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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 23 April 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uh (KR 20060112743 – previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Uh teaches a battery (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 2, lithium-ion secondary battery)
comprising:
an electrode body including respective electrodes of positive and negative electrodes (Uh Tech-
Solution ¶ 7-8, electrode assembly; positive electrode current collector; negative electrode current
collector);
a battery case including an opening, and for accommodating the electrode body (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 5, electrode assembly accommodated in the can, and an upper end opening of the can);
a sealing plate including a terminal mounting hole, and for sealing the opening (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 6, the top opening of the can is sealed by the cap assembly);
an electrode terminal electrically joined at one end thereof with any electrode of the positive and negative electrodes inside the battery case, and inserted at another end thereof through the terminal mounting hole to be exposed to outside the sealing plate (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 12, electrode terminal is penetrated and coupled to the terminal through hole formed on the cap plate);
and an insulating member for establishing an insulation between at least a part of the sealing plate and the electrode terminal (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 12, for the electrical insulation between the electrode terminal and the cap plate a tubular gasket is installed. The gasket may be formed of insulating rubber or synthetic resin),
the terminal mounting hole has a cylindrical shape (Uh Fig. 5-7), and
a portion of the electrode terminal to be inserted through the terminal mounting hole has a cylindrical shape(Uh Fig. 5-7),
wherein one or a plurality of concave parts exists at at least any one of the sealing plate and the insulating member (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 16, a groove is formed on the cap plate),
when the concave part exists at the sealing plate, the concave part is filled with the insulating
member opposed to the concave part (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 16, the gasket corresponds to a shape of the
groove at a position corresponding to the groove formed on the cap plate. A protrusion having a shape
is formed and coupled to the groove of the cap plate), and
when the concave part exists at the insulating member, the sealing plate opposed to the concave part is buried in the concave part (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 20, the cap plate has a protrusion protruding upwards, and the gasket corresponds to the shape of the protrusion at a position corresponding to the protrusion).
Uh does not teach that the one or plurality of concave parts are each in a rectangular shape as seen from an opening thereof, at each of the concave parts, at a portion opposed to a rotation direction of the cylindrical portion of the electrode terminal, a corner of an opening has an R shape, and at each of the concave parts, at a portion not opposed to a rotation direction of the cylindrical portion of the electrode terminal, a corner of an opening does not have an R shape. However, the specific shape of the concave part is considered to be a matter of design choice within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art absent a showing of persuasive evidence that the particular claimed configuration is significant. See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 3, figures 5 – 7 of Uh show a plurality of concave parts (Uh Tech-Solution ¶ 22, two grooves) formed symmetrically at both sides of the electrode terminal.
Claims 2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uh (KR 20060112743 – previously cited) in view of Mizukami (JP 2020145088 – previously cited).
Regarding claims 2 and 6, Uh discloses the battery of claim 1 with a sealing plate (cap plate), an
insulating member, and concave parts on both, but not their depths nor thicknesses. In a related field of endeavor, Mizukami discloses a sealing body with a metal plate constituting the first cap with a thickness between 0.1 to 1.0 mm (Description-Of-Embodiments ¶ 6), an insulating gasket with a thickness between 0.05 to 0.8 mm (Description-Of-Embodiments ¶ 55-56), and recesses facing convex portions with heights of 10 to 300 µm (Description-Of-Embodiments ¶ 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to
modify the disclosure of Uh with the dimensions of Mizukami for the sealing body first cap plate thickness to optimize battery capacity and first cap strength and formability (Mizukami Description-Of- Embodiments ¶ 6), for the insulating gasket thickness to optimize sealing body height and insulation, and for the recess/convex portion height to optimize electrical connection between first cap and protective element sealing body height (Mizukami Description-Of-Embodiments ¶ 13).
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uh (KR 20060112743 – previously cited) in view of Li (US 20020102732 – previously cited).
Regarding claims 7 and 9, Uh discloses the battery of claim 1 with an insulation member (gasket), but not an insulation filler included in the insulation member, or that the insulation filler is made of a glass material. In a related field of endeavor, Li discloses an insulation layer (¶ 0165, support protection layer) with insulation filler (¶ 0168, inorganic insulation layer may include an insulation filler (preferably inorganic insulation particles). The insulation filler is preferably at least one of aluminum oxide, magnesium oxide, zinc oxide, silicon oxide, titanium oxide, zirconium oxide, aluminum nitride, silicon nitride, calcium fluoride, and barium fluoride). At least silicon oxide from the list of preferable insulation fillers is a glass material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to
modify the disclosure of Uh with the insulation filler disclosed by Li as this would ensure that the
insulator has improved properties such as hardness and mechanical strength (¶ 0168).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. as being unpatentable over Uh (KR 20060112743 – previously cited) in view of Guo (WO 2017198136 – previously cited).
Regarding claim 8, Uh discloses the battery of claim 1, including an electrode terminal and
insulating member, but not that they are an integrally molded product. In a related field of endeavor, Guo discloses a pole assembly that includes a pole member and an injection molded plastic member integrally molded in the gap between the between the pole member and the top cover (Guo Specific Embodiment ¶ 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to
modify the disclosure of Uh with the method of integral molding from Guo in order to improve structural stability in high and low temperature and long-term aging environments (Guo Specific
Embodiment ¶ 6).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. as being unpatentable over Uh (KR 20060112743 – previously cited) in view of Li (US 20020102732 – previously cited) in further view of Lee et al. (US 20070007871, hereinafter, Lee).
Regarding claim 10, Uh in view of Li teaches the battery of claim 1, including an insulating member including an insulation filler including a glass filler, but not that the glass filler is at least one of a glass comprising SiO2, Al2O3, CaO, and SrO or a glass comprising SiO2, B2O3, ZnO, and Na2O. In a related field of endeavor, Lee teaches a glass powder matrix and a filler powder, with at least one comprising SiO2, B2O3, Na2O, and ZnO (Lee ¶ 50-51). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to use the glass powder matrix or glass filler of Lee to substitute for the insulation filler of Li in the battery of Uh because both glass fillers serve the same purpose and would result in a similar and predictable product. See MPEP 2143.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 5, filed 8 July 2026, with respect to claims 1-3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claims 1-3 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks pages 5-8, filed 8 July 2026 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 3 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Uh does not teach the amended limitation regarding the configuration of the concave parts. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Uh as outlined above.
Applicant's arguments, see remarks pages 8-12, filed 8 July 2026, with respect to claims 2, and 6-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments are addressed as follows:
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In the case of claims 2 and 6, the motivation to combine the dimensions of the sealing plate and concave parts of Mizukami with Uh can be found in (Mizukami Description-Of-Embodiments ¶ 6) to optimize battery capacity and first cap strength and formability. In the case of claim 7, the motivation to combine Li with Uh can be found in (Li ¶ 0168) to improve properties such as hardness and mechanical strength. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that although there is no identified deficiency as applicant has stated, the teaching of Li would result in an improvement to the component of Uh. In the case of claim 8, the motivation to combine Guo with Uh can be found in (Guo Specific Embodiment ¶ 6) to improve structural stability in high and low temperature and long-term aging environments. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the use of the technique of Guo to form the member of Uh would result in the improved structural stability stated by Guo.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 12, filed 8 July 2026, with respect to claims 1-8 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The double patenting rejection of claims 1-8 has been withdrawn.
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 MICHAEL FANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8815. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 10:00am-6:00pm.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-0604. 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./ Examiner, Art Unit 1784
/HUMERA N. SHEIKH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1784
