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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/11/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment and arguments filed 06/11/2026 have been fully considered. Claim(s) 22-23 are new. Examiner affirms that the original disclosure provides adequate support for the amendment.
Upon considering said amendment and arguments, the previous rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 set forth in the Office action mailed 02/12/2026 has/have been withdrawn.
New grounds of rejection are presented hereinbelow.
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 1-8,10,12,14 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakimoto et al. (US20230369692A1) in view of Seong et al. (EP2141758A1; US20100003583A1 cited as U.S. equivalent; cited in 08/21/2024 IDS) and Kawata et al. (JP2013127906A; cited in 12/21/2023 IDS; machine translation with 05/20/2024 Office action).
Regarding claims 1, 19, and 20, Wakimoto discloses an electricity-consumption device (“a vehicle”) comprising an energy-consumption device body (i.e., the vehicle body) and an energy-storage apparatus (100, “battery”) supplying power to the electricity-consumption device body ([0059]) as claimed in claim 20, an energy-storage apparatus (100) comprising an end cover assembly as claimed in claim 19, and an end cover assembly for the energy-storage apparatus ([0021-0023], FIG. 1) as claimed in claim 1, the end cover assembly comprising:
a top cover (14, “closing plate”) having a first surface (14 u, “upper surface”) ([0033], FIG. 3),
wherein the top cover (14) further defines a liquid-injection hole (15, “electrolytic solution injection hole”) extending through the first surface (14 u) ([0032], FIG. 3);
PNG
media_image1.png
760
1369
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 4
a portion of the first surface (14 u) surrounding the liquid-injection hole (15) may be designated as the first sub-surface (shaded area, see annotations), and a portion connected around a periphery of the first sub-surface may be designated as the second sub-surface (see Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 4 above) as claimed in claims 1, 19, and 20.
Wakimoto seals the liquid-injection hole (15) by laser welding a sealing cap (16, “sealing member”) to the top cover (14) ([0027]) and aims to improve the reliability of the connection by preventing the welded connection (W) from contamination from electrolytic solution ([0037]). However, Wakimoto fails to expressly disclose use of a roughness of the first sub-surface (14 b 1) greater than roughness of the second sub-surface (14 u) for this purpose.
Wakimoto envisions a suitability of multiple separate laser welding steps in the process of connecting the sealing cap (16, “sealing member”) to the top cover (14). Kawata (JP2013127906A), analogous as an end cover assembly where a sealing cap (9) is laser-welded to a top cover (3 b) to seal a liquid-injection hole (7) (Machine Translation of Kawata, [0021], FIG. 1), teaches a laser welding pre-treatment step of irradiating a first sub-surface (8, “heat input section”) around the liquid-injection hole (7) ([0015]) to vaporize electrolyte around the liquid-injection hole (7) ([0033]) and form grooves (8a), i.e., roughness in the first sub-surface (8) ([0020], FIG. 5) prior to welding the sealing cap (9) ([0021]). Consequently, welding defects from electrolyte remaining around the liquid- injection hole (7) are prevented ([0033]), and the roughness in the first sub-surface (8) extending around the sealing cap (9) also prevents remaining electrolyte on the top cover (3 b) from returning inwards to the welding area ([0052], FIG. 3).
Thus, in seeking to further prevent defects from electrolyte solution in Wakimoto’s weld between the top cover and the sealing cap, it would be obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application for one having ordinary skill in the art to perform Kawata’s laser irradiation pre-treatment in the first sub-surface around the liquid- injection hole, thus forming a roughness (i.e., the grooves) which is greater than roughness of the second sub-surface as claimed in claims 1, 19, and 20. Such a modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success, as Wakimoto envisions the use of multiple laser welding processes in order to connect the top cover and sealing cap, which suggests a suitability of performing Kawata’s additional laser irradiation pre-treatment in the welding process (Wakimoto [0057]).
Modified Wakimoto’s end cover assembly further comprises a sealing cap (16, “sealing member”) sealing the liquid-injection hole (15) and connected to the top cover (14) (Wakimoto [0027], FIGs. 3-4), and an annular welding portion (W, “connection”) located at a junction between the sealing cap (16) and the top cover (14) ([0034], FIGs. 3, 4).
Wakimoto fails to further provide a top patch closely attached to the first surface of the top cover (14) by adhesive, the top patch disposed on the sealing cap as claimed in claim 1.
PNG
media_image2.png
498
1050
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B
However, it is known in the art that the sealing performance of the liquid-injection hole sealed with a sealing cap is improved using a top patch; Seong (US20100003583A1), directed to an analogous end cover assembly comprising a top cover (350, “cap plate”) having a first surface (“outer surface”) ([0064], FIG. 3B), and a sealing cap (382, “sealing member”) sealing a liquid injection hole (370, “electrolyte injection hole”) ([0057], FIG. 2B), teaches coating and curing a UV curable resin on the sealing cap (382) and an adjacent surface (i.e., the first surface) of the top cover (350), to form a top patch (390, “UV hardened layer”) disposed on the sealing cap (382), improving the sealing of the electrolyte injection hole (370) ([0077], FIG. 2B). Seong additionally recognizes that resins provide an adhesive effect to perform sealing ([0076]).
Thus, it would be obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application for one having ordinary skill in the art seeking to improve the sealing performance of Wakimoto’s sealing cap to coat and cure a UV curable resin on the sealing cap and the adjacent surface of the top cover (i.e., the first surface which surrounds the sealing cap) as taught by Seong, thus forming a top patch wherein the top patch is attached to the first surface of the top cover by adhesive and the top patch is disposed on the sealing cap as claimed in claims 1, 19, and 20.
Modified Wakimoto welds the sealing member (16) to the top cover (14) and forms an annular welding portion (W) using a weld along a first track (FIG. 6A) and subsequently a second track (FIG. 6B (Wakimoto [0056-0057], see Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B above showing the combined weld from the first/second tracks). The starting (e.g., (1)) and ending (e.g., (4)) positions of the welds protrude from the annular welding portion (W) ([0056-0057], [0034]) and are interpreted as a first welding mark and second welding mark (“protruding portion”, [0034]), the first welding mark comprising a first end portion connected to the welding portion (W) and an opposite second end portion (1) located outside and periphery of and spaced apart from the welding portion (W), and the second welding mark comprising a third end portion connected to the welding portion (W) and an opposite fourth end portion (4) located outside the periphery of and spaced apart from the welding portion (W) (Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B, [0047]), which reads on the remaining limitations of claims 1 and on a portion of claims 19 and 20.
Furthermore, Wakimoto discloses a surface of the sealing cap (16) away from the liquid-injection hole (15) is flush with the first sub-surface at a first projection (14 c 1) around the sealing cap (16) (Wakimoto [0036], FIG. 3) as claimed in claims 19 and 20.
An adapter sheet (50, “collector”) is further disposed at a side of the top cover (14) away from the first surface (i.e., the upper surface), wherein the adapter sheet has one end electrically connected to the end cover assembly (at a terminal 30); and an electrode assembly (20) disposed at a side of the adapter sheet away from the end cover assembly (“inside the exterior body”), wherein the electrode assembly (20) is electrically connected to one end of the adapter sheet (50) away from the end cover assembly (Wakimoto [0044], FIGs. 2, 5), thus fully reading on claims 19 and 20.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1. While at least some measure of roughness is present in Wakimoto’s first sub-surface treated with Kawata’s laser irradiation process to form grooves, i.e., roughness (Kawata [0015] to [0017], figs. 3-5), Wakimoto fails to disclose that a roughness Ra of the first sub-surface is in a range of 3.2 µm ≤ Ra ≤ 50 µm.
Kawata, relied upon to teach forming roughness of sub-surface 8 ([0015] to [0017], figs. 3-5), teaches that the roughness of the first sub-surface 8 is formed with a laser configured so as to avoid damaging the cover ([0045] to [0047]), and such that grooves are formed to collect electrolyte and thereby improve the welded seal ([0048]). Thus, Kawata teaches a need to balance between grooves deep enough to collect electrolyte but not so deep as to penetrate or otherwise compromise the cover. Roughness, Ra, as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art is a function of average deviation of surface height from a mean line, in this case the average surface depth in the grooved portion 8 of Kawata (for the definition of Ra as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art, see Section 3.2.1.1, p. 51-52 of Whitehouse and Section 4.2.1, p. 13 of BS ISO 4287 attached with the Office action filed 05/20/2024).
It would thus be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the roughness Ra of modified Wakimoto’s treated first sub-surface so as to obtain the desired balance between electrolyte collection (which requires a higher roughness) and integrity of the cover (which requires less roughness) for optimal end cover assembly sealing performance under considerations taught by Kawata (MPEP 2144.05 II) and in doing so, utilize at least a portion of the claimed range of roughness Ra between 3.2 µm ≤ Ra ≤ 50 µm, with a reasonable expectation of success as a skilled artisan would necessarily select at least some measure of roughness Ra in performing Kawata’s roughness treatment.
Regarding claims 3 and 7, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1, wherein the first sub-surface is necessarily annular in shape as surrounding the liquid-injection hole (15), which is circular; however, Wakimoto fails to further discuss a linewidth (L1) of the first sub-surface, being claimed within a range of 1.5 mm ≤L1≤ 8.5mm in claim 3.
Kawata, relied upon to teach irradiating to form a roughness of the first sub-surface (Kawata [0015]), teaches forming the sub-surface (8, “heat input section”) with an outer radius larger than the radius of the sealing lid (9) ([0015]) to use the roughness (i.e., grooves) to prevent any electrolyte remaining on the top cover (3b) from returning inwards towards the welding area ([0052], FIG. 3), and suggests an example outer radius of “several millimeters” for this purpose ([0015]). Kawata also notes that the spiral pattern used to form the annular first sub-surface (8) has the advantage of being relatively quick to manufacture ([0049], FIGs. 2-4); however, as the area of an annulus (i.e., the area irradiated to form the first sub-surface) is represented by A=π(router2-r-inner2), which increases multiplicatively with respect to router, e.g., an outer radius of the annular first sub-surface, a skilled artisan would avoid excessive values of first sub-surface outer radius to avoid an increasingly large impact on manufacturing speed.
Thus, in seeking to balance protecting the welding area from electrolyte without excessively impacting the manufacturing speed, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to optimize the outer radius of modified Wakimoto’s first sub-surface according to Kawata’s teaching and consequently vary the linewidth L1 of the first sub-surface; while Wakimoto and Kawata do not expressly specify a linewidth, given that Kawata envisions a first sub-surface in a general size range of “several millimeters” in radius, a skilled artisan would reasonably consider using at least a portion of the claimed range of 1.5 mm ≤L1≤ 8.5 mm which exists in a similar size range of several millimeters (MPEP 2144.05 II).
Similarly, as Kawata teaches forming the first sub-surface (8, “heat input section”) with an outer radius R1 larger than the radius R3 of the sealing lid (9) ([0015]), a ratio between R1/R3 is necessarily larger than 1<R1/R3. Increasing radius R1 of the first sub-surface (8) beyond the radius R3 of the sealing lid (9) would better protect the welding area around modified Wakimoto’s sealing lid from electrolyte ([0015, 0052], FIG. 3), but increasing R1 requires irradiating a multiplicatively larger area A=π(R12-rinner2) of the first sub-surface and mitigates Kawata’s improvements to manufacturing speed ([0049], FIGs. 2-4).
Thus, in seeking to balance protecting the welding area from electrolyte without excessively impacting the manufacturing speed, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to optimize a radius R1 modified Wakimoto’s first subsurface relative to the radius R3 of the sealing lid and thus vary a range of R1/R3 beyond at least 1<R1/R3, encompassing claim 7’s range of 1.45 ≤ R1/R3 ≤ 3.65 such that a skilled artisan performing this optimization would have routinely selected within the overlap (MPEP 2144.05 II).
Regarding claim 4, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1 wherein the first sub-surface is annular (Kawata [0015]) and the liquid-injection hole (15) is circular (Wakimoto [0027], FIG. 3). Wakimoto’s sealing cap (16) has a diameter (and thus a radius) greater than that of the liquid-injection hole (15) having the claimed radius R2 ([0027], FIG. 3); as the first sub-surface taught by Kawata extends beyond the sealing cap (Kawata [0052], FIG. 3), an outer radius thereof (R1) is larger than liquid-injection hole radius (R2) and 1<R1/R2. Simultaneously, Wakimoto’s liquid-injection hole (15) allows electrolytic solution around the injection hole to flow through the hole under linear inclination (Wakimoto [0038]); it would be apparent to a skilled artisan that too narrow of an injection hole (where radius R2 decreases and R1/R2 increases) would interfere with this function.
Thus, in seeking to form modified Wakimoto’s first sub-surface with a suitably large radius according to Kawata’s teaching while also allowing electrolytic solution to passively flow into the liquid-injection hole, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize ranges of R1 and R2 which approach 1<R1/R2, which encompasses the claimed range of 1.2 ≤R1/R2≤ 4.8 such that a skilled artisan seeking to form modified Wakimoto’s first sub-surface would have routinely selected within at least a portion of the claimed range.
PNG
media_image3.png
489
1036
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B Showing Lengths
Regarding claims 5, 10, Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1. Wakimoto fails to expressly specify a ratio of the outer radius R4 of the welding portion (W) to a length L2 of the first welding mark is in a range of 0.4 ≤ R4/L2≤4.8 as claimed in claim 5, or a relative length L3 of the second welding mark is 0.4 ≤ R4/L3≤4.8 as claimed in claim 10. However, Wakimoto notes that a sufficient length of the laser path starting and end points (e.g., (1), (4)) which constitute the end points of the first and second welding marks must be positioned at a sufficient distance from the interface of the welding portion (W) in order to prevent excess laser light to the end points and prevent damage to the end cover assembly (Wakimoto [0056-0057]). Additionally, Wakimoto depicts the lengths L2, L3 of the first, second welding marks as being at least comparably similar in size to the the outer radius R4 of the welding portion (W), i.e., where R4/L2 and R4/L3 roughly equal 1 (see Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B Showing Lengths, above). While Wakimoto’s drawings are not necessarily to scale, a skilled artisan seeking to prevent excessive laser light at the welding end points according to Wakimoto’s disclosure would at least consider the relative scale of the lengths L2, L3 as a starting point for determining an optimal length of L2 and L3 for this purpose and thus utilize at least a portion of the range of claims 5 and 10 where 0.4 ≤ R4/L2 ≈ 1 ≤2.8 and 0.4 ≤ R4/L3 ≈ 1 ≤2.8 (MPEP 2144.05 I).
PNG
media_image4.png
498
1050
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B
Regarding claims 6 and 12, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1, wherein the first welding mark and the second welding mark are illustrated to be straight as claimed in claims 6 and 12, and tangent to the welding portion (W) as claimed in claim 12 (Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B). While Wakimoto does not verbally specify that the first and second welding marks are straight and tangent, assuming arguendo that Wakimoto’s end cover assembly comprises first and second welding marks which lack these qualities, Wakimoto FIGs. 6A, 6B nonetheless provide sufficient basis for a skilled artisan to envision first and second welding marks straight and tangent to the welding portion (W) such that it would be obvious to select such a structure in the welding marks (MPEP 2144.04 IV. B).
As a property of geometry (where the first and second welding marks are tangent to welding portion W), an angle α between a line (see dashed line, Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B) connecting a center of the sealing cap (16) and the first end portion and the first welding mark is a right angle at 90°, which falls within claim 6’s range of 70°≤α≤120°; and an angle β between a line connecting a center of the sealing cap (16) and the third end portion and the second welding mark is a right angle at 90°, which falls within claim 6’s range of 70°≤β≤120°.
Regarding claim 8, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1, wherein the first end portion is overlapped with the third end portion, and the second end portion (1) and the fourth end portion (4) are respectively arranged at two opposite sides of a line (see dashed line) connecting the first end portion and a center of the liquid-injection hole (15) (Wakimoto [0056-0057], Annotated Wakimoto FIGs. 6A/6B).
Regarding claim 14, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 1, wherein the top cover (14) further has a second surface (“inner surface”) away from the first surface (“outer surface”), and the liquid-injection hole (15) further extends through the second surface (Wakimoto [0029], FIG. 3); and the second surface comprises a third sub-surface (14 a, “protrusion”) and a fourth sub-surface (14 d, “lower surface”) connected to the third sub-surface (14 a) ([0029], FIG. 3),
the third sub-surface (14 a) is around a periphery of the liquid-injection hole (15) , the fourth sub-surface (14 d) is around a periphery of the third sub-surface (14 a), and the third sub-surface (14 a, “protrusion”) exceeds the fourth sub-surface (14 d) to form a protrusion ([0029], FIG. 3).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakimoto (US20230369692A1) in view of Seong (EP2141758A1) and Kawata (JP2013127906A) as applied to claim 14, further in view of Wang et al. (CN214099733U; machine translation with 09/25/2025 Office action).
Regarding claim 15, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 14.
Wakimoto envisions the use of a protrusion (see 14 a) in the top cover second surface (i.e., the inner surface) in order to increase rigidity and prevent deformation near the electrolytic solution injection hole (15) (Wakimoto [0007], FIG. 3). However, Wakimoto does not further disclose a fifth sub-surface around a periphery of the fourth sub-surface, the third, fourth, and fifth sub-surfaces cooperatively defining a groove around the protrusion as claimed in claim 15.
Wang, in a similar field of endeavor of a battery top cover defining a liquid-injection hole (Machine Translation of Wang, [n0006]), teaches an end cover assembly wherein the second surface further comprises a fifth sub-surface (111, “first surface), the fifth surface around a periphery of a fourth sub-surface and connected to the fourth sub-surface, the fifth surface exceeds the fourth sub-surface, the third sub-surface (see annotation, being the protruded surface around the liquid injection hole 220) exceeds the fifth sub-surface (see Annotated Wang FIG. 2 below, Wang [n0032]), and the third, fourth, and fifth sub-surface cooperatively define a groove (300, “feeding groove”) around a protrusion (120, “second cover body”) ([n0032], [n0045], Annotated Wang FIG. 2).
PNG
media_image5.png
424
1357
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Wang FIG. 2
Advantageously, forming the groove (“feeding groove”) around the protrusion generates a force opposite to the force applied during processing of the liquid-injection hole, avoiding edge or corner collapse caused during processing the injection hole and improving the sealing of the sealing cap and the battery top cover ([n0003], [n0020])
As such, in seeking to prevent edge or corner collapse and improve the sealing of the sealing cap and the battery top cover, it would be obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application for one having ordinary skill in the art to provide modified Wakimoto’s end cover assembly with the fifth sub-surface connected around a periphery of a fourth sub-surface, wherein the fifth surface exceeds the fourth sub-surface, the third sub-surface exceeds the fifth sub-surface and the third, fourth, and fifth sub-surface cooperatively define a groove around a protrusion as taught by Wang. Such a modification would be done with a reasonable expectation of success, as Wakimoto’s protrusion would benefit from the reduction in deformation during forming the liquid-injection hole by forming the third, fourth, and fifth sub-surface in the groove around the protrusion as taught by Wang; furthermore, no features are present in the portion directly surrounding Wakimoto’s third surface (14a) which would appear to interfere with forming Wang’s the fifth sub-surface or groove (Wakimoto FIG. 3).
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakimoto (US20230369692A1) in view of Seong (EP2141758A1) and Kawata (JP2013127906A) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Liu et al. (CN211629143U; machine translation with 05/20/2024 Office action).
Regarding claim 16, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly for an energy storage apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the energy-storage apparatus further comprises an electrode assembly (20) (Wakimoto [0029], FIG. 2); the top cover (14) further has a second surface (“inner surface”) away from the first surface (“outer surface”), and the liquid-injection hole (15) further extends through the second surface ([0029], [0032], FIG. 3).
Wakimoto’s end cover assembly comprises poles (30) disposed through the top cover which includes a first through hole (18, “hole”) extending through the first surface and second surface, i.e., through the inner and outer surfaces of top cover (14) ([0043], FIG. 2), and the first through hole (18) is spaced apart from the liquid-injection hole (15) (FIG. 2), reading on portions of claim 16. The end cover also comprises a lower plastic member (90, “internal insulator”) disposed on the second surface (i.e., a bottom surface) of the top cover (14) as claimed in claim 16, functioning to insulate the poles from the top cover (14) ([0044], FIG. 2); and a pole (30, “terminal”), wherein one part (30c, “swaged portion”) of the pole (13) is located at a side of the lower plastic member (80) away from the top cover (14) and is insulated from the top cover(14), and the pole (30) is configured to be electrically connected to the electrode assembly (20) ([0043-0044], FIG. 2).
However, Wakimoto fails to further disclose the top cover which further defines a first accommodating recess from the second surface, a second accommodating recess recessed from a bottom wall of the first accommodating recess as claimed in claim 16. Wakimoto’s first through hole (18) extends through the first surface (“outer surface”) but not through a bottom wall of the second accommodating recess ([0032, 0043]). Similarly, Wakimoto fails to disclose further structural details of the lower plastic member such as the abutting portions which abut against the walls of the accommodating recesses, or a through hole which extends through the abutting portions as claimed in the remainder of claim 16.
PNG
media_image6.png
484
1084
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Liu FIG. 2
Liu (CN211629143U) is directed to an end cover assembly with a pole structure having improved performance (Machine translation of Liu, [0006]), teaches a top cover (4, “top cover sheet”) defining a first accommodating recess from the second surface (i.e., “the bottom of the top cover plate”) ([0029]), a second accommodating recess recessed from a bottom wall of the first accommodating recess, and a first through hole (14, “pole hole”) extending through both a bottom wall of the second accommodating recess (“bottom of…electrode hole 14”, [0032]) and the first surface (i.e., the upper surface of the top cover 4), the first accommodating recess, the second accommodating recess and the first through hole (14) are in communication with one another, and the first through hole (14) is spaced apart from a liquid-injection hole (6) ([0029], see Annotated Liu FIG. 2).
Liu’s end cover assembly further comprises a lower plastic member (10, “lower plastic part”, 7, “sealing ring”, [0029]), wherein the lower plastic member (10, 7) is disposed on the second (i.e., bottom) surface of the top cover (“lower plastic part 10…at the bottom of top cover sheet 4”, [0029]); the lower plastic member (7, 10) comprises a body portion (“groove structure”, [0029],) a first abutting portion (see annotations) protruding from a surface of the body portion facing the top cover (4) (“groove structure…at the bottom of the top cover sheet 4”, [0029]), and a second abutting portion (7, “sealing ring”) protruding into the first through hole (14), i.e., from the surface of the first abutting portion facing the top cover ([0035]) (Annotated Liu FIG. 2), reading on portions of claim 16.
The first abutting portion is located in the first accommodating recess and abuts against the bottom wall of the first accommodating recess and a side wall of the first accommodating recess (Annotated Liu FIG. 2) reading on portions of claim 16; these interlocking structures in the lower plastic member (10, 7) and top cover (4) would be understood to have utility in positioning the lower plastic member (10, 7) which comprises a hole which must align with a liquid injection hole (6) in the top cover (4) ([0029], Annotated Liu FIG. 2).
The second abutting portion (7) is located in the second accommodating recess and abuts against the bottom wall of the second accommodating recess (“bottom of…electrode hole 14”) and a side wall of the second accommodating recess as claimed in claim 16, which allows the second abutting portion (7, “sealing ring”) to be compressed against the top cover (4) and form an improved seal ([0032], Annotated FIG. 1, Annotated Liu FIG. 2).
The lower plastic member further defines a second through hole (“through holes”, see dashed line in Annotated Liu FIG. 1) sequentially extending through the body portion, the first abutting portion, and the second abutting portion (7, “sealing ring”, a ring necessarily comprising a central hole) ([0029], Annotated Liu FIG. 1, Annotated Liu FIG. 2), and the second through hole is defined corresponding to the first through hole (14, “pole hole” [0029]); this structure allows the sealing ring to achieve improved sealing ([0032]).
PNG
media_image7.png
774
1317
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotated Liu FIG. 1
Liu’s end cover assembly comprises a pole (9), wherein the lower plastic member(7) is sleeved between a one part (“lower column bodies”) of the pole (9) and the bottom of the electrode hole (14) of the top cover (4) ([0032], Annotated Liu FIGs. 1, 2), and the one part (“lower column body”) of the pole (9) is thus is located at a side of the lower plastic member (7) away from the top cover (4) as claimed in claim 16. The other part (“upper parts”) of the pole (9) sequentially extends through the second through hole and the first through hole (14) and is insulated from the top cover ([0029], Annotated Liu FIGs. 1, 2), and the pole is configured to be electrically connected to the electrode assembly ([0006]), thus reading on the remaining limitations of claim 16.
Wakimoto notes that increasing the scale of energy-storage apparatus increases the likelihood of an increase in internal pressure ([0045]); while the sealing member has an improved pressure resistance ([0006-0007]), Wakimoto does not remark on any such improvements in the pole (30) or plastic member (80) (Wakimoto [0043], FIG. 2); the structure of Wakimoto’s poles would thus benefit from improved sealing performance such as that provided by Liu’s structure of poles and plastic member.
Thus, in seeking to improve the sealing performance of modified Wakimoto’s end cover, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the above structure of Liu’s poles and plastic member for use in Wakimoto’s end cover, with a reasonable expectation of success as Liu’s end cover assembly makes similar allowances for a liquid-injection hole in the top cover and would not require significant redesign of modified Wakimoto’s sealing member and liquid-injection hole, and because Liu’s end cover assembly provides the same functionality of sealing the energy-storage apparatus and providing an electrical connection to an electrode assembly.
Regarding claim 17, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly of claim 1, including a lower plastic member (80, “insulator”) provided between the pole (30) and the cover (14) disposed on a side of the top cover (14) away from the first surface (i.e., the top surface) (Wakimoto [0044], FIG. 2), reading on portions of claim 17, but fails to further specify a structure of the lower plastic member comprising a first, second, third, and fourth plastic sub-member, or indicate the specific structure or position of the first, second, third, and fourth plastic sub-members as recited in claim 17.
Liu teaches an end-cover assembly for an energy-storage apparatus (“a power battery top cover plate assembly”) comprising a top cover 4, a liquid-injection hole 6, and a lower plastic member (collectively portions 10 and 11) disposed on a side of the top cover 4 away from the first (top) surface ([0008], [0029], figs. 1-2). Specifically, Liu teaches that the lower plastic member (portions 10 and 11) comprises a first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10), a second plastic sub-member (left portion of member 10), a third plastic sub-member (front portion of member 11), and a fourth plastic sub-member (back portion of member 11), such that the first plastic sub-member and the second plastic sub-member are arranged at an interval in a first (horizontal) direction on a surface of the top cover 4 away from the first (top) surface ([0029], figs. 1-2; see Annotated Liu FIG. 1 below).
Liu further teaches that the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) defines a leakage hole at a position of the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) close to the second plastic sub-member (left portion of member 10), the leakage hole is in communication with the liquid-injection hole 6, the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) has a first peripheral side wall and a second peripheral side wall that are connected end-to-end and define the leakage hole, the first peripheral side wall is a cambered surface, the second peripheral side wall is a flat surface, and the second peripheral side wall is closer to the second plastic sub-member than the first peripheral side wall (Annotated Liu FIG. 1; where the indicated first and second side walls are located around the leakage hole so as to limit, i.e. define, the leakage hole, and the first side wall has curved ends such that the first side wall is cambered, i.e. curved; [0029], figs. 1-3).
PNG
media_image8.png
467
1500
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Annotated Liu FIG. 1
Liu further teaches that the third plastic sub-member (front portion of member 11) and the fourth plastic sub-member (back portion of member 11) are arranged at an interval in a second direction (orthogonal to fig. 1, vertical in fig. 3), and the third plastic sub-member (front portion of member 11) is connected to both the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) and the second plastic sub-member (left portion of member 10) in a snap-fit manner (via buckles 18 into holes 17); the fourth plastic sub-member (back portion of member 11) is connected to both the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) and the second plastic sub-member (left portion of member 10) in a snap-fit manner (via buckles 18 into holes 17); and the third plastic sub-member (front portion of member 11) and the fourth plastic sub-member (back portion of member 11) are both partially located between the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) and the second plastic sub-member (left portion of member 10), the first direction (horizontal in Annotated Liu FIG. 1) being perpendicular to the second direction (orthogonal in Annotated Liu FIG. 1), ([0029], figs. 1-3).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt Liu’s structure of lower plastic member for use in Wakimoto’s end cover assembly with a reasonable expectation of success as Liu’s end cover assembly makes similar allowances for a liquid-injection hole in the top cover and would not require significant redesign of modified Wakimoto’s sealing member and liquid-injection hole, and because Liu’s end cover assembly provides the same functionality of sealing the energy-storage apparatus and providing an electrical connection to an electrode assembly. Additionally, such a person would have been motivated to add the lower plastic member of Liu to the end-cover assembly of Wakimoto in order to improve the safety and performance of the end-cover assembly ([0006] and [0017] of Liu).
Regarding claim 18, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly according to claim 17.
Wakimoto’s top cover (14) comprises a second surface (i.e., a bottom surface) away from the first surface (i.e., the top surface). Wakimoto defines a discharge vale (17) extending through the first and second surface (i.e., from the top to the bottom of the top cover 14) which prevents pressures inside the energy-storage apparatus in excess of a predetermined pressure (Wakimoto [0025], FIG. 2), i.e., renders the energy-storage apparatus as being explosion-proof and is thus recognized as an explosion-proof hole (17) ([0025], FIG. 2) reading on portions of claim 18.
The explosion-proof hole (17) is spaced apart from the liquid-injection hole (15) ([0025], FIG. 2); and the end cover assembly further comprises an explosion-proof sheet (shown as the thin portion of explosion-proof hole 17) sealing the explosion-proof hole and connected to the top cover (14) (FIGs. 1, 2).
However, modified Wakimoto fails to further disclose that the first plastic sub-member further defines a vent channel in communication with the leakage hole, the vent channel extends through both a surface of the first plastic sub-member facing the second plastic sub-member and a surface of the first plastic sub-member facing the top cover, and the vent channel is in communication with a side of the explosion-proof sheet facing the first plastic sub-member as claimed in the remaining limitations of claim 18.
Liu, relied upon to teach the structure of the lower plastic member (portions 10 and 11 of Liu) comprising a first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10). Liu also teaches an explosion-proof hole sealed with explosion-proof sheet 2, and that the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) further defines a vent channel (curved portion on the center of the left end of the right portion of member 10) in communication with the leakage hole (via the body of the right portion of the member 10), the vent channel extends through both a surface of the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) facing the second plastic sub-member (left portion of member 10) and a surface of the first plastic sub-member (right portion of member 10) facing the top cover 3, and the vent channel is in communication with a side of the explosion-proof sheet 2 facing the a side of the explosion-proof sheet facing the first plastic sub-member ([0029], figs. 1-3 of Liu).
The above structure in the plastic member enables the functionality of the explosion-proof hole in Liu’s top cover (Liu [0029]); it would be apparent that a lack of any vent channel between the plastic sub-members would cause a potential buildup of gas in the energy storage apparatus.
Thus, in seeking to maintain the function of modified Wakimoto’s explosion-proof hole at releasing internal pressure from the energy storage apparatus, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to provide further structures of Liu’s lower plastic member as described above which read on the remaining limitations of claim 18, with a reasonable expectation of success as no inherent functions of Wakimoto’s end cover assembly (particularly, venting exhaust gas through the explosion-proof hole) are rendered inoperable by the selection of this structure in the plastic sub-member.
Claims 22, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakimoto (US20230369692A1) in view of Seong (EP2141758A1) and Kawata (JP2013127906A) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Tsukui et al. (US20180369963A1).
PNG
media_image9.png
498
1050
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B
Regarding claims 22 and 23, modified Wakimoto discloses the end cover assembly of claim 1, wherein the first and second welding marks are positioned away from the interface of the annular welding portion (W) around the sealing cap (16), and are thus at least partially located on and in direct contact with the first sub-surface (Annotated Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B, Wakimoto [0056-0057]) as claimed in claim 22. Additionally, Wakimoto suggests performing welding in the area of a first recess (14 b 1) surrounding the sealing member (16) to improve workability of forming the weld and to prevent interference with other members ([0035]); however, modified Wakimoto fails to explicitly disclose a first/second welding mark completely located on the first sub-surface as claimed.
Tsukui (US20180369963A1) is analogous as manufacturing a battery using laser welding (Tsukui [0018]) where a weld (31, “irradiation mark”) is formed entirely within a rough area (8) ([0051], FIG. 6) comparable to modified Wakimoto’s roughened first sub-surface. Tsukui notes that the rough area (8) is more easily recognized by a scanning camera when performing the welding, improving positioning precision (Tsukui [0051-0052], FIG. 6). Such improvements in positioning would have utility in manufacturing Wakimoto’s battery, where Wakimoto discloses a preferability of forming the weld in the area of the first recess around the sealing sealing cap for improved workability and reduced risk of interference with other components.
Thus, in seeking to improve the manufacturing precision, it would be obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application for one having ordinary skill in the art to form Wakimoto’s first and second welding marks entirely within a roughened area, e.g., the first sub-surface as taught by Tsukui and thus reading on the entirety of claim 22; such a modification would be made with a reasonable expectation of success as no change in functionality of Wakimoto’s end cover assembly would result from this positioning of the first and second welding marks.
Wakimoto further illustrates and thus discloses or provides sufficient specificity to envision the first welding mark and the second welding mark as straight and tangent to the welding portion (W) (Wakimoto FIG. 6A/6B). While modified Wakimoto fails to expressly quantify a length of the first and second welding marks L2 and L3 relative to a radius R1 of the first sub-surface and R4 as an outer radius of the welding portion (W) as satisfying 1.5mm ≤ L2 and L3 ≤ √(R1^2-R4^2) as claimed in claim 23, the upper limit term √(R1^2-R4^2) represents the maximum length (L2, L3) of a straight first or second welding mark tangent to the annular welding portion (W) and entirely disposed within the radius (R1) of the first sub-surface (see Office action filed 02/12/2026 p. 6 for a geometric proof of this derivation). Wakimoto further discloses providing the welding end points (i.e., the second, fourth end positions) away from the welding portion (W) to prevent excessive laser light at these points ([0056-0057]); in light of this consideration and Tsukui’s teaching of forming the first, second welding mark, within the bounds of the first sub-surface to improve precision (Tsukui [0051-0052], FIG. 6), a skilled artisan would thus consider forming Wakimoto’s first and second weld marks with endpoints near the outer radius R1 of the second sub-surface to maximize the length L2, L3, and thus utilize a first, second welding mark length L2, L3 approaching the upper limit of √(R1^2-R4^2) (MPEP 2144.05 I).
While modified Wakimoto fails to expressly disclose that L2, L3 are both greater than 1.5mm ≤ L2, L3, Kawata also teaches a need to form the first sub-surface outer radius R1 larger than the radius of the sealing lid (equal to radius R4 in modified Wakimoto’s end cover assembly) to prevent electrolyte on the top cover from returning inwards towards the welding area (Kawata [0052], FIG. 3), and suggests an example outer radius R1 of “several millimeters” for this purpose ([0015]). A skilled artisan would also avoid excessive values of first sub-surface outer radius R1 to avoid an increasingly large impact on manufacturing speed.
Thus, in seeking to balance protecting the welding area from electrolyte without excessively impacting the manufacturing speed, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to optimize the outer radius R1 of modified Wakimoto’s first sub-surface relative to R4 according to according to Kawata’s teaching; while Wakimoto and Kawata do not expressly specify R4 and R1, given that Kawata envisions a first sub-surface in an R1 of “several millimeters”, a skilled artisan would reasonably consider using at least a portion of the claimed range of 1.5mm ≤ L2, L3 which exists in a similar size range of several millimeters (MPEP 2144.05 II) in addition to L2, L3 ≤ √(R1^2-R4^2) as claimed in claim 23.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous rejection of claims 1, 19, 20, and dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 over combinations of Kawata, Okada, and Fujimoto, Hazemi, Wakimoto, Wang, Jiang, and Liu (remarks pp. 10-12) have been considered but are moot because the arguments are drawn to the claim amendment (reciting a top patch attached to the first surface of the top cover by adhesive) which has necessitated new grounds of rejection under Seong et al. (EP2141758A1; US20100003583A1 cited as U.S. equivalent; cited in 08/21/2024 IDS) as discussed above.
Applicant notes improvements to the sealing based on the ability of the top patch to adhere to the first surface of the top cover by adhesive, where the roughness of the first sub-surface allows gas between the top patch to be discharged through gaps, preventing the formation of bubbles and improving the binding force and sealing performance, which appears to be an unexpected improvement of Applicant’s inventive top patch being bonded adhesively (Remarks pp. 11-12).
However, an adhesively bonded top patch is known in the art (see discussion of claims 1, 19, 20 under Seong EP2141758A1); moreover, it is not clear that this improvement would be present in each possible configuration of the adhesive top patch encompassed by claims 1, 19, and 20. For example, the top patch could be attached by the adhesive to only the roughened first sub-surface, the comparatively smooth second sub-surface, or to both surfaces, and still be attached to the first surface which comprises both the first sub-surface and second sub-surface as claimed. The behavior and sealing performance of the adhesive bond would be expected to vary non-trivially depending on the surface structure (i.e., roughness).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVERETT T CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-1331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00-8:00.
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, Jonathan G Leong can be reached on (571) 270 1292. 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.
/E.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 8/14/2026
Prosecution Insights