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 June 8th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 5, & 6 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the short side" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the pair of short sides" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the pair of short sides" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (KR 20190059076 A), in view of Shin et al. (U.S. Patent No. 12,191,507 B2), and further in view of Kim et al. (KR 20140094205 A).
Regarding claim 1, Jeong teaches a secondary battery (Par. 0001) comprising: a case (Fig. 1a; case 130) having a safety vent (Fig. 1a; safety vent 134); an electrode assembly (Fig. 1b; electrode assembly 110) in the case; a pair of terminals (Fig. 1a & 1b; terminals 150 and 160) electrically connected to the electrode assembly (Par. 0006; terminals are electrically connected to the electrode assembly); and an insulating member (Fig. 3a; insulating tape 120) with a stitch (Fig. 3b & 4a-b, venting guide portion 121; Par. 0005, guide portion may be a notch or a stitch) in a region corresponding to the safety vent(Par. 0016; “a venting guide portion is formed … corresponding to the safety vent of the case”). Jeong does not teach, however, a pair of terminals respectively coupled at opposite ends of the case, and an insulating member wrapped around the case.
However, Shin teaches a secondary battery (Column 4, lines 51-52) comprising: a case having a safety vent (Fig. 1; case 300, vent member 310); an electrode assembly in the case (Fig. 2; electrode assembly 100); and a pair of terminals (Fig. 2; first terminal portion 410a, second terminal portion 4b) electrically connected to the electrode assembly (Column 5, lines 53-54) and respectively coupled at opposite ends of the case (Fig. 2; the negative terminal 410a and the positive terminal 410b are disposed on opposite sides of the case).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery taught by Jeong by placing the terminals on opposite sides of the battery, as taught by Shin. Doing so would simplify the assembly process and improve energy density, as stated in Shin (Column 1, lines 52-58).
Modified Jeong fails to teach an insulating member wrapped around the case, wherein the insulating member electrically insulates the case from an external component.
However, Kim teaches a secondary battery (Par. 0001) with an insulating member (Fig. 1; film insulating member 71) wrapped around a case (Par. 0033; the film insulating member 71 surrounds the case 26), wherein the insulating member electrically insulates the case from an external component (Par. 0005, “a thin film insulating member is installed on the outside of the case to prevent a short circuit of the case”, as the insulating member prevents short-circuiting, the case is electrically insulated; Par. 0005, the case is protected from external moisture).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery taught by Jeong by wrapping the insulating member around the case and making it electrically insulative, as taught by Kim, in order to improve battery safety and minimize the risk of short-circuiting, as stated in Kim (Par. 0005, lines 2-4).
Regarding claim 2, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the safety vent is one a short side of the case. Modified Jeong does not teach the safety vent being placed between the pair of terminals.
Shin teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the safety vent is on a short side of the case between the pair of terminals (Fig. 1-2; the safety vent is on the short side of the case 300, and it is positioned between the two terminals 410a and 410b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery taught by Jeong by placing the safety vent between the two terminals, as taught by Shin, in order to discharge gas generated in the space between the terminals, as stated in Shin (Column 7, lines 42-44).
Regarding claim 3, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the stitch is in the region of the insulating member (Par. 0006, lines 4-5) corresponding to the safety vent provided on the short side of the case (Par. 0008; the venting guide portion (stitch) is on the short side of the case).
Regarding claim 4, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the case has a pair of short sides (Fig. 1; short side portion 132) and a pair of long sides (Fig. 1; long side portion 131), and wherein the safety vent is on any one of the pair of short sides (Par. 0007; the safety vent is formed in the short side of the case).
Regarding claim 5, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 4, wherein the stitch is in the region of the insulating member (Par. 0006, lines 4-5) corresponding to the safety vent on one of the pair of short sides of the case (Par. 0008; the venting guide portion (stitch) is on the short side of the case).
Regarding claim 6, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 4. Jeong fails to teach a pair of cap plates, as it only teaches one on top of the battery case.
However, Shin teaches the secondary battery of claim 4, wherein the case comprises a pair of cap plates (Fig. 1; cap assemblies 400a and 400b) respectively coupled to opposite ends of the pair of short sides and the pair of long sides (Column 5, lines 42-46), wherein the pair of terminals pass respectively pass through the pair of cap plates (Fig. 2; Column 5, lines 59-62), and wherein the insulating member covers a partial region of at least one of the pair of cap plates (Column 9, lines 39-44; Column 11, lines 18-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery taught by Jeong by incorporating a pair of partially insulated cap plates which the two terminals pass through, as taught by Shin. Insulating the cap plates would be done in order to prevent the cap plates from short-circuiting the electrode assembly, and passing the terminals through the cap plates would reduce energy density and simplify the connection between the terminals and the electrode assembly, as stated in Shin (Column 9, lines 35-39; Column 7, lines 30-41).
Regarding claim 7, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the stitch has a smaller size than the safety vent (Fig. 4a; stich can be seen entirely through the safety vent).
Regarding claim 8, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the stitch extends in a longitudinal direction of the safety vent (Fig. 5a; stitch may extend vertically).
Regarding claim 9, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the stitch is over a central region of the safety vent (Fig. 4a; the stitch is aligned in the center of the safety vent).
Regarding claim 10, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the stitch is a plurality of perforations (Fig. 4b; stitch can be seen as a plurality of arrow-shaped cuts).
Regarding claim 11, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the insulating member further comprises an adhesive layer on a surface thereof facing the case (Par. 0074; insulating tape 120 is tightly adhered to the case 130, therefore the adhesive layer must face the case).
Regarding claim 12, Kim teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the insulating member overlaps and is attached to a region of the case opposite to the safety vent (Par. 0005; The insulating layer is box-shaped and only open on the top, with a sealed bottom, which is opposite to the safety vent. The insulting member is also bonded, therefore attached, to the case).
Regarding claim 13, Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the safety vent comprises a notch and a stitch which has a shape corresponding to the notch. Jeong fails to teach the safety vent comprising a line-shaped notch.
However, Kim teaches a safety vent (vent 39) comprising a line-shaped notch (notch 39a; Fig. 3 & 6, the notch is in the shape of a line).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the safety vent taught by Jeong by providing a line-shaped notch, as taught by Kim. One of ordinary skill would have determined that this would yield predictable results of minimized expulsion of the battery’s internal components in the case of an explosion, and a minimized spray zone, due to a smaller opening.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 8th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Jeong fails to teach the insulating member electrically insulating the case from an external component, as required by amended claim 1. As now cited in the new rejection of record, Kim teaches that a film insulating member 71 prevents the battery from short-circuiting due to condensation on the outside of the case. Here, condensation on the outside of the case is an external component, and the film insulating member 71 is preventing an electrical mishap in the form of short-circuiting from occurring. Thus, the film insulating member 71 is an insulating member which electrically insulates the case from liquids such as water on the external surface of the case. The Examiner additionally notes that Applicant did not address Kim in their response.
Applicant’s arguments that the rejections of claims 2 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are persuasive, and the rejection is withdrawn. However, Applicant did not remedy the terms “the short side” and “the pair of short sides” in dependent claims 3, 5, and 6. As this results in a lack of antecedent basis, a new rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is hereby entered.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CAMERON M BAIRD whose telephone number is (571)272-9742. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, Matthew 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.
/CAMERON M BAIRD/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights