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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-17) in the reply filed on 10/28/25 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/15/24 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 1/15/24. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (“JP’421”) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (“JP’967”).
As to Claim 1:
JP’421 discloses:
a battery comprising a housing that contains a power-generation element (Abstract; p. 4, lines 1–10);
the housing comprises first and second poles, namely a positive terminal (case body) and a negative terminal (sealing plate) (Fig. 1; p. 4, lines 10–25);
a water-responsive safety layer in the form of an organic coating that absorbs liquid and expands when contacted with body fluid (Abstract; p. 2, lines 10–25; p. 3, lines 1–15);
the coating comprises a polymer material, such as hydroxypropylcellulose, sodium polyacrylate, or other water-absorbing polymers (p. 3, lines 5–25);
the organic coating is positioned adjacent to at least one of the first and second poles, being applied to a region near the gasket and terminal portions of the battery (Fig. 1; p. 4, lines 20–35). JP’421 also teaches that the coating is disposed on an external surface of the battery, specifically on outer exposed portions of the case and gasket region (Abstract; p. 4, lines 25–35); and
upon contact with an aqueous solution (body fluid), the organic coating causes an electrical short-circuit between the positive and negative terminals, thereby providing a safety function (p. 2, lines 25–35; p. 5, lines 1–10). This teaches a safety layer adapted to short the battery upon aqueous contact, resulting in a substantial reduction in output.
However, JP’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer further comprises at least one metal salt, nor does JP’421 expressly disclose that the shorting behavior reduces the battery voltage to below 1.5 V.
JP’967 discloses composite materials comprising polymer binders and metal-containing compounds, including metal salts and metal-derived ionic species, dispersed within a polymer matrix to form functional composite layers or coatings (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP’967 teaches that such metal-containing polymer composites may be applied as coatings on conductive substrates to modify electrical behavior (p. 7, lines 5–30). These teachings supply the missing limitation that the composite safety layer further comprises at least one metal salt, and they demonstrate that incorporating metal salts into polymer coatings to tune electrical conductivity is well known.
JP’421 and JP’967 are analogous art because both references relate to battery-related structures and functional coatings applied to battery components to achieve electrical and safety-related effects. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing a water-responsive battery safety layer would reasonably consult both a reference directed to liquid-activated battery safety coatings (JP’421) and a reference directed to polymer-metal composite coating materials (JP’967).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the water-responsive polymer safety coating of JP’421 to further include at least one metal salt as taught by JP’967, in order to enhance ionic conductivity and ensure rapid electrical shorting upon aqueous contact, thereby achieving a predictable reduction of terminal voltage, including to below 1.5 V. Such modification represents a routine and predictable use of known polymer-metal composite coating technology to improve the safety function already disclosed in JP’421.
As to Claim 4:
JP’421 further discloses a composite water-responsive safety layer in the form of an organic coating that absorbs liquid and expands when contacted with an aqueous solution (body fluid) (Abstract; p. 2, lines 10–25; p. 3, lines 1–15
However, JP’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer further comprises a zero oxidation state metal powder. JP’421 describes only polymeric organic coatings and does not teach incorporating any elemental (zero-valent) metal powder into the safety layer.
JP’967 discloses polymer composite materials comprising elemental metal powders dispersed in a polymer binder matrix (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP’967 explicitly teaches the use of zero oxidation state metal powders, such as elemental copper (Cu⁰) and silver (Ag⁰), including dendritic copper metal powders and silver-coated copper particles (p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 7, lines 5–30). JP’967 further teaches that such elemental metal powders are incorporated into polymer-based composite layers to provide electrical conductivity and functional electrical behavior (p. 7, lines 5–30).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the water-responsive polymer safety layer of JP’421 to further include a zero oxidation state metal powder, as taught by JP’967, in order to increase electrical conductivity of the layer upon aqueous contact and promote reliable short-circuiting between the battery poles. Such modification represents a routine and predictable application of known polymer–metal composite technology to enhance the safety function already disclosed in JP’421.
As to Claim 5:
JP’421 further discloses that the polymer safety layer absorbs an aqueous solution and expands to provide a safety function by electrically affecting the battery when exposed to water (p. 2, lines 10–25; p. 3, lines 1–25).
However, JP’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer further comprises a zero oxidation state metal powder, nor does JP’421 disclose any specific elemental metal powders, such as bismuth(0), copper(0), iron(0), indium(0), lead(0), nickel(0), magnesium(0), mercury(0), silver(0), tin(0), zinc(0), or alloys thereof, as recited in claim 5.
JP’967 teaches composite materials comprising polymer binders containing elemental (zero-valent) metal powders, including copper (Cu⁰) metal powder and silver (Ag⁰) metal coatings on copper particles (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 7, lines 5–30). JP’967 further teaches that such elemental metal powders are selected from known conductive metals and may be incorporated into polymer-based composite layers. Copper(0) and silver(0) are expressly included within the group of metals recited in claim 5. Thus, JP’967 teaches the missing limitation of claim 5, namely that the metal powder comprises one or more zero oxidation state metal powders selected from the claimed group.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP’421 to further include one or more zero oxidation state metal powders, such as copper(0) or silver(0), as taught by JP’967, in order to enhance electrical conductivity and promote reliable electrical interaction between the battery poles upon exposure to an aqueous solution. Selecting Cu⁰ or Ag⁰ from among the known elemental metal powders taught by JP’967 represents a routine materials-selection choice yielding predictable results.
As to Claim 12:
JP ’421 further discloses a water-responsive organic/polymeric safety layer applied on the external surface of the battery in the region adjacent the insulating gasket. This layer is described as being positioned around the gasket region and configured to absorb water or moisture and change its electrical characteristics to provide a safety function (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18). JP ’421 also illustrates that the coating extends along surfaces adjacent the gasket and overlaps portions of both the positive can and the negative cup (p. 9, lines 6–18; Fig. 2), thereby teaching that the safety layer is positioned adjacent the insulating gasket and contacts regions associated with both poles.
However, JP ’421 does not explicitly disclose that the water-responsive safety layer is a composite layer configured to electrically extend between and contact both the positive pole and the negative pole in the manner of a conductive composite layer.
JP ’967 teaches composite coating materials comprising polymer binders with dispersed functional components, such as metal particles or other conductive additives, which are applied to surfaces to form electrically functional composite layers (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP ’967 further teaches that such composite layers may be applied to adjacent conductive members so as to enable controlled electrical interaction when environmental conditions change (p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 9, lines 1–15).
JP ’967 therefore teaches the use of composite polymer layers capable of electrical interaction across adjacent components, supplying the missing aspect that the safety layer may be a composite layer extending between and contacting multiple conductive elements.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 by implementing it as a composite polymer layer as taught by JP ’967, such that the layer extends between and contacts both the positive pole and the negative pole across the insulating gasket region. This modification represents a predictable use of known composite coating technology to achieve a controlled electrical interaction between battery poles upon exposure to water.
As to Claim 13:JP ’421 further discloses a water-responsive polymeric safety coating positioned adjacent the insulating gasket, wherein the coating absorbs liquid and is applied so as to extend between and contact both the positive pole (can) and the negative pole (cup) in the gasket region (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18; Fig. 2). As shown in Fig. 2 and described at p. 9, lines 6–18, the coating is disposed around the gasket region, which is annular in a coin-type battery, thereby indicating a peripheral placement surrounding the terminal region.
However, JP ’421 does not explicitly state that the composite water-responsive safety layer extends continuously around the entire periphery of at least one of the positive pole or the negative pole, nor does it expressly characterize the coating as a composite layer formed as a continuous film.
JP ’967 discloses composite coatings formed from polymer binders containing dispersed functional materials, wherein such coatings are applied as continuous films over conductive substrates to provide uniform electrical and functional properties (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP ’967 teaches that forming a continuous peripheral coating is a routine coating practice to ensure uniform conductivity and responsiveness around a component.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 by forming it as a continuous composite coating around the periphery of at least one of the positive pole or the negative pole, as taught by JP ’967, in order to provide uniform and reliable safety activation around the entire gasket/terminal region. Such a modification represents a predictable use of known coating techniques to improve consistency and effectiveness of a known water-responsive safety layer.
As to Claim 14:
JP ’421 further discloses a water-responsive organic/polymeric coating disposed adjacent the insulating gasket (p. 8, lines 10–22), wherein the coating is positioned in the terminal region and overlaps surfaces associated with both the positive terminal (can) and the negative terminal (cup) (p. 9, lines 6–18; Fig. 2). As shown and described, the coating extends between the positive pole and the negative pole and is applied along the gasket region such that it extends around a portion of a periphery of at least one of the poles, rather than necessarily completely encircling the terminal structure (p. 9, lines 6–18).
However, JP ’421 does not explicitly describe the coating as a composite layer formulated using conventional composite-coating constituents or processing teachings, nor does it elaborate on materials-engineering aspects typical of composite safety layers.
JP ’967 discloses polymer-based composite coating materials formed by dispersing functional constituents (e.g., metal-containing components or other additives) within a polymer binder and applying the resulting composition as a film or coating on conductive components (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP ’967 further teaches that such composite coatings may be selectively applied to particular regions of a component, including peripheral or partial-coverage regions, depending on functional requirements and design considerations.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to implement the gasket-adjacent, water-responsive coating of JP ’421 using the composite-coating formulations and application techniques taught by JP ’967, and to apply such a composite safety layer so that it extends between the positive and negative poles around a portion of a periphery of at least one pole. Such a modification represents a predictable use of known composite coating technology to realize the placement and functionality already taught by JP ’421, yielding no unexpected results and resulting in the configuration as claimed.
As to Claim 15:
JP ’421 discloses a battery comprising a housing with positive and negative poles. In particular, JP ’421 describes a coin-type (button-type) battery including a positive terminal (can), a negative terminal (cup), and an insulating gasket disposed between the terminals (p. 6, lines 15–25; p. 7, lines 1–10; Fig. 2). These disclosures teach a battery structure corresponding to the battery of claim 1 and expressly identify a coin cell / button cell.
As to Claim 16:JP’421 further discloses a composite water-responsive safety layer disposed on an external surface of the battery and positioned adjacent to the pole/gasket region, the layer being formed of polymeric material and configured to respond to moisture by changing electrical behavior, including causing an external short when wetted (p. 2, lines 10–25; p. 3, lines 1–25; p. 6, lines 15–30; p. 8, lines 10–22; Figs. 1–2).
However, JP’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer further comprises a second metal salt, nor does it describe multiple distinct metal salts within the safety layer. JP’421 discusses functional additives generally, but does not teach the presence of more than one metal salt in the composite layer.
JP’967 teaches polymer composite formulations used in electrically functional coatings and pastes that include metal-containing components dispersed in a polymer binder, and further teaches that the type and number of metal-based components in such composites may be selected and adjusted to tune electrical conductivity and functional response (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 7, lines 5–30; p. 9, lines 1–15). JP’967 therefore teaches that adding additional metal-containing constituents to a polymer composite layer is a known and routine design approach to modify electrical behavior.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP’421 to further include a second metal salt, as suggested by JP’967’s teaching that polymer composite layers may include multiple metal-containing additives to tailor electrical conductivity and response characteristics. Such a modification represents a routine compositional optimization of known composite coatings to achieve predictable electrical and moisture-responsive behavior.
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (“JP’421”) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (“JP’967”) and further in view of US 6,033,806 (“US’806”).
As to Claim 2:
JP’421 discloses a battery comprising a housing with positive and negative poles and a water-responsive safety layer positioned adjacent to the pole/gasket region on an external surface of the battery. JP’421 teaches that the safety layer is formed from a polymeric material that responds to water ingress (e.g., swelling/absorbing liquid to affect electrical behavior), thereby establishing the presence and function of a polymeric safety layer in a battery structure (p. 6, lines 15–25; p. 7, lines 1–10; p. 8, lines 10–22; Fig. 2).
However, JP’421 does not expressly disclose that the polymer material of the water-responsive safety layer is selected from the specific group recited in Claim 2 (e.g., polyethylene glycols, polyethylene oxides, polyacrylic acids, polyacrylates, polyvinyl alcohols and modified polyvinyl alcohols, water-soluble acrylate copolymers, polyvinyl esters, polyvinyl pyrrolidones, pullulan, gelatin, hydroxylpropylmethyl celluloses (HPMC), low-viscosity hydroxypropylcelluloses, polysaccharides, water-soluble natural polymers, modified starches, and copolymers thereof).
JP’967 teaches polymeric binders and matrices used in composite coatings and films for battery-adjacent and electrochemical applications, including hydrophilic and water-soluble polymers suitable for forming functional layers. JP’967 describes forming composite films using polymer binders mixed with conductive or functional components, identifying polymer systems compatible with aqueous processing and water interaction (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 9, lines 1–15). These teachings indicate the use of water-responsive polymer binders consistent with the functional requirements of JP’421’s safety layer.
US’806 expressly discloses polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) and modified polyvinyl alcohol polymers used in battery components (e.g., separator films and polymer layers), including water-soluble and film-forming PVA systems and cross-linked/modified variants (US’806, col. 2, lines 10–35; col. 3, lines 1–20). Polyvinyl alcohols and modified polyvinyl alcohols are explicitly recited members of the polymer group in Claim 2. US’806 further evidences that water-soluble polymer materials (including cellulose-based or polysaccharide-type additives) were well known for battery applications requiring interaction with liquids (US’806, col. 1, lines 20–45; col. 4, lines 5–25).
JP’421, JP’967, and US’806 are analogous arts because each pertains to battery structures and polymeric materials used in battery components or functional layers, including coatings, films, separators, or safety-related layers that interact with liquids or electrolytes.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to select the polymer material for the water-responsive safety layer of JP’421 from among the known water-soluble and hydrophilic polymers taught by JP’967 and US’806—such as polyvinyl alcohols, modified polyvinyl alcohols, polyethylene oxides, polyethylene glycols, polyacrylates, or cellulose-based polymers—because these materials were well known to be compatible with battery environments and to provide predictable water-responsive behavior. Such selection represents a routine materials-engineering choice yielding predictable results.
As to Claim 11:
JP’421 discloses a battery comprising a housing having positive and negative poles separated by an insulating gasket, and an external, water-responsive composite layer positioned adjacent the terminal/gasket region of the battery (p. 6, lines 15–25; p. 7, lines 1–10; Fig. 2). JP’421 further teaches that this layer is an organic/polymeric coating applied to the exterior surface of the battery that absorbs liquid and changes its electrical or physical behavior upon contact with moisture (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–5).
However, JP’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer further comprises an additive selected from a stabilizer and/or a porogen, nor does JP’421 describe incorporating specific functional additives into the polymer layer to control stability or porosity.
JP’967 teaches composite coating and paste formulations comprising polymer binders and functional fillers, and further teaches that such composite layers may include additives (e.g., dispersants, stabilizers, and processing aids) to improve dispersion stability, coating uniformity, and film integrity (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 9, lines 1–15). These disclosures demonstrate that it was well known to include stabilizing additives within polymer-based composite layers used in electrically functional coatings.
US’806 expressly teaches polymer films and layers for battery-related applications that include stabilizers and pore-forming additives to control mechanical stability, durability, and permeability. For example, US’806 discloses polyvinyl-alcohol-based films containing stabilizers to improve film integrity and aging resistance (US’806, col. 1, lines 20–45; col. 2, lines 10–35), and further discloses the use of additives that generate or control porosity in polymer layers, corresponding to porogens (US’806, col. 3, lines 1–20; col. 4, lines 5–25).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP’421 to further include an additive selected from a stabilizer and/or a porogen, as taught by JP’967 and US’806, in order to improve coating stability, durability, processability, or moisture-response characteristics. Incorporating stabilizers or porogen-type additives into polymer composite layers was a well-known and routine materials-engineering practice in battery-related technologies, and doing so would have yielded predictable results.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967) and further in view of US 4,473,492 A (US ’492).
As to Claim 3:
JP ’421 further teaches that the coating material is selected from polymeric materials suitable for external battery use, forming a stable film on the battery exterior (p. 8, lines 10–22).
However, JP ’421 does not expressly disclose that the polymer material of the water-responsive safety layer is “biologically inert,” nor does it explicitly discuss biological inertness, non-toxicity, or non-irritating properties of the polymer material.
JP ’967 discloses composite coating materials and paste formulations comprising polymer binders and metallic fillers used in electrically functional layers (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP ’967 teaches that polymer binders are selected for stability, compatibility, and safe handling in applied coatings. While JP ’967 reinforces the use of polymer materials in composite layers applied to external surfaces, it likewise does not explicitly characterize such polymers as biologically inert.
US ’492, however, expressly teaches polymer compositions used in electrically functional layers that are biologically inert, non-toxic, and non-irritating. Specifically, US ’492 discloses polymer-based electrode compositions and films formulated to be “substantially free from irritation” and “generally non-toxic,” and suitable for safe contact environments (US ’492, col. 1, lines 20–35; col. 2, lines 1–10; col. 4, lines 5–25). These disclosures establish that polymer materials used in electrically functional coatings can be selected to be biologically inert.
JP ’421, JP ’967, and US ’492 are analogous art because all three references relate to polymer-containing, electrically functional layers used in or adjacent to electrochemical devices. JP ’421 addresses battery safety coatings; JP ’967 addresses polymer composite coatings with electrical functionality; and US ’492 addresses polymer materials for electrical interfaces with an emphasis on non-toxicity and inertness. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing external battery safety layers would reasonably consult all three references.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to select a biologically inert polymer material, as taught by US ’492, for use in the polymer-based water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 (as reinforced by the composite polymer teachings of JP ’967), in order to improve safety, handling characteristics, and suitability for external battery surfaces. Selecting a biologically inert polymer represents a predictable substitution of one known polymer property for another known polymer used in similar electrically functional layers, yielding no unexpected results.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967) and further in view of WO 2017/119033 A1 (WO ’033).
As to Claim 6:
JP ’421 further discloses safety-related structures positioned at the terminal region of the battery, including coatings or layers disposed on outer regions of the battery housing adjacent the poles (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18; Fig. 2). Thus, JP ’421 teaches the battery structure and the presence of exterior pole surfaces suitable for application of additional layers.
However, JP ’421 does not disclose that the battery further comprises a metal layer in contact with an exterior surface of at least one pole. JP ’421 describes polymeric or organic coatings in the terminal region but does not teach plating, cladding, or otherwise forming a metallic layer directly on the exterior surface of a battery pole.
JP ’967 teaches the formation and use of metal layers and metal-coated structures. For example, JP ’967 discloses elemental metal powders and metal coatings, such as silver layers formed on copper substrates, and explains techniques for producing metal-on-metal structures with direct contact between the metal layer and an underlying metal surface (p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 7, lines 5–30). These teachings demonstrate that applying a metal layer directly onto a metallic surface was well known in the art.
WO ’033 expressly discloses battery terminal structures in which a metal layer is provided on, and in direct contact with, an exterior surface of a battery pole. Specifically, WO ’033 teaches battery terminals, terminal plates, or lid members having plated or clad metal layers formed on the outer surface of the terminal to improve conductivity, corrosion resistance, and durability ([0028]–[0036], [0048]–[0052]; Figs. 3–6). Thus, WO ’033 teaches the specific limitation missing from JP ’421: a metal layer in contact with an exterior surface of at least one battery pole.
JP ’421, JP ’967, and WO ’033 are analogous arts because all three references relate to battery structures, battery terminals or poles, and material modifications applied to battery components to improve performance, reliability, or safety. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing battery terminal regions would reasonably look to these references together when selecting materials and surface treatments for battery poles
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery of JP ’421 by forming a metal layer on the exterior surface of at least one pole, as taught by WO ’033, using well-known metal-layer formation techniques exemplified by JP ’967. Such a modification would have been motivated by predictable benefits, including improved electrical conductivity, enhanced corrosion resistance, and increased mechanical robustness of the battery terminals. Applying a metal layer to the exterior pole surface represents a routine and predictable design choice in battery engineering, and therefore the claimed subject matter of Claim 6 would have been obvious.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967) and further in view of US 2007/0283558 A1 (US ’558).
As to Claim 7:
JP ’421 discloses a battery comprising a housing having first and second poles corresponding to a positive pole and a negative pole (battery anode). In particular, JP ’421 describes a coin-type battery including a positive terminal can and a negative terminal cup that together define the battery housing and poles (p. 6, lines 15–25; p. 7, lines 1–10; Fig. 2). JP ’421 further discloses structures positioned in the terminal region of the battery and layers disposed on outer surfaces adjacent the poles (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18). These disclosures teach a battery structure in which layers may be formed on exterior surfaces of the poles, including the negative pole.
However, JP ’421 does not disclose that the metal layer in contact with the negative pole comprises a metal selected from the group consisting of bismuth(0), indium(0), lead(0), mercury(0), tin(0), zinc(0), alloys thereof, or combinations thereof. JP ’421 describes polymeric or organic coatings in the terminal region, but does not specify the claimed zero-valent metal compositions for a metal layer contacting the negative pole.
JP ’967 teaches the use of elemental metal layers and metal powders, including tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), indium (In), lead (Pb), and alloys thereof, for use in conductive layers and coatings on metal substrates (p. 6, lines 12–30; p. 8, lines 1–15). JP ’967 explains that such elemental metals and alloys are suitable for forming conductive layers directly contacting metal components, thereby supplying the specific metal compositions recited in Claim 7.
US ’558 further teaches that a metal layer comprising tin, zinc, lead, indium, or alloys thereof may be formed directly on a negative electrode casing or anode-side terminal of a battery. For example, US ’558 discloses plating or coating an anode casing with tin or tin–zinc alloys such that the metal layer is in direct contact with the negative pole to improve battery performance and suppress undesirable reactions (US ’558, [0015]–[0021], [0041]–[0044]; Fig. 2).
JP ’421, JP ’967, and US ’558 are analogous arts because all three references relate to battery structures and material modifications applied to battery poles or terminals to improve electrical performance, safety, or durability. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing battery terminal or pole structures would reasonably consult these references together when selecting materials and configurations for metal layers on battery poles.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery of JP ’421 by forming a metal layer in contact with the negative pole, using the elemental metals and alloys taught by JP ’967 and applying them in the anode-contact configuration expressly taught by US ’558. Such a modification would have been motivated by predictable benefits, including improved conductivity, corrosion resistance, and terminal stability. Applying a metal layer comprising tin, zinc, indium, lead, or alloys thereof directly to the negative pole represents a routine and predictable design choice in battery engineering.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967) and further in view of JP 2017-503327 A (JP ’327).
As to Claim 8:
JP ’421 describes a coin-type battery including a positive terminal can and a negative terminal cup separated by an insulating gasket, with an organic/polymeric coating positioned in the terminal region on the exterior of the battery (p. 6, lines 15–25; p. 7, lines 1–10; p. 8, lines 10–22; Fig. 2). JP ’421 further teaches that this coating absorbs liquid such as water and changes its electrical behavior to provide a safety function, including promoting electrical conduction upon liquid ingress (p. 8, lines 15–22; p. 9, lines 1–18).
However, JP ’421 does not disclose that the polymer material of the composite water-responsive safety layer is selected from polyethylene glycol (PEG), polyvinyl acetate (PVAc), polyethylene oxide (PEO), or polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), nor does JP ’421 disclose that the metal salt present in the safety layer is copper sulfate (CuSO₄).
JP ’327 discloses polymer materials suitable for use in battery-related layers and coatings. In particular, JP ’327 teaches the use of polyoxyethylene-based polymers such as polyethylene oxide (PEO) and polyethylene glycol (PEG), vinyl-acetate-based polymers (e.g., PVAc-type polymers), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) in battery components and functional layers (JP ’327, p. 20, lines 1–10; p. 22, lines 5–18). Thus, JP ’327 teaches the specific polymer materials recited in Claim 8 as suitable polymer constituents for battery-associated layers.
JP ’967 teaches composite materials incorporating copper-containing compounds and metal salts into polymer or binder-based formulations to impart electrical conductivity or ionic responsiveness. For example, JP ’967 discloses copper-containing salts and copper-based compounds added to composite layers and conductive pastes to provide ionic conduction when exposed to moisture or electrolyte (p. 5, lines 20–30; p. 9, lines 1–15). Copper sulfate is a well-known copper salt within the scope of the copper-salt teachings of JP ’967 and would have been understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art as a suitable copper salt for such composite, moisture-responsive layers.
JP ’421, JP ’327, and JP ’967 are analogous arts because all three references relate to battery structures and materials used in battery coatings or functional layers. JP ’421 addresses safety coatings on battery terminals, JP ’327 addresses polymer materials suitable for battery layers, and JP ’967 addresses incorporation of copper salts into composite materials to impart electrical or ionic functionality. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing a water-responsive safety layer for a battery would reasonably consult these references together.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 by selecting a polymer material such as PEG, PEO, PVAc, or PMMA as taught by JP ’327, and by incorporating a copper salt such as copper sulfate as taught by JP ’967, in order to provide a predictable, moisture-activated conductive response. Such selection of known battery-compatible polymers and known copper salts represents a routine materials-design choice yielding predictable results.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967), JP 2017-503327 A (JP ’327), as applied to Claim 8 above, and further in view of US 5,837,402 (US ’402).
As to Claim 9:
JP ’421 discloses a battery comprising a housing with positive and negative poles and an externally disposed, water-responsive safety layer positioned adjacent to the terminal/gasket region of the battery (p. 3, lines 12–28; p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 8, lines 10–22). JP ’421 teaches that this safety layer is formed from a polymeric material and is configured to respond upon exposure to water or moisture so as to alter the electrical state of the battery for safety purposes, including suppressing abnormal operation (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18; Fig. 2).
However, JP ’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer further comprises zinc (Zn) particles, nor does it identify any specific metal particulate added to the polymeric safety layer.
JP ’967 teaches composite layers and coatings in battery-related applications that include metal particles dispersed in polymeric binders, explaining that metal powders are added to polymer matrices to control conductivity and functional response (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). While JP ’967 demonstrates that metal particles are suitable additives for polymer-based battery layers, it does not specifically identify zinc particles.
JP ’327 discloses battery component materials that include polymer compositions suitable for battery safety and functional layers, including polymers compatible with incorporation of inorganic or metallic additives (JP ’327, p. 20, lines 1–10; p. 22, lines 5–18). JP ’327 therefore supports the general concept of modifying polymer layers used in batteries by incorporating additional functional additives, but does not expressly disclose zinc particles.
US ’402 expressly teaches the use of zinc (Zn) particles and zinc powder in battery structures, including zinc particles incorporated into composite battery materials to provide electrical functionality and predictable electrochemical behavior (US ’402, col. 1, lines 10–25; col. 2, lines 1–15; col. 3, lines 20–45). US ’402 further teaches that zinc particles may be mixed with binders or other matrix materials to form composite battery layers (US ’402, col. 5, lines 10–35).
JP ’421, JP ’967, JP ’327, and US ’402 are analogous arts because each reference relates to battery structures, battery safety features, or battery materials, and specifically to the use of polymeric layers and metal or particulate additives in batteries to control electrical behavior and safety performance. A person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably consult these references together when designing or modifying battery safety layers.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 by incorporating zinc (Zn) particles, as taught by US ’402, into the polymeric safety layer, in view of the teachings of JP ’967 and JP ’327 that metal particles and functional additives are routinely incorporated into polymer-based battery layers to adjust conductivity and response characteristics. Such a modification represents a predictable use of known battery materials (zinc particles) in a known battery safety layer to achieve expected electrical and safety behavior.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967), JP 2017-503327 A (JP ’327), as applied to Claim 8 above, and further in view of US 2008/0220326 A1 (US ’326).
As to Claim 10:
JP ’421 discloses a battery comprising a housing having first and second poles and an externally disposed, water-responsive safety layer positioned adjacent the terminal/gasket region of the battery (p. 6, lines 15–25; p. 7, lines 1–10; Fig. 2). JP ’421 further teaches that this safety layer is formed from an organic/polymeric material and is configured to absorb water or moisture and thereby change its electrical behavior to provide a safety function, including promoting conduction upon liquid ingress (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18).
However, JP ’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer comprises copper sulfate (CuSO₄), nor does it disclose that any copper sulfate is present in an amount of at least 5 weight % based on the total weight of the composite safety layer.
JP ’327 discloses polymer compositions suitable for use in battery components and functional layers, including polymers such as polyethylene oxide (PEO), polyethylene glycol (PEG), vinyl-acetate-based polymers (e.g., PVAc), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), and further teaches that such polymer layers may include metal salts, including copper salts such as copper sulfate, to impart electrical or ionic functionality (JP ’327, p. 20, lines 1–10; p. 22, lines 5–18). JP ’327 therefore teaches the use of copper sulfate in polymer-based battery layers, supplying the identity of the metal salt as recited in Claim 10.
JP ’967 teaches composite formulations in which functional additives are incorporated into polymer matrices in substantial loadings, explaining that conductive or reactive additives are added in amounts selected to achieve desired electrical performance (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP ’967 thus evidences that the weight percentage of an additive in a composite layer is a result-effective variable that may be adjusted as needed, including to relatively high levels.
US ’326 discloses battery safety structures and teaches that material compositions and additive concentrations in safety-related components are selected and optimized to achieve desired safety and performance characteristics ([0019]; [0055]–[0056]). US ’326 therefore reinforces that selecting a particular additive amount in a battery safety feature is a matter of routine design choice.
JP ’421, JP ’327, JP ’967, and US ’326 are analogous arts because all relate to battery structures, battery safety features, and materials used in battery layers or coatings. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing a water-responsive battery safety layer would reasonably consult references addressing polymer layers, metal salts, and optimization of additive content in battery-related materials.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 by incorporating copper sulfate as taught by JP ’327 and by selecting the amount of copper sulfate—including an amount of at least 5 weight %—as a matter of routine optimization in view of JP ’967 and US ’326, in order to ensure sufficient conductivity or responsiveness upon exposure to water. Such modification represents a predictable use of known materials and known formulation techniques to achieve expected safety behavior.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2017-126421 A (JP ’421) in view of JP 2012-153967 A (JP ’967), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2008/0220326 A1 (US ’326).
As to Claim 17:
JP ’421 further teaches that this safety layer is formed from an organic/polymeric material that absorbs water or moisture and changes its electrical characteristics to provide a safety function, including promoting electrical conduction upon liquid ingress (p. 8, lines 10–22; p. 9, lines 1–18).
However, JP ’421 does not disclose that the composite water-responsive safety layer comprises two different metal salts, nor does it disclose that one metal salt is water-soluble while a second metal salt is water-insoluble.
JP ’967 teaches composite materials and coatings in which metal-containing components are incorporated into polymer or binder matrices to control electrical properties (p. 4, lines 3–25; p. 6, lines 1–20). JP ’967 further teaches that multiple metal-based additives may be included in a single composite formulation to tailor conductivity, responsiveness, or functional performance (p. 6, lines 1–20; p. 9, lines 1–15). While JP ’967 does not expressly distinguish solubility, it establishes that more than one metal-containing component may be present in a composite safety or functional layer.
US ’326 teaches battery safety structures and materials selected based on chemical and physical properties, including ionic materials and salts whose solubility in water affects electrical behavior when moisture is present ([0019]; [0055]–[0056]). US ’326 further teaches that different materials may be combined in safety-related battery components to achieve controlled or staged responses based on their differing properties, including solubility ([0055]–[0056]). These disclosures teach the relevance and desirability of combining water-soluble and water-insoluble materials in battery safety features.
JP ’421, JP ’967, and US ’326 are analogous arts because each reference pertains to battery structures and safety-related materials, including polymer-based layers, metal-containing additives, and material-property selection (such as solubility) to control electrical behavior in response to environmental conditions. A person of ordinary skill in the art designing a water-responsive battery safety layer would reasonably consult these references together.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the composite water-responsive safety layer of JP ’421 by incorporating two metal salts, as suggested by the multi-component composite teachings of JP ’967, and by selecting one metal salt to be water-soluble and another to be water-insoluble, as taught by US ’326, in order to achieve a predictable and controllable moisture-responsive electrical behavior. Such selection represents a routine materials-design choice based on known solubility properties of metal salts and would have yielded predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights