DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2023-019928, filed on February 13th, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) submitted on January 4th, 2024 and October 10th, 2025 have been received and considered by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
Cited Art
Honda US PG Publication 2019/0363317 (“Honda”)
Negishi US PG Publication 2016/0336554 (“Negishi”)
Otake US PG Publication 2015/0221902 (“Otake”)
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda US PG Publication 2019/0363317 in view of Negishi US PG Publication 2016/0336554, as evidenced by Otake US PG Publication 2015/0221902.
Regarding Claim 1, Honda discloses a battery (which reads on the instantly claimed power storage module) (Abstract, entire disclosure dependent upon) comprising:
a pair of electrode plates comprising an electrode layer 110 and a counter electrode layer 120 (Fig. 13, [0059]);
a seal 314 (sealing member) provided between the pair of electrode plates 110/120-122 to form a space together with the pair of electrode plates (as defined by the area within the unit cell) ([0105]-[0107]);
a battery element including a positive electrode active material layer provided on a surface of one of the pair of electrode plates (i.e. counter electrode layer 120-122) in the space ([0065], [0109]-[0112]), a negative electrode active material layer provided on a surface of the other of the pair of electrode plates (i.e. electrode layer 110) in the space ([0061]), and an electrolyte ([0069]); and
an [electrically] insulating member 2010 positioned between the pair of electrode plates 110/120-122, the insulating member 2010 being provided on a side opposite to the space when viewed from the sealing member 314 (Fig. 13, [0154]).
While Honda discloses that the insulating member 2010 and sealing member 314 are resins ([0130]), Honda fails to explicitly disclose wherein a melting point of the insulating member is lower than a melting point of the sealing member1.
However, Negishi discloses a battery comprising an electrode body, a seal, and an insulating member (Abstract, [0108], [0123], [0215]-[0220], entire disclosure dependent upon). Negishi teaches the use of a thermoplastic resin such as polyethylene (PE) for the insulating member ([0107]-[0108], [0216]) and a thermoplastic resin such as polypropylene (PP) for the seal member ([0217]-[0220]) in order to achieve electrical insulation between the seal and the electrode ([0215]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the power storage module of Honda such that the sealing member is made of polypropylene (PP) and the insulating member is made of polyethylene (PE) in order to achieve electrical insulation between the sealing member and the electrode, as taught by Negishi.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Honda in view of Negishi discloses wherein a melting point of the insulating member 2010 consisting of polyethylene (PE) (130oC) is lower than a melting point of the sealing member 314 consisting of polypropylene (PP) (170oC), as evidenced by Otake ([0038]).
1 The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
PNG
media_image1.png
829
1486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 13 of Honda
Regarding Claim 2, Honda in view of Negishi teaches the instantly claimed power storage module according to Claim 1.
While Honda discloses that it is best to separate current collectors corresponding to the electrode layer 110 and the counter electrode layer 120-122, respectively, Honda fails to explicitly disclose a separator.
However, Negishi discloses a separator sandwiched between the positive electrode material layer and the negative electrode material layer opposed to each other and made of a resin material such as polypropylene in order to improve the safety of the battery ([0048]-[0049], [0083]-[0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the power storage module of Honda in view of Negishi such that the battery element further includes a separator positioned between the positive electrode active material layer and the negative electrode active material layer and consisting of polypropylene, in order to improve the safety of the battery, as taught by Negishi.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Honda in view of Negishi discloses wherein the melting point of the insulating member 2010 consisting of polyethylene (PE) (130oC) is lower than a melting point of the separator consisting of polypropylene (PP) (170oC), as evidenced by Otake ([0038]).
Regarding Claim 3, Honda in view of Negishi discloses the instantly claimed power storage module according to Claim 1.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Honda in view of Negishi discloses wherein the melting point of the insulating member 2010 consisting of polyethylene (PE) (130oC) is higher than 60oC, as evidenced by Otake ([0038]).
Regarding Claim 4, Honda in view of Negishi discloses the instantly claimed power storage module according to Claim 1, and Honda discloses wherein the power storage module comprises three or more electrode plates including the pair of electrode plates 110/120-122, the three or more electrode plates being aligned in one direction, wherein
each of the sealing member 314, the battery element, and the insulating member 2010 is provided between the electrode plates that are adjacent to each other, of the three or more electrode plates (Fig. 13, [0150]-[0155]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVIA MASON MELFI whose telephone number is (703)756-4652. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7am-6pm 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/O.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights