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 .
Status of the Claims
The claims submitted 08/07/2023 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-8 are pending and examined herein.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0138716 A1 (“Iwama”) in view of JP 2013-168317 A1 (“Minamigata” – machine translation of record in parent application 17/171,142 dated 05/10/2023 cited herein).
Regarding claim 1, Iwama discloses a battery comprising an electrode body 30 (Abstract; Figs. 1, 2). The electrode body 30 comprises a cathode 10, an anode 20, and an electrolyte layer 32 (Abstract; Figs. 1, 2). The anode 20 comprises an anode current collector 22 made of a metal such as nickel ([0027]) and an anode active material layer 23 (Figs. 3A, 3B).
The anode current collector 22 has a covering region 22A (“laminate surface”) which contacts the anode active material layer 23, and an exposed region 22S (“connection surface”) as a flat and smooth region in which the anode active material layer 23 does not exist and the anode current collector 22 is exposed (Figs. 3A, 3B; [0025]).
The surface roughness of the anode current collector 22 in the exposed region 22S is smaller than the surface roughness (ten point height of roughness profile Rz) of the covering region 22A ([0026]).
Iwama does not disclose the battery comprises a plurality of electrode bodies, wherein one of the electrode bodies and another of the electrode bodies are connected via a conductive material.
Minamigata discloses a secondary battery comprising an electrode body 25 of multi-layer structure, wherein a plurality of electrode leads are joined together (Abstract). The electrode body 25 comprises repeated stacks of positive electrode sheets 21, negative electrode sheets, and sheet-type separators sandwiched therebetween (Abstract) and is therefore considered to contain a plurality of electrode bodies as claimed. The positive and negative electrodes current collector terminals are joined to the respective electrode leads with a conductive epoxy resin 33 (Abstract; Figs. 5, 8A; [0036]). The structure improves the volume energy density and weight energy density ([0043]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the structure of Minamigata to improve the volume and weight energy density of the battery.
Regarding claim 2, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. Iwama discloses the surface roughness Rz of the exposed region in Example 3-1 is 0.8 µm (Table 3). See also the discussion in [0026].
Regarding claim 3, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. Minamigata further discloses that solder can be used instead of the conductive epoxy resin ([0059]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. Minamigata further discloses the current collectors have electrode leads 21a, 21b (“tabs”). In the combination, the electrode leads have the connection surface.
Regarding claim 5, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. Iwama discloses the cathode current collector 12 is made of a metal material such as aluminum, nickel, and stainless ([0022]). While Iwama does not expressly disclose the combination of aluminum and nickel as claimed, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a combination of two of the disclosed elements of the group because, as shown by Iwama, they are known in the art for the same purpose.
Regarding claim 7, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. As shown in Figs. 1 of Minamigata, the positive electrode leads 21a are joined and the negative electrode leads 22a are joined. Therefore, the electrode bodies are connected in parallel.
Regarding claim 8, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. As shown in Fig. 2 of Minamigata, a separator 23 is disposed between each electrode body. The separator is made of an insulating material ([0025]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0138716 A1 (“Iwama”) in view of JP 2013-168317 A1 (“Minamigata” – machine translation of record in parent application 17/171,142 dated 05/10/2023 cited herein) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2015/0255827 A1 (“Matsushita”).
Regarding claim 6, modified Iwama discloses the battery of claim 1. Modified Iwama does not expressly disclose one of the electrode bodies another of the electrode bodies are connected in series via the conductive material.
Matsushita discloses a battery including a plurality of electrode bodies (Abstract). Matsushita discloses that the stacked unit batteries C1 to C4 are connected to one another in series and/or in parallel to form one combined battery ([0103]). As a person having ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize, connecting battery units in series increases the voltage and connecting battery units in parallel increases the capacity. Tt would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect at least on the electrode bodies with another of the electrode bodies in series depending on the voltage requirements of the system.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,764,445 in view of US 2008/0138716 A1 (“Iwama”). The instant claims differ from the claims of the Patent in the recitation of at least one of the metal current collectors connected via the conductive material contains Ni. However, this feature is obvious over Iwama. Iwama discloses nickel is a known material for cathode current collectors ([0022]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use nickel as material of the current collector as it amounts selection of a known material for the same purpose.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Scott Carrico whose telephone number is (571)270-5504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:15AM-6PM ET.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
Robert Scott Carrico
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/Robert S Carrico/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727