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 .
Elections/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-11, drawn to a prismatic cell assembly and an all-solid-state battery, in the reply filed on July 13th, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that that a single search and examination covering all claims would not place undue burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because:
The inventions are considered to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown:
(1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or
(2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP §806.05(f)).
Only one of the two prongs needs to be met for the inventions to be distinct, and in this case, the second prong (2) is met, where the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process. In this case, the product of Group I can be made by a materially different process; for example, the claimed prismatic cell assembly layers may be assembled without the claimed external compression operations.
Regarding the lack of serious search and/or examination burden, this argument is not found persuasive because Group I would require a unique text search involving internal elastic components, solid-state layers, and battery housing structures, whereas Group II would require a unique text search involving plate alignment and maintenance of external compression during welding or joining of elements during manufacture.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 12-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected method of assembling a prismatic cell assembly, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on July 13th, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 9, claim 1 recites “the one or more stacked sheets” in limitation (c) and claim 9 also recites “the one or more stacked sheets”; however, there is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation in both of these claims. Regarding claim 1, the claim previously recites “one or more stacks” in limitation (b) where each stack comprises a solid-state electrolyte layer, a cathode layer and an anode layer, but does not previously introduce “one or more stacked sheets.” Accordingly, it is unclear whether the recitation of “the one or more stacked sheets” in limitation (c) of claim 1 and in claim 9 results in the pre-deformed elastic body exerting an internal compression on or among “the one or more stacked sheets” as a whole, or exerts compression on or among the individual layers/sheets of a single stack, with there being a plurality of stacks within the housing ([0004]).
Appropriate correction may include amending the claim to clarify what structure is intended by “the one or more stacked sheets” in limitation (c) of claim 1 and, consequently, the structure(s) on or among in which the internal compression is exerted.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “a first plate and a second plate joined via edges thereof.” The phrase “edges thereof” renders the scope of the claim unclear because it is unclear whether “thereof” refers to edges of both the first plate and the second plate, or only the edges of the second plate.
Appropriate correction may include amending the claim to expressly identify the plate or plates whose edges provide the recited joining, consistent with the Applicant’s intended scope ([0034]).
Regarding claims 2-11, claim 1 recites "A prismatic cell assembly" (line 1), but claims 2-11 recite "the cell assembly." Therefore, there is a lack of antecedent basis for "the cell assembly" in the dependent claims.
Appropriate correction may include amending either “a prismatic cell assembly” in claim 1 to recite “a cell assembly,” or amending “the cell assembly” in claims 2-11 to recite “the prismatic cell assembly,” depending on what is intended from the Applicant. For the purposes of examination, “the cell assembly” of claims 2-11 is being interpreted as corresponding to the “prismatic cell assembly” of claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites the pre-deformed elastic body “is positioned between two of the one or more stacks.” However, the recitation “one or more stacks” encompasses an embodiment having only a single stack, whereas positioning the pre-deformed elastic body “between two” of the stacks requires a plurality of stacks. Thus, it is unclear whether claim 8 requires the “one or more stacks” to comprise a plurality of stacks.
Appropriate correction may include amending the claim to recite “wherein the one or more stacks comprises a plurality of stacks, and the pre-deformed elastic body is positioned between two of the plurality of stacks,” if that is what intended for the scope of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-4, 7, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsukuda (US20110250485A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tsukuda teaches a prismatic cell assembly (the housing container is formed in the shape of a box, [0042]; the shape of the cell assembly is prismatic, see Figs. 42-44), comprising:
a housing (lid plate 80 and package can 70 or metal package container 60; Figs. 55-56, [0170] and [0303]);
one or more stacks in the housing (electrode assembly or electrode stack 50; Fig. 44, [0170]),
each stack comprising a solid-state electrolyte layer (electrode assembly 50 is sealed along with a non-aqueous electrolyte, [0170]; a solid electrolyte may be used instead, [0480]), a cathode layer and an anode layer (electrode assembly 50 includes a plurality of positive electrodes 10, a plurality of negative electrodes 20, and a plurality of separators 30. The positive electrodes 10, the separators 30, and the negative electrodes 20 are stacked sequentially to form the stacked member 50a; Figs. 1-5); and
a pre-deformed elastic body (plate-shaped or sheet-shaped pressing member(s) 710; [0277]) positioned inside the housing (see Figs. 42 and 45; [0280]).
Regarding the limitation “…such that the pre-deformed elastic body exerts an internal compression on or among the one or more stacked sheets without the application of external forces on the housing post-manufacture of the prismatic cell assembly,” Tsukuda teaches that the electrode assembly is pressed in the stack direction (Z direction) via the pressing members, wherein the pressing members apply a pressing force within regions of both the positive and negative electrode active material layers ([0278]). Therefore, Tsukuda teaches a pre-deformed elastic body that exerts an internal compression on or among the one or more stacked sheets without the application of external forces on the housing post-manufacture of the prismatic cell assembly, as claimed.
Regarding claim 2, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, and further teaches the prismatic cell assembly wherein the housing comprises a first plate (package can 70) and a second plate (lid plate 80) joined via edges thereof (lid plate 80 is fitted to the package can 70 such that the opening 73 of the package can 70 is sealed with the lid plate 80 by a double seam, [0210]; Fig. 44)
Regarding claim 3, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 2 as described above, and further teaches the prismatic cell assembly wherein the edges of the first and second plates meet with each other either vertically or horizontally (the package can 70 is sealed with the lid plate 80 by a double seam, [0210]; container flange portion 75 is provided for the double-seam sealing [0206], therefore the edges of the package can 70 and lid plate 80 may be sealed in both the vertical and/or horizontal directions, see Fig. 44).
Regarding claim 4, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 2 as described above, and further teaches the prismatic cell assembly wherein the first and second plates are joined together by a weld (the opening of the package can 70 may be sealed by welding the lid plate 80 to the package can 70, [0481]).
Regarding claim 7, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, and further teaches the prismatic cell assembly wherein the pre-deformed elastic body is positioned between an internal wall of the housing and a surface of one of the one or more stacks (pressing members 710 are in between the electrode assembly 50 and the lid plate 80 and in between the electrode assembly 50 and the bottom face portion 71 of the package can 70, [0280]; see Figs. 42 and 45).
Regarding claim 10, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, and further teaches the prismatic cell assembly wherein the housing is made of Al, Mg, Ti, steel, or an alloy comprising at least one thereof (the package can 70 and the lid plate 80 are formed of a metal plate of stainless steel, aluminum, or the like, [0208]).
Regarding claim 11, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, and further teaches an all-solid-state battery comprising the cell assembly of claim 1 (a solid electrolyte may be used as the electrolyte in the disclosed secondary battery, [0480]).
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.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukuda (US20110250485A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hashimoto (US20090064487A1).
Regarding claim 5, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 2 as described above, and further teaches the prismatic cell assembly comprising a first plate (package can 70) and a second plate (lid plate 80) joined via edges thereof. Tsukuda further teaches wherein the housing comprises opposing side walls (side wall portions 72; Fig. 1) and with two ends (ends of the side wall portions 72) formed by the joining of the first and second plates (package can 70 and lid plate 80). However, Tsukuda does not expressly teach wherein the opposing side walls form an opening at each end.
Hashimoto discloses a prismatic battery comprising a battery case that is made by sealing the open ends of the case with lids such that the battery case has a highly reliable sealing structure for the part where an electrode pole or terminal passes through the battery case lid, wherein the battery case is able to be produced with increased productivity as compared to deep-drawn prismatic cases ([0028], [0021]). Hashimoto further discloses a battery case (case 2; Fig. 2) wherein the positive collector (7) functions as a lower lid for closing the lower open end of the case ([0055]; Fig. 2), and that a negative collector (8) is placed between the upper end of the electrode plate group (3) and the upper lid (13) for closing the upper open end of the case ([0056]; Fig. 2). Hashimoto further discloses the positive and negative current collectors (7 and 8), lid (13), and the peripheral skirts (22 and 9) are joined to the case by welding ([0055]-[0056]).
Since Tsukuda teaches a housing comprises a first plate and a second plate joined via edges thereof where the housing comprises opposing side walls with two ends formed by the joining of the first and second plates, and Hashimoto discloses a battery case that is made by sealing the open ends of the case with lids such that the battery case has a highly reliable sealing structure while maintaining or improving productivity during production of the battery, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of Tsukuda (hereby referred to as “modified Tsukuda”) by joining the first and second plates to form two opposing side wall ends such that the opposing side walls form an opening at each end, as taught by Hashimoto, in order to achieve the known benefits of a battery case with highly reliable sealing properties while maintaining or improving productivity during production of the battery.
Regarding claim 6, modified Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 5 as described above. As discusses in the rejection of claim 5, Hashimoto discloses a battery case (case 2; Fig. 2) wherein the positive collector (7) functions as a lower lid for closing the lower open end of the case ([0055]; Fig. 2), and wherein a negative collector (8) is placed between the upper end of the electrode plate group (3) and the upper lid (13) for closing the upper open end of the case ([0056]; Fig. 2); in addition, the positive and negative current collectors, lid, and the peripheral skirts (22 and 9) are joined to the case by welding ([0055]-[0056]).
Since Tsukuda teaches a housing that comprises a first plate and a second plate joined via edges thereof such that the housing further comprises two opposing side wall openings at the ends, and Hashimoto discloses a battery case that is made by sealing the open ends of a battery case with lids such that the battery case has a highly reliable sealing structure while maintaining or improving productivity during production of the battery (Hashimoto, [0028] and [0021]), it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the housing of Tsukuda such that a lid seals both of the opposing side walls openings, as taught by Hashimoto, in order to achieve the known benefits of a battery case with highly reliable sealing properties while maintaining or improving productivity during production of the battery.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukuda (US20110250485A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hirano (JP2021111561A).
Regarding claim 8, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, including a pre-deformed elastic body positioned inside the housing, wherein the pre-deformed elastic body exerts an internal compression on or among the one or more stacked sheets. However, Tsukuda does not expressly teach the prismatic cell assembly wherein the pre-deformed elastic body is positioned between two of the one or more stacks.
Hirano discloses a battery assembly comprising an elastic body that is arranged either between a plurality of battery cells or between a battery cell and a cell support portion that supports the battery cells (the cell support portion corresponds to support plate(s) 16a/16b and spacer(s) 13 that support the battery cells; [0053]; Fig. 3). Hirano further discloses the elastic body is capable of applying an appropriate external force to the battery cells as a response to a change in volume (i.e. contraction or expansion) of the battery cells ([0012], [0050]).
Since Tsukuda teaches a pre-deformed elastic body that exerts an internal compression on or among the one or more stacked sheets, and Hirano discloses a battery assembly comprising an elastic body that is arranged either between a plurality of battery cells or between a battery cell and a cell support portion that supports the battery cells, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prismatic cell assembly of Tsukuda by positioning the pre-deformed elastic body between two of the one or more cell stacks, as taught by Hirano, in order to more appropriately manage the external and internal forces applied to the battery cells caused by volume changes during charging and discharging (Hirano, [0005]).
Regarding claim 9, Tsukuda teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, including a pre-deformed elastic body positioned inside the housing, wherein the pre-deformed elastic body exerts an internal compression on or among the one or more stacked sheets. However, Tsukuda does not expressly disclose an internal compression value or range that the pre-deformed elastic body exerts on the stacked sheets.
Hirano discloses a battery assembly comprising an elastic body that is arranged either between a plurality of battery cells or between a battery cell and a cell support portion that supports the battery cells (the cell support portion corresponds to support plate(s) 16a/16b and spacer(s) 13 that support the battery cells; [0053]; Fig. 3). Hirano further discloses the elastic body is capable of applying an appropriate external force to the battery cells as a response to a change in volume (i.e. contraction or expansion) of the battery cells ([0012], [0050]), and that the maximum compressive stress of the elastic body (average surface pressure calculated from the contact area between the elastic body and the cell) is preferably 10 MPa or less and/or may be 1 MPa or more ([0058]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.01 to 10 MPa. In addition, Hirano teaches that it is preferable to keep the stress generated in the battery cell within this range because deformation of the electrodes is unlikely to occur and suitable battery performance can be maintained ([0058]).
Since Tsukuda teaches a pre-deformed elastic body that exerts an internal compression on or among the one or more stacked sheets, and Hirano discloses the maximum compressive stress of an elastic body is preferably 10 MPa or less and/or 1 MPa or more, and that such a range helps reduce the occurrences of electrode deformation while providing suitable battery performance, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pre-deformed elastic body of Tsukuda to exert an internal compression of 10 MPa or less and/or 1 MPa or more, as taught by Hirano, in order to achieve the known benefits of reducing the chances of electrode deformation while providing suitable battery performance.
In addition, when the prior art discloses a general range that overlaps or routinely encompasses the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness is established (see MPEP §2144.05). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Hirano, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXIS R OSTWALT whose telephone number is (571)272-8650. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am-5pm.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 5712707692. 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.
/A.R.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
