Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/346,794

LONG-LIFE SECONDARY BATTERY, BATTERY MODULE, BATTERY PACK, AND POWER CONSUMPTION APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 04, 2023
Examiner
RAYMOND, BRITTANY L
Art Unit
1722
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
CONTEMPORARY AMPEREX TECHNOLOGY (HONG KONG) LIMITED
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
774 granted / 1006 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1039
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.8%
+12.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1006 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1-6 and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishi (JP Publication 2011-192562) in view of Hojo (U.S. Patent Publication 2009/0246631). Regarding claims 1 and 2, Ishi discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising: a negative electrode containing a negative electrode active material on both sides of a negative electrode current collector, a positive electrode containing a positive electrode active material on at least one side of a positive electrode current collector, a separator, and a non-aqueous electrolyte, wherein the positive and negative electrode alternative with separators in between each, and wherein on one side, the capacity per unit area of the negative electrode is larger than the capacity per unit area of the opposing positive electrode, and on the other side, the capacity per unit area of the negative electrode is smaller than the capacity per unit area of the opposing positive electrode (Paragraph 0010). Ishi also discloses that the capacity of the negative and positive electrodes can be adjusted by the thickness of the electrode layers (Paragraph 0015). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that if the capacity per unit area ratios of the negative to positive electrodes is different on each side of the negative electrode, that either the capacity per unit areas of the two negative electrode active materials are different from one another, that the capacity per unit areas of the two positive electrode active materials are different from one another, or both. Thus, the capacity per unit area of one positive electrode active material could be greater than the positive electrode active material on the opposite side of the current collector. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the thicknesses of the positive electrode active material layers could be adjusted so that the ratio of the two layers could fall within 0.7 and 1. As to claims 3 and 4, Ishi teaches that on one side the ratio of capacity per unit area of the negative electrode to the capacity per unit area of the positive electrode is 0.6 to 1, while the ratio on the other side is 1-1.67 (Paragraph 0016). Regarding claims 9-13, Ishi discloses that the batteries can be used in various electrical devices and automobiles (Paragraph 0001). It would be well known in the art that larger electrical appliances would require battery modules which consist of a plurality of the battery cell units, and that automobiles require battery packs which consist of a plurality of battery modules. Ishi fails to disclose that the negative electrode current collector is provided with a through hole, that the ratio of an area of the through hole to an area of the current collector is 0.2-40%, and that the pore diameter of the through hole is 5-500 µm. Regarding claim 1, Hojo discloses an electricity storage device comprising: a positive electrode current collector, a positive electrode disposed on the positive electrode current collector, a negative electrode current collector, a negative electrode disposed on the negative current collector, and a separator, wherein the negative electrode current collector comprises a plurality of through holes (Paragraphs 0070, 0088). As to claim 5, Hojo teaches that the volume ratio of the through hole in the current collector is 30% or higher (Paragraph 0090). Regarding claim 6, Hojo states that the through hole diameter can be several times larger than the thickness of the negative electrode, such as 100 µm (Paragraph 0089, 0265, Table 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the negative electrode current collector of Ishi could contain a through hole with the size of Hojo because Hojo teaches that the through hole technique allow for the highest ratio of electrolyte retention, which improves charge-discharge capacity of the battery. Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishi (JP Publication 2011-192562) in view of Hojo (U.S. Patent Publication 2009/0246631) as applied to claims 1-6 and 9-13 above, and further in view of Shi (CN Publication 105449139). The teachings of Ishi and Hojo have been discussed in paragraph 3 above. Ishi and Hojo fail to disclose that the compacted density of the positive electrode is 2-3.6 g/cc, and that the compacted density of the negative electrode is 0.5-2 g/cc. Regarding claims 7 and 8, Shi discloses a battery cell comprising: a positive electrode current collector with a positive electrode active material on the surface, a negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material on the surface, and a separator in between, wherein the compaction density of the positive electrode is 3 g/cc, wherein the compaction density of the negative electrode is 2 g/cc, and wherein the ratio of capacity per unit area of the positive electrode to the negative electrode is 1.2:1 (Paragraphs 0026-0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the compaction densities of the electrodes of Ishi could be in the ranges taught by Shi because Shi teaches that these densities allow for a desired capacity per unit area of each electrode. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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. BRITTANY L. RAYMOND Primary Examiner Art Unit 1722 /BRITTANY L RAYMOND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 04, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603324
LOCALIZED HIGH SALT CONCENTRATION ELECTROLYTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598747
FABRICATING THREE-DIMENSIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592434
Apparatus and Method for Shaping Pouch Film for Secondary Batteries
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586807
FUEL CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585192
IMPRINT METHOD FOR FABRICATION OF LOW DENSITY NANOPORE MEMBRANE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1006 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month