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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 9, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S> Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0214061 to Machida (“Machida”).
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 20, Machida discloses spiral-wound electrode core assemblies for batteries comprising a positive electrode, separator, and negative electrode laminated together and spirally-wound. Machida at Abstract and Figure 3. Reference will now be made to the following annotated version of Figure 4b of Machida in support of the following discussion.
PNG
media_image1.png
354
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The positive electrode includes a current collector and with active material applied to both sides thereof, where the current collector is longer than the active material on both sides of the current collector, such that the positive current collector has an exposed part on both surface sides of the current collector at both the winding start end of the current collector and the winding terminal end of the current collector. The negative electrode is similarly fabricated. See Annotated Figure 4b above and related discussion in Michada. As can be seen above, an insulating body (16a) is applied on both sides of the negative electrode at the winding start end, and in particular the portion on the first side faces an exposed part of the positive electrode current collector such that it will will a gap between that exposed portion and the negative electrode upon winding. Accordingly, the insulating body (16a) corresponds to the recited gap filling body. The insulating body is provided in the form of adhesive tape.
Regarding claims 2-5, and 8 as shown above, the negative electrode current collector is longer than the length of active material applied to both the first and second side of the electrode. Additionally, the length of the negative electrode active material applied to the first side of the negative electrode current collector facing the positive electrode is longer than the electrode active material applied to the second side, and the insulating body attaches to the current collector, and the active material, abutting/sitting flush with both the exposed winding start end of the active material and the major surface of the active material layer facing the positive electrode. The portion of the insulating body covering the current collector is the end of the insulating body closest to the winding start end and the portion of the insulating body sitting flush with end portions of the negative electrode active material is the tail of the insulating body arranged closest to the winding terminal end.
Further regarding claim 6, as shown above the insulating body also attaches to the second side of the negative electrode, including to both the second side of the current collector and the electrode active material applied to the second side.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida. Machida is applied as described above.
First addressing claims 11 and 12, Machida discloses that the thickness of the insulating layer is a result effective variable, where the tape needs to be thick enough to form a robust insulating layer, but that if it is too thick it will negatively impact the volume efficiency of the battery. Thus, absent a showing of unexpected results, the Office finds that the person of ordinary skill in the art would have reason to experiment with various thicknesses of the insulating layer including within the recited ranges.
Returning to claims 7 and 13, the purpose of the insulating layer is to provide insulating protection against burrs and other edges formed about a cut edge of the electrode. As noted above, Machida also discloses that providing an insulating body that is larger than needed will negatively impact the battery volume efficiency. Thus, the Office finds the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have reason to experiment with lengths of the insulating body to find one that is long enough to create robust insulation protection against burrs but not so long as to negatively effect volume efficiency of the battery, including the range recited in claim 13, and a length that results in a mid-point of the insulating body aligning with the first end of the electrode active material, since that is a central region of possible burr formation.
Claims 14, 15, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0299461 to Kim (“Kim”). Machida is applied as described above. Further regarding claims 14, 15, and 19, as noted, Machida discloses using an adhesive tape as its insulator. However, alternative means of providing extra insulation protection in regions of batteries requiring such, as is the purpose of the insulating body in Machida. In particular, application of a paste comprising a polymer binder and protruding ceramic particles is one common means of achieving such insulation. See Kim at paragraphs [0009] and [0040]. Thus, the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have found use of the ceramic-containing paste of Kim as the insulator in Machida (including in its double-layer structure) to be nothing more than the use of a commonly known alternative insulating material for its intended purpose to achieve a predictable result.
Further regarding claim 18, as noted above, Machida provides sufficient reason to experiment with the thickness of the insulating layer and thus, absent a showing of unexpected results for the claimed range, it is found obvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 16, and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art discloses use of gap filling bodies for insulation purposes. Thus, in addition to not disclosing an adhesive tape with a through-hole structure, the prior art motivates against such an arrangement since it would leave the electrode structure exposed at the through-hole leading to possible shorts.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art is silent regarding use of the recited carbon materials in its gap-filling body, because again it is intended to be insulating and the recited carbon materials are not known to be excellent insulators.
Further regarding claim 17, the prior art is silent regarding insuring the length of a gap filling body is the same as the exposed portion of the positive electrode current collector.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT P MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (571)270-7531. The examiner can normally be reached 9am to 5pm M-F.
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.
/WYATT P MCCONNELL/ Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights