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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the sub-retainer of claims 4-7, 9-12, & 14-17 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (KR 20190059076 A), further in view of Choi et al. (WO 2021241939 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jeong teaches a secondary battery (Par. 0001) comprising: a case (case 130) having a hexahedral shape (Fig. 3a); an electrode assembly (electrode assembly 110) accommodated in the case; a cap assembly (Cap 140, Fig. 3a); and a retainer (retainer 170) between the electrode assembly and the case (Par. 0054, lines 1-2) and on a side surface area of the electrode assembly at where the negative electrode tab and the positive electrode tab are not formed (Fig. 3a; retainer is positioned on the side of the assembly, electrode terminals are on top of the battery). Jeong fails to teach a case with opposite ends in a longitudinal direction being open, positive electrode tabs at opposite ends of the case in the longitudinal direction, and a pair of cap assemblies coupled to both open ends of the case. Jeong rather teaches that both terminals are formed on a single cap assembly.
However, Choi teaches a secondary battery (Page 1, Par. 1) comprising: a case (case 50) having a hexahedral shape (Fig. 1) with opposite ends in a longitudinal direction being open (Page 3, Par. 12); an electrode assembly (electrode assembly 10) accommodated in the case and comprising a negative electrode tab (negative electrode tab 11b) at one end thereof in the longitudinal direction and a positive electrode tab (positive electrode tab 13b) at an opposite end thereof in the longitudinal direction (Page 2, Par. 4); and a pair of cap assemblies (cap assemblies 50 and 60) respectively electrically connected to the negative electrode tab and the positive electrode tab and respectively coupled to the open opposite ends of the case (Page 3, Par. 12; Fig. 1).
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 positioning the battery terminals on opposite ends of the battery, with a cap assembly on each terminal, as taught by Choi. This would be done to simplify the shape of the current collector and minimizing its length, while improving the degree of freedom of assembly and increasing battery length, as stated in Choi (Page 2, Par. 10-11).
Regarding claim 2, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the case has a vent (safety vent 134) in a long side surface thereof (Par. 0013; Fig. 3a), and wherein the retainer is on a side surface (Fig. 3a) of the electrode assembly corresponding to a position of the vent (Par. 0067; Fig. 3a).
Regarding claim 3, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer has a degassing hole (through hole 171) penetrating therethrough at a position corresponding to the vent (Par. 0054, lines 5-6).
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong, in view of Choi, and further in view of Jeoung et al. (US 20150194639 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Jeong fails to teach a sub-retainer in the secondary battery assembly.
However, Jeoung teaches a secondary battery (Abstract; Fig. 1), further comprising a sub-retainer (“sub-retainer” will be interpreted as a sheet positioned between the electrode assembly and the case for stabilization of the assembly; retainers 140) on a side surface of an electrode assembly at where a vent is not formed (Fig. 2; sub-retainers are positioned on the sides of the electrode assembly, and the vent is positioned on top of the battery module).
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 set of secondary retainers on the sides of the electrode assembly, as taught by Jeoung. Doing so would prevent movement of the electrode assembly inside the case, as stated in Jeoung (Par. 0014).
Regarding claim 5, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer is a sheet (Fig. 3a; Par. 0074, retainer has a flat portion and is primarily a flat sheet on the side of the module) and is attached to the electrode assembly (Par. 0054; the retainer is fixed to the electrode assembly with the insulation tape). Jeong fails to teach sub-retainers, wherein the sub-retainers are sheets attached to the electrode assembly.
However, Jeoung teaches sub-retainers (retainers 140) as sheets (Fig. 2; retainers are flat, elongated sheets) which are attached to the electrode assembly (Par. 0014; retainers prevent movement of the assembly).
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 sub-retainer sheets which are attached to the electrode assembly, as taught by Jeoung. Doing so would prevent movement of the electrode assembly inside the case, as stated in Jeoung (Par. 0014).
Regarding claim 6, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer and sub-retainer are made of insulating material (Par. 0056; the polymers and rubber listed are not electrically conductive). Jeong fails to teach the sub-retainer being made of insulating material.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have determined that it would have been obvious to apply a known technique in insulation to the sub-retainer to yield predictable results of improved electrical interference prevention and thermal protection.
Regarding claim 7, Jeong fails to teach the retainer and sub-retainer having the same shape.
However, Jeoung teaches a retainer (bottom retainer 140) and sub-retainer (side retainers 140) having the same shape (Fig. 2; retainers 140 are thin, rectangular sheets).
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 forming the retainer and sub-retainer set in the same shape, as taught by Jeoung. One of ordinary skill in the art could have determined that substituting retainers of different shapes for those with the same shape would have yielded predictable results of decreased production costs and reduced space inside the battery.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong, in view of Choi, and further in view of Lee et al. (KR 20180091301 A).
Regarding claim 8, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery of claim 2, but fails to teach the retainer having a plurality of degassing holes penetrating therethrough at a position corresponding to the vent.
However, Lee teaches a secondary battery (Par. 0001; “Secondary battery”), wherein a retainer (insulating plate 20) has a plurality of degassing holes (vent holes 43) penetrating therethrough at a position corresponding to a vent (Par. 0052; Fig. 5).
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 retainer taught by Jeong by incorporating a plurality of degassing holes corresponding to the vent, as taught by Lee. Doing so would allow the discharge of gas and pressure, while blocking the discharge of battery cell components, as stated in Lee (Par. 0058).
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong, in view of Choi, further in view of Lee, and further in view of Jeoung et al. (US 20150194639 A1).
Regarding claim 9, modified Jeong fails to teach a sub-retainer in the secondary battery assembly.
However, Jeoung teaches a secondary battery (Abstract; Fig. 1), further comprising a sub-retainer (retainers 140) on a side surface of an electrode assembly at where a vent is not formed (Fig. 2; sub-retainers are positioned on the sides of the electrode assembly, and the vent is positioned on top of the battery module).
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 set of secondary retainers on the sides of the electrode assembly, as taught by Jeoung. Doing so would prevent movement of the electrode assembly inside the case, as stated in Jeoung (Par. 0014).
Regarding claim 10, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer is a sheet and is attached to the electrode assembly (Par. 0054; the retainer is fixed to the electrode assembly with the insulation tape). Jeong fails to teach sub-retainers, wherein the sub-retainers are sheets attached to the electrode assembly.
However, Jeoung teaches sub-retainers (retainers 140) as sheets (Fig. 2; retainers are flat, elongated sheets) which are attached to the electrode assembly (Par. 0014; retainers prevent movement of the assembly).
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 sub-retainer sheets which are attached to the electrode assembly, as taught by Jeoung. Doing so would prevent movement of the electrode assembly inside the case, as stated in Jeoung (Par. 0014).
Regarding claim 11, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer and sub-retainer are made of insulating material (Par. 0056; the polymers and rubber listed are not electrically conductive). Jeong fails to teach the sub-retainer being made of insulating material.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have determined that it would have been obvious to apply a known technique in insulation to the sub-retainer to yield predictable results of improved electrical interference prevention and thermal protection.
Regarding claim 12, Jeong fails to teach the retainer and sub-retainer having the same shape.
However, Jeoung teaches a retainer (bottom retainer 140) and sub-retainer (side retainers 140) having the same shape (Fig. 2; retainers 140 are thin, rectangular sheets).
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 forming the retainer and sub-retainer set in the same shape, as taught by Jeoung. One of ordinary skill in the art could have determined that substituting retainers of different shapes for those with the same shape would have yielded predictable results of decreased production costs and reduced space inside the battery.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong, in view of Choi, and further in view of Yu et al. (WO 2021129739 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Jeong teaches the retainer of claim 2, wherein the retainer is corresponding to a position of a vent. Jeong fails to teach the retainer comprising a plurality of degassing holes penetrating therethrough at an area covering and larger than an area of the vent.
However, Yu teaches a retainer (insulating plate 400, Fig. 2; the plate is positioned inside the case on a surface of the electrode assembly) with a plurality of degassing holes (Fig. 2; explosion-proof valve holes 440) penetrating therethrough at an area covering and larger than an area corresponding to the position of a vent (Fig. 2; valve holes extend past the area of the vent, designated as explosion-proof mounting hole 140).
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 retainer taught by Jeong by incorporating a plurality of degassing holes into the retainer in correspondence with the vent, as taught by Yu. Doing so would improve explosion-proof capabilities of the battery assembly, as stated in Yu (Page 7, Par. 7).
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong, in view of Choi, further in view of Yu, and further in view of Jeoung et al. (US 20150194639 A1).
Regarding claim 14, modified Jeong fails to teach a sub-retainer in the secondary battery assembly.
However, Jeoung teaches a secondary battery (Abstract; Fig. 1), further comprising a sub-retainer (retainers 140) on a side surface of an electrode assembly at where a vent is not formed (Fig. 2; sub-retainers are positioned on the sides of the electrode assembly, and the vent is positioned on top of the battery module).
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 set of secondary retainers on the sides of the electrode assembly, as taught by Jeoung. Doing so would prevent movement of the electrode assembly inside the case, as stated in Jeoung (Par. 0014).
Regarding claim 15, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer is a sheet and is attached to the electrode assembly (Par. 0054; the retainer is fixed to the electrode assembly with the insulation tape). Jeong fails to teach sub-retainers, wherein the sub-retainers are sheets attached to the electrode assembly.
However, Jeoung teaches sub-retainers (retainers 140) as sheets (Fig. 2; retainers are flat, elongated sheets) which are attached to the electrode assembly (Par. 0014; retainers prevent movement of the assembly).
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 sub-retainer sheets which are attached to the electrode assembly, as taught by Jeoung. Doing so would prevent movement of the electrode assembly inside the case, as stated in Jeoung (Par. 0014).
Regarding claim 16, modified Jeong teaches the secondary battery as stated above, wherein the retainer and sub-retainer are made of insulating material (Par. 0056; the polymers and rubber listed are not electrically conductive). Jeong fails to teach the sub-retainer being made of insulating material.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have determined that it would have been obvious to apply a known technique in insulation to the sub-retainer to yield predictable results of improved electrical interference prevention and thermal protection.
Regarding claim 17, Jeong fails to teach the retainer and sub-retainer having the same shape.
However, Jeoung teaches a retainer (bottom retainer 140) and sub-retainer (side retainers 140) having the same shape (Fig. 2; retainers 140 are thin, rectangular sheets).
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 forming the retainer and sub-retainer set in the same shape, as taught by Jeoung. One of ordinary skill in the art could have determined that substituting retainers of different shapes for those with the same shape would have yielded predictable results of decreased production costs and reduced space inside the battery.
Conclusion
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 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, 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