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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action Application No. 18/414,383 to Park et al., assigned to LG Energy Solution, Ltd., Seoul, Korea, filed 02/01/2024 and published as U.S. PG Publication 2024/0162557A1 is in response to applicants’ request for continued examination, RCE, filed 03/02/2026. Applicants’ response is given full consideration. This application id continuation of Appl. No. 18/109,027 filed 02/13/2023 which claims foreign priority to KR10-2022-0018633 filed 02/14/2022.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/02/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
In the RCE response dated 03/02/2026 applicants’ have amended the claims of the application. Claim 1 and 10 have been amended by adding a new limitation, “wherein the venting part includes a notch which is non-linear”. New claims 13 and 14 have also been added.
The status of the claims stand as follows:
Currently amended 1, 10
Previously presented 2, 4, 11-12
Canceled 3-9
New 13-14
Claims 1-2, 4-14 are currently pending in this application. All pending limitations are under full consideration.
Withdrawal of Claim Rejections -103
The amendment of claim 1 has overcome the previously presented rejection of Claim 1-2, 4-8, 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masuda Wataru et al. (JP2021-170481; called JP '481) in view of Lee (U.S. PG Publication 2017/0279098; called Lee '098). Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Upon further consideration and search a new ground of rejection under 103 over Masuda Wataru et al. (JP2021-170481) in view of newly applied reference of Kim et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2010/0173178) is made and presented in this Office action.
The rejection of claim 9 under 103 has also been withdrawn for the same reasons, and is now rejected along with claim 1 under the same prior art.
Withdrawal of Claim Rejections -102
The amendment of claim 10 overcomes the previously presented rejection of Claims 10 and 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (U.S. PG Publication 2023/0216134; called Lee '134). Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Upon further search and consideration, a new ground of rejection under 103 over Lee ‘134 in view of newly applied reference of Kim et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2010/0173178) is made and presented in this Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in this section can be found in the prior Office Action.
Claim 1-2, 4-9, 11, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masuda Wataru et al. (JP2021-170481; called JP '481) in view of Kim et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2010/0173178)
Regarding claim 1 JP '481 discloses a rechargeable lithium-ion secondary battery 20 (JP '481 paragraph 0001, 0006, 0022, 0023) having a cell case 21 (JP '481 paragraph 0006), the cell case 21 has a flat rectangular parallelepiped extending in the left-right direction (JP "481 Fig. 5, paragraph 0034) including six flat surfaces that are first to sixth surfaces to form a hexahedral shape (JP '481 Fig. 5), considered equivalent to a prismatic secondary battery. The upper surface 21a and lower surface 21b are considered equivalent to the first and third surfaces, the left side surface and the right-side surface are considered equivalent to the second and fourth surfaces, and the front surface and back surface are considered equivalent to the fifth and sixth surfaces. The first and third surfaces have an area wider than the second and fourth surfaces, and the fifth and sixth surfaces have the widest areas (JP '481 Fig. 5).
JP '481 discloses a positive terminal 22a and negative terminal 22b are disposed on the upper surface 21a, equivalent to the first surface (JP '481 Fig. 5, paragraph 0033, 0034).
JP '481 discloses release valve 23, considered equivalent to the venting part, is disposed on the lower surface 21b (JP '481 Fig, 5, paragraph 0035) considered equivalent to the third surface, which is farthest surface from the positive terminal and negative terminal 22a, 22b (JP '481 Fig. 5), and the release valve 23, i.e., venting part, provided on the lower part farthest from the terminals 22a, 22b, does not overlap with the positive electrode terminal and the negative electrode terminal along a vertical axis parallel to the second or fourth surface (JP '481 Fig. 5).
JP '481 discloses the release valve 23 has a circular shape (JP '481 Fig. 5) and is silent that the release valve has a long side and a short side. Kim discloses a rechargeable battery include an electrode assembly, a case in which the electrode assembly is accommodated and a cap assembly combined to the case (Kim Fig. 1, paragraph 0008, 0018), and the battery has a prismatic shape (Kim paragraph 0040) the case having first to sixth surfaces (Kim Fig. 1, 6). The cap plate has a vent portion 126 (Kim paragraph 0054), and the vent portion 126 has a long side and a short side, and the long side of the vent portion is disposed parallel to a longitudinal direction of the cover plate and the lower plate opposite the cover plate (Kim Fig. 1), and equivalent to the claimed third surface. The venting part 126 has a notch to be openable depending on a set internal pressure (Kim Fig. 1, paragraph 0054) and the notch has a shape of the number 8 (Kim Fig. 1, 6) considered to be equivalent to being non-linear.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention o have modified the circular-shaped release valve 23 of JP '481 (JP '481 Fig, 5, paragraph 0035) by the elongated vent portion of Kim having a long side and a short side and including a notch which is non-linear as disclosed by Kim (Kim Fig. 1, 6) since such a modification entails only a change in shape of the release valve, and according to MPEP a change in shape or size is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
PNG
media_image1.png
444
731
media_image1.png
Greyscale
JP ‘481 Fig. 5
PNG
media_image1.png
444
731
media_image1.png
Greyscale
JP ‘481 Fig. 5
PNG
media_image2.png
497
915
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kim Fig. 1
Regarding claim 2 JP '481 discloses the cover plate 21a serves as the top portion of the case 21 i.e. the first surface (JP '481 Fig. 5), and the positive terminal 22a, and the second terminal 22b are disposed on the first surface which is an upper surface of the prismatic cell (JP "481 Fig. 5, paragraph 0033).
Regarding claim 4 JP '481 discloses the release valve 23, equivalent to the venting part, is provided at a lower portion of the lower surface 21b of the cell case (JP 481 Fig. 5, paragraph 0052, 0053), the lower part considered equivalent to the third surface.
Regarding claim 5 JP '481 discloses a relief valve, equivalent to the venting part, is provided in the lower part of the cell casing (JP '481 paragraph 0007), the lower part of the cell casing is equivalent to the bottom surface, and the electrolyte that has accumulated at the bottom of the cell case, rather than the gasified electrolyte that has accumulated at the top of the cell case, is allowed to flow out of the cell case (JP '481 paragraph 0007); thus, it is pulled to the ground by gravity from the bottom surface of the prismatic cell.
Regarding Claim 6 JP '481 discloses a relief valve, equivalent to the venting part, is provided in the lower part or surface 21b of the cell casing 21 (JP '481 paragraph 0007, 0035), equivalent to the third surface. JP ‘481 discloses the position of the relief valve 23 is slightly shifted from the middle portion of the third surface towards one of the side surfaces, and that JP '481 is silent that the relief valve is at a middle portion of the third surface. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have made the relief valve disposed at a middle portion of the lower or third surface, rather than being shifted slightly to one of the two sides of the cell case since such a slight change towards the middle portion of the cell is a mere shift in position and would not have modified the operation of the cell. According to the MPEP shifting the position of parts within a device will not render the device patentable if the position change does not alter the device's operation (see Jn re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); MPEP § 2144.04 VI. C.).
Regarding claim 7 JP '481 discloses the release valve 23, considered equivalent to the venting part, is disposed on the lower surface 21b (JP '481 Fig. 5, paragraph 0035) considered equivalent to the third surface, and the lower surface 21b is a flat surface (JP '481 Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8 JP '481 discloses the battery cell 20 has an electrode body 25 formed by stacking a positive electrode sheet, a negative electrode sheet, and a separator (JP '481 paragraph 0033), considered equivalent to the stack type electrode assembly, and the electrode body contained in a cell case 21 (JP '481 paragraph 0033).
Regarding Claim 9 Kim discloses the positive electrode 111 and the negative electrode 112 are wound with the separator 113, which is the insulator, interposed therebetween to form the electrode assembly 110 having a jelly-roll shape (Kim paragraph 0050)
Regarding claim 11 Kim discloses vent portion 126 ( Kim Fig. 1, 6), and the vent portion 126 has a notch dividing the vent portion and the notched portion has a thickness that is less than the thickness of the surrounding since Kim discloses be openable depending on a set internal pressure and it is weaker than the other part of the vent portion (Kim Fig. 1, paragraph 0054).
Regarding claim 13 the notch is configured to be openable on a set internal pressure (Kim paragraph 0054) equivalent to be separate the venting portion into tow parts.
Claim 10, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (U.S. PG Publication 2023/0216134; called Lee '134) in view of Kim et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2010/0173178)
Regarding claim 10 Lee '134 discloses a rechargeable battery include an electrode assembly, a case in which the electrode assembly is accommodated and a cap assembly combined to the case (Lee '134 paragraph 0010, 0038), and the battery has a prismatic shape (Lee '134 paragraph 0038). The battery case including six flat surfaces that are first to sixth surface to from a hexahedral shape (Lee '134 Fig. 1), the first and third surface having an area wider than the second and fourth surfaces, and the fifth and sixth surfaces having the widest area (Lee Fig. 1).
The positive terminal and negative terminal are disposed opposite to each other on the surfaces equivalent to the second and fourth faces (Lee Fig. 1), equivalent to a positive electrode terminal disposed on one of the second and fourth surfaces and a negative electrode terminal disposed on other of the second and fourth surfaces.
Lee '134 discloses the battery has a safety vent 160, considered equivalent to the venting part, disposed on one of the two smaller surface and on a surface other than the surface that includes the terminals 140, 150 and which has a wider surface area (Lee ‘134 Fig. 4) considered equivalent to the third surface. The venting part of safety vent has a long side and a short side, the long side is disposed parallel to the longitudinal direction of the third surface, and the venting part does not overlap with the positive terminal and the negative terminal along a vertical axis parallel to the second and fourth surfaces (Lee '134 Fig. 4).
Lee ‘134 discloses The safety vent 160 may be formed with a notch 160A to induce bursting (Lee ‘134 Fig. 4, paragraph 0050). But is silent about the notch is non-linear.
Kim discloses a rechargeable battery include an electrode assembly, a case in which the electrode assembly is accommodated and a cap assembly combined to the case (Kim Fig. 1, paragraph 0008, 0018), and the battery has a prismatic shape (Kim paragraph 0040) the case having first to sixth surfaces (Kim Fig. 1, 6). The cap plate has a vent portion 126 (Kim paragraph 0054), and the vent portion 126 has a long side and a short side, and the long side of the vent portion is disposed parallel to a longitudinal direction of the cover plate and the lower plate opposite the cover plate (Kim Fig. 1), and equivalent to the claimed third surface. The venting part 126 has a notch to be openable depending on a set internal pressure (Kim Fig. 1, paragraph 0054) and the notch has a shape of the number 8 (Kim Fig. 1, 6) considered to be equivalent to being non-linear.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention o have modified the venting portion 160 to have the notch 160A in a non-linear shape as disclosed by Kim (Kim Fig. 1,6) since such a modification entails only a change in shape of the release valve, and according to MPEP a change in shape or size is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
PNG
media_image3.png
644
890
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Lee ‘134 Fig. 1 and 4
PNG
media_image4.png
375
429
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Instant Invention Fig. 4
Regarding claim 12 Lee '134 disclose the safety vent may be formed with a notch 160A to induce bursting, the notch is in the center portion and dividing the safety vent (Lee ‘134 Fig. 4, paragraph 0050), and the notch inducing bursting (Lee ‘134 paragraph 0050) since it is weaker having a thickness that is less than the surrounding. Similarly, Kim also discloses the venting part 126 has a notch to be openable depending on a set internal pressure (Kim Fig. 1, paragraph 0054); thus, the notch is weaker having a thickness that is less than the surrounding.
Regarding claim 14 the notch is configured to be openable on a set internal pressure (Kim paragraph 0054) equivalent to be separate the venting portion into two parts.
Response to Argument
Applicant traverses the previous rejoin ad argues that the applied prior art do not disclose the new limitation recited in both claim 1 and 10, wherein the venting part includes a notch which is non-linear. Examiner agree that the applied references of JP ‘481, Lee ‘098, Lee ‘317 and Lee ‘137 do not disclose the new limitation of the notch is non-linear. Therefore, the previously presented rejections of the claims have been withdrawn and a new ground of rejection that relies upon secondary reference of Kim for its disclosure of non-linear notch is made and presented in this Office action.
Applicant regarding the rejection of claim 6 argues that the reference of JP ‘’481 teaches the venting portion biased towards one side from the center, which has been argues in the rejection that it would have been obvious to shift its position slightly towards the center since such a change will not render it inoperable. Applicant has not persuasively argued that such a change would have not been obvious to the person of ordinary skill.
Examiner notes that the combined teaching of JP ‘481 and the newly applied reference of Kim as presented above in this Office action renders the invention obvious.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR M KEKIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00 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, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/OMAR M KEKIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722