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 .
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 2-3 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.
Claims 2-3 recite “measured as follows”. The claims do not recite a method of measurement or any limitations to further define the measurement. Therefore, it is not understood what is meant by “measured as follows”, rendering the claim indefinite. For purposes of examination the pouch film will be examined with a thickness of 34-40 micrometers.
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 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20230207931 A1) in view of Cui (US 20240213591 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a secondary battery pouch film (paragraph 0008), comprising at least an outer layer, a barrier layer, and a sealant layer which are structured in an order (paragraphs 0010, 0082, figure 8, gas barrier layer 1352, drawing assistance layer 1354, surface protection layer 1353), wherein the outer layer comprises nylon and polyethylene terephthalate films (paragraphs 0079, 0082, 0088), the barrier layer is made of aluminum (paragraph 0060, figure 2, barrier layer 1352). Kim does not explicitly disclose that the Poisson's ratio is 0.4 to 0.5.
Cui discloses battery cells housed in a flexible encapsulation structure (Cui paragraphs 0020-0024). Cui further discloses that the to flexible encapsulation layers have a Poisson’s ratio of 0.35 to 0.45 (Cui paragraphs 0125, 0128, overlapping the claimed range). The reference teaches that the encapsulation layers prevent creases and micro-cracks in the edge of the battery (Cui paragraph 0121). Cui and Kim are analogous because they both disclose packaging films for batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pouch film disclosed by Kim to include the Poisson’s ratio disclosed by Cui for the purpose of preventing creases and cracks. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 4, modified Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1. Kim further discloses a method of preparing the secondary battery pouch film, the method comprising: laminating nylon and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) films; and laminating the laminated nylon and PET films with the barrier layer (paragraphs 0082, 0088-0089, nylon and PET films are stacked on the Al layer).
Regarding claim 5, modified Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1. Kim further discloses a secondary battery encased with the secondary battery pouch film (paragraph 0027).
Regarding claim 6, modified Kim discloses the limitations of claim 5. Kim further discloses wherein the secondary battery is for electric vehicles or energy storage devices (paragraph 0003).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1. Kim further discloses a method for manufacturing a secondary battery, the method comprising encasing the secondary battery with the secondary battery pouch film (paragraphs 0052-0054).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20230207931 A1) in view of Cui (US 20240213591 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ojiri et al. (US 20190148682 A1).
Regarding claim 2, modified Kim discloses the limitations of claim 1. Kim further discloses that the thickness of aluminum before forming is 60 µm (paragraphs 0083, 0088). Kim is silent regarding wherein the remaining thickness of aluminum at the edge of the secondary battery pouch film measured as follows is 34 µm to 40 µm.
Ojiri discloses a battery packaging material that includes a laminate having at least a base material layer, an aluminum alloy foil layer, and a heat-weldable resin layer (Ojiri paragraph 0012). Ojiri further discloses that the ratio of the thickness of the aluminum alloy in the curved sections to the thickness of the aluminum alloy in the straight section after forming is 45% or more to 90% or less (Ojiri paragraph 0083, figure 6, overlapping the claimed range as 34 to 40µm is ~57% to ~67%). The reference teaches that the thickness prevents pinholes and cracks and improves appearance (Ojiri paragraph 0083). Ojiri and Kim are analogous because they oth disclose laminate film battery packaging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pouch film disclosed by Kim to include the aluminum edge thickness disclosed by Ojiri. Doing so would prevent pinholes and cracks and improve appearance. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 3, modified Kim discloses the limitations of claim 2. Kim further discloses wherein a maximum forming depth of the secondary battery pouch film measured as follows is 16 mm to 22 mm (paragraphs 0090-0091, 0101-0102, Table 2, Examples 2 and 3 have a forming depth within the claimed range).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN T LUSTGRAAF whose telephone number is (571)272-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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.
/B.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights