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 Claims
Claims 1-6 are pending in the current application and under consideration on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02 January 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation, “a back surface side” which renders the claim as indefinite as the identification of the back surface side has not been established.
For examination on the merits, claim 4 is interpreted wherein the bottom surface of the disk oriented in relationship to the other claim features comprises a recess.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanida (US 5876868 A, "Tanida"), in view of Lee et al. (US 8927123 B2, "Lee").
Regarding claim 1,
PNG
media_image1.png
471
450
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
552
435
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
667
427
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
474
624
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Tanida discloses a battery sealing structure (e.g. current interrupt device) disposed at one end of a battery housing (e.g. cylindrical battery can, reg. #2, col. 2, lines 17-20) having a cylindrical shape and a top opening (col. 2 lines 17-20), wherein the battery sealing structure comprises a safety valve (e.g. cover, ref. #5, col. 2, lines 45-62), an insulating member (e.g. holder, ref. #6, col. 2, lines 45-62), and a stripper member (e.g. disk, ref. #7, col. 2, lines 45-62). The safety valve/cover includes a concentric stepped portion (e.g. first protrusion, ref. #5b, co. 2, lines 27-29) including a first bottom portion [FIG. 1], an annular first side wall that is raised in a direction away from the electrode body from the peripheral edge of the first bottom portion [FIG. 1], and a first flange portion that extends outward from an upper end of the first side wall portion. The insulating member/holder includes a first accommodation portion including an annular second side wall portion raised from an extension portion in a direction away from the electrode body [FIG. 1] wherein the extension portion the extension portion extending inward from a lower end of the second side wall portion [FIG. 1]; and a second flange portion extending outward from an upper end of the first side wall portion [FIG. 1]. The stripper member/disk comprises a second accommodation portion including a second bottom portion [FIG. 1], an annular third side wall portion that is raised in a direction away from the electrode body from a peripheral edge of the second bottom portion [FIG. 1], and a third flange portion extending outward from an upper end of the third side wall portion [FIG. 1]. The stripper member is in contact with a lead of a power-generating element of the battery (e.g. electrode body, col. 2, lines 30-32). As shown above in FIG. 2, the concentric stepped portion of the safety valve is fitted into the first accommodation portion of the insulating member and the first accommodation portion of the insulating member is fitted into the second accommodation portion of the stripper member.
Tanida is silent regarding the disk including a second protrusion protruding from a central portion toward the first bottom portion and that a top portion of the second protrusion is connected to the first bottom portion by welding.
Lee discloses a cap assembly (e.g. current interrupt device) for a cylindrical rechargeable battery that is mounted on an open upper end portion of a cylindrical can of a battery in which an electrode assembly (e.g. columnar electrode body) is installed in the cylindrical can (col. 4, lines 53-58). The cap assembly comprises a safety vent (e.g. cover, ref. #30, col. 4, lines 62-67, and col. 5, lines 1-3]) and a current interruptive device/CID (e.g. disk, ref. #50, col. 4, lines 62-67, and col.5, lines 1-3) that is provided below the safety vent ([FIG. 4]). The safety vent is shaped wherein its center is downwardly embayed (e.g. first protrusion, col. 6, lines 47-49). The current interrupt device includes a protrusion (e.g. second protrusion,, , col. 6, lines 67, and col. 7, lines 1-4) that is welded to a lower end of the embayed region of the safety vent and upwardly protrudes at the center (col. 7, lines 1-4, [FIG. 4]).
Tanida and Lee each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claim invention – a cylindrical battery and a cylindrical battery cap assembly. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the stripper member of Tania to be modified to comprise the current interruptive device including the protrusion that is welded to the safety vent of Lee in order for the stripper member and current interruptive device to be electrically connected to each other and be easily separated from each other when the internal pressure of the battery increases abnormally (Lee, col. 7, lines 11-24).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanida (US 5876868 A, "Tanida"), in view of Lee et al. (US 8927123 B2, "Lee"), and further in view of Ito (JPWO 2017119421 A1, “Ito”).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Tanida in view of Lee discloses the cylindrical battery of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tanida in view of Lee is silent regarding a thickness of the top portion of the second protrusion being less than a thickness of a non-top portion of the second protrusion (claim 2) and a thickness of the top portion of the second protrusion being 0.05 mm or more and 0.20 mm or less (claim 3).
Ito discloses an electrical storage element comprising a diaphragm (e.g. cover, ref. #50 Para. [0015]) for current interruption and a current collector (e.g. disk, ref. #37, para. [0031]), wherein the current collector is made of aluminum (para. [0031]) and is a conductive member provided in the conductive path between the diaphragm and the electrode body (para. [0032]). The diaphragm protrudes downward (e.g. first protrusion, shown below in [FIG. 8]) and comprises a bottom portion (e.g. first bottom portion, shown below in [FIG. 8]). The current collector further comprises a protruding portion (e.g. second protrusion, ref. #40, para. [0057]) that protrudes upward toward the bottom portion of the diaphragm (shown below in [FIG. 8]). The thickness of the protrusion portion of the current collector (e.g. thickness of the non-top portion of the second protrusion, ref. #L2, para. [0061]) is greater than the thickness of the end face portion (e.g. thickness of the top portion of the second protrusion, ref. #L1, para. [0061]).
PNG
media_image5.png
492
893
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Tanida, Lee and Ito each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claim invention – a battery and a cylindrical battery cap assembly. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the current interruptive device including a second protrusion of Tanida in view of Lee to have the current collector of Ito to have the thickness of the top portion of the second protrusion to be less than the thickness of the non-top portion of the second protrusion in order for the relatively thin end face portion (e.g. top portion of the second protrusion) to be easily broken and to ensure the rigidity of the relatively thick protruding portion (e.g. non-top portion of the second protrusion) is secured (Ito, para. [0061]).
In addition and/or in the alternative, a particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.). In this case, Ito does not disclose the thickness of the end face portion being in a range of 0.05 mm or more and 0.20 mm or less. It would not have been inventive to discover the workable ranges by routine experimentation of the invention taught by Ito. Tanida, Lee and Ito each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – a battery and a cylindrical battery cap assembly. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the thickness of the top portion of the second protrusion for the intended application in order for the relatively thin end face portion (e.g. top portion of the second protrusion) to be easily broken and to ensure the rigidity of the relatively thick protruding portion (e.g. non-top portion of the second protrusion) is secured (Ito, para. [0061])., since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanida (US 5876868 A, "Tanida"), in view of Lee et al. (US 8927123 B2, "Lee"), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 8071230 B2 “Kim”).
Tanida in view of Lee discloses the cylindrical battery of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tanida in view of Lee is silent regarding a recess being on a back surface side of the second protrusion, and a size of a bottom portion of the recess being 0.5 mm or more and 3.0 mm or less.
Kim discloses a cap assembly for a for a secondary battery comprising a vent (e.g. cover, ref. #420, col. 7, lines 8-13) and a current intercepting member (e.g. disk, ref. #700, col. 7, lines 8-13) that is below the vent. The current intercepting member comprises a protrusion (e.g. second protrusion, ref. #720, col. 7, lines 23-35) that has a diameter (e.g. size of the bottom portion the recess, col. 9, lines 21-23) of 2 mm which falls within the claimed range, and thereby renders prima facie obvious the claimed range of 0.5 mm or more and 3.0 mm or less. (MPEP 2144.05)
Tanida, Lee, and Kim each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – a cylindrical battery and a cylindrical battery cap assembly. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the current interruptive device of Tania in view of Lee to have a recess with a diameter of 2 mm as disclosed in Kim to prevent the electrolyte from leaking from the batteries (Kim, col. 10, lines 1-2).
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanida (US 5876868 A, "Tanida"), in view of Lee et al. (US 8927123 B2, "Lee"), and further in view of Berkowitz et al. (US 20080220316 A1, “Berkowitz”).
Tanida in view of Lee discloses the cylindrical battery of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tania in view of Lee is silent regarding the second bottom portion including an annular groove surrounding the second protrusion and a ratio of a bottom thickness of the groove to a thickness of the disk is 30% or more and 70% or less.
Berkowitz discloses an end cap assembly comprising a PTC device (e.g. cover, ref. #160, para. [0045]), a support washer (e.g. holder, ref. #140, para. [0046]), and a cathode contact cup (e.g. disk, ref. #40, para. [0046]). The cathode contact cup has a groove (e.g. annular groove, ref. #44, para. [0051]) and a thin portion (e.g. bottom thickness of the groove, ref. #43, para. [0053]). The cathode contact cup has a thickness of 0.2 to 1.5 mm (para. [0053]) wherein the thin portion has a thickness of about 0.02 and 0.12 mm. The ratio of the thickness of the thin portion to the thickness of the cathode contact cup is in a range of 10% to 60% (e.g.
0.02
0.2
=
0.1
,
0.12
0.2
=
0.6
) which overlaps with, and thereby renders prima facia obvious the claimed range of 30% or more and 70% or less. (MPEP 2144.05).
PNG
media_image6.png
326
413
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Tanida, Lee and Berkowitz each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – a battery and a cylindrical battery cap assembly. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the current interruptive device of Tanida in view of Lee to include an annular groove and to have a ratio of the thickness of the thin portion to the thickness of the cathode contact cup to be in a range of 10% to 60% to achieve a bust pressure in a range of 350 psi to 500 psi (para. [0055]). One of ordinary skill in the art would like the groove to rupture when the gas within the cell builds up to a predetermined pressure leave, thereby venting gas to the environment and reducing the cell’s internal pressure (para. [0060]).
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanida (US 5876868 A, "Tanida"), in view of Lee et al. (US 8927123 B2, "Lee"), and further in view of Kunoike et al. (US 10615401 B2, “Kunoike”).
Tanida in view of Lee discloses the cylindrical battery of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tania in view of Lee is silent regarding the first side wall portion being inclined such that an inner diameter of the first side wall portion gradually increases from an upper portion to a lower portion.
Kunoike discloses a sealing unit (e.g. current interrupt device) for a cylindrical battery comprising a valve member (e.g. cover. ref #12, col. 3, lines 36-38), an annular insulating member (e.g. holder, ref. #14, col. 3, lines 36-38), and a metal plate (e.g. disk, reg. #13, col. 3, lines 36-38). The valve member comprises a sloping region (e.g. first side wall portion, ref. #12a, col. 4, lines 10-16, shown below in [FIG. 3]) in which the thickness decreases continuously along the radial direction from an inner peripheral portion (e.g. lower portion, ref. #T1, col. 6, lines 60-64) to an outer peripheral portion (e.g. upper portion, ref. #T2, col.6, lines 60-64), (col. 4, lines 10-16, shown below in [FIG .3]).
PNG
media_image7.png
434
702
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Tanida, Lee and Kunoike Berkowitz each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – a cylindrical battery and a cylindrical battery cap assembly. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the current interruptive device of Tanida in view of Lee with the valve member of Kunoike wherein the inner dimeter of the first side wall portion gradually increases from an upper portion to a lower portion in order for the valve member to deform more stably (Kunoike, col. 4, lines 34-37).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered [pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Kobayashi et al. (KR 101698258 B1) discloses a cylindrical battery comprising a cylindrical case body (ref. #114, para. [0068]) with an opening at one end that houses a wound electrode body (e.g. columnar electrode body, para. [0068[) and a current blocking mechanism (e.g. current interrupt device, ref. #180, para. [0069]). The current blocking mechanism includes a pressure reducing member (e.g. cover, ref. #130, para. [0069]), an insulating spacer (e.g. holder, ref. #136, para. [0069]), and a conductive plate (e.g. disk, ref. #172, para. [0069]). The pressure reducing member comprises a curved portion (e.g. first bottom portion, ref. #132C, para. [0072]). FIG. 6 shows the pressure reducing member having an annular side wall and a flange portion.
Matsuoka (JP 2008210620 A) discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a safety valve (e.g. cover, ref. #50, para. [0002], [FIG. 8]), a disc holder (e.g. holder, ref. #53, para. [0002], [FIG. 8]), and a stripper disc [e.g. disk, ref. #54, para. [0002], [FIG. 8]). The safety valve includes a safety cover (e.g. first flange portion, ref. #51, para. [0002, [FIG. 8]]) and a projection (e.g. first protrusion, ref. #52, para. [0002], [FIG. 8]). The projection comprises a first bottom portion [FIG. 8] and an annular first side wall portion that is raised in a direction away from the electrode body from a peripheral edge of the first bottom portion [FIG. 8].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANDRA BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-0345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 6 am - 4:45 pm EST.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571) 272-8935. 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.
/SANDRA BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
