the main body 100 in a lateral direction (X-axis direction), through the center of the main body 100, 0044, “The frame 10 at least partially defines the cooling hole H1”]. The battery also includes an electrode assembly (20) (“roll”) including anode plates (3) and cathode plates (9) (“electrodes”) and separating layers (6) (“separators”) [0048, “the electrode assembly 20 includes anode plates 3, cathode plates 9, and separating layers 6 disposed therebetween. The anode plates 3, the separating layers 6, and the cathode plates 9 may be wound into a jellyroll-type shape”]. The electrode assembly is arranged between an outer surface of the frame defining the cooling hole and the case [Paik Figs. 2 and 5B, 0052, “the electrode assembly 20 is formed around the frame 10, by using the frame 10 as a roll core”].
Further regarding claim 2, Paik teaches that the main body may have a circular cross-section (“cylindrical shape”) [0057, “The main body 100 may also be formed so as to be ovoid or circular in cross-section”].
Further regarding claim 3, Paik teaches that the frame, which defines the cooling hole, may be cylindrical, i.e. have a circular cross-section [0042, “The frame 10 may be rectangular, cylindrical, or the like, in cross-section”].
Further regarding claim 4, Paik teaches that the cooling hole extends through the main body in a lateral direction [0040]. Furthermore, Paik teaches that each of the side walls, which may be disposed on the top and bottom, surfaces, may include a hole that at least partially defines the cooling hole, therefore the cooling hole may pass through the top surface and the bottom surface of the main body [Paik Fig. 2, 0044, “Each of the side walls 30 may include a hole that at least partially defines the cooling hole H1].
Further regarding claim 5, Paik teaches that the side walls (“cap”) disposed on the top and bottom surfaces of the main body are attached to the case and the frame [0044, “each of the side walls 30 may be welded to the case 40 and the frame 10”].
Further regarding claim 6, Paik teaches that the main body may have a prismatic shape [0040, “The main body 100 may be prismatic”].
Regarding claim 7, Paik teaches the battery of claim 6 as described in the rejection of instant claim 6. Paik also teaches that the frame, which defines the cooling hole, may be cylindrical, or circular, in cross section [0042, “The frame 10 may be rectangular, cylindrical, or the like, in cross-section”].
Regarding claim 8, Paik teaches the battery of claim 6 as described in the rejection of instant claim 6. Paik also teaches that the cooling hole extends through the main body in a lateral direction [0040]. Furthermore, Paik teaches that each of the side walls, which may be disposed on the top and bottom, surfaces, may include a hole that at least partially defines the cooling hole, therefore the cooling hole may pass through the top surface and the bottom surface of the main body [Paik Fig. 2, 0044, “Each of the side walls 30 may include a hole that at least partially defines the cooling hole H1].
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 and 5-7 of copending Application No. 18/325,515 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim 1 of '515 recites all the limitations of instant claim 1 including a hollow battery cell comprising an enclosure including a top surface, a bottom surface, and a sidewall; a hollow center tube including a side wall, wherein the hollow center tube passes through at least one of the top surface and the bottom surface; and a roll including electrode and separator layers arranged between an outer surface of the hollow center tube and the enclosure.
Claim 2 of ‘515 recites all the limitations of instant claims 2 and 3 including the enclosure having a cylindrical shape and the hollow center tube having a circular cross section.
Claim 3 of ‘515 recites all the limitations of instant claim 4 including the hollow center tube passing through the top surface and bottom surface of the enclosure.
Claim 5 of ‘515 recites all the limitations of instant claim 5 including at least one of the top surface and the bottom surface comprising a cap attached to the side wall of the enclosure and the hollow center tube.
Claim 6 of ‘515 recites all the limitations of instant claims 6 and 7 including the enclosure having a prismatic shape, and the hollow center tube having a rounded rectangular cross section.
Claim 7 of ‘515 recites all the limitations of instant claim 8 including the hollow center tube passing through the top surface and bottom surface of the enclosure.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA F OROZCO whose telephone number is (571)272-0172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/M.F.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729