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 .
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 12 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 12 recites the limitation " said current collectors". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation claims antecedent basis to each of the current collectors associated with their respective electrode plate portions, or the at least one said current collector configured as a barrier, or a combination of the above.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the barriers”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “an electrode plate portion having the barrier” which fails to further limit claim 1 reciting “at least one said current collector is configured as a barrier”. More specifically, claim 11 reciting “having the barrier” fails to further limit claim 1 reciting “configured as a barrier”.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “having the barrier” which fails to further limit claim 1 reciting “at least one said current collector is configured as a barrier”. More specifically, claim 12 reciting “having the barrier” fails to further limit claim 1 reciting “configured as a barrier”.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (US 2021/0151770A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses an electrode assembly (battery core, see Title, Abstract, Fig. 1-10), comprising:
several electrode plate portions sequentially arranged in a laminated manner along a thickness direction of the electrode assembly (battery core includes a positive electrode plate, a separator, and a negative electrode plate by stacking [0027]), each of the electrode plate portions comprising a current collector (current collector [0028]); and
an insulating portion, the insulating portion being arranged between any adjacent two of the electrode plate portions (separator [0027]),
wherein at least one said current collector is configured as a barrier, the thermal conductivity of the barrier in the thickness direction of the electrode assembly being denoted as λ0, and the thickness of the barrier being denoted as d0, with λ0/d0<3×107 W/(K*m2) (composite current collector including a polymer-based support layer 101 and a conductive layer 102, composite current collector has a thermal conductivity of 0.01 to 2 W/(mK) [0030]-[0039]; Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-12 µm, i.e., 3.4*10-6 - 12*10-6 m; Thus, the calculated range of λ0/d0 for Liu is 833 - 5.88*105 and within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 2, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the thermal conductivity λ0 of the barrier and the thickness d0 of the barrier further satisfy the condition: λ0×d0<0.003 W/K (composite current collector including a polymer-based support layer 101 and a conductive layer 102, composite current collector has a thermal conductivity of 0.01 to 2 W/(mK) [0030]-[0039]; Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-12 µm, i.e., 3.4*10-6 - 12*10-6 m; Thus, the calculated range of λ0*d0 for Liu is 3.4*10-8 – 2.4*10-5 and within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 3, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses λ0×d0<0.001 W/K (composite current collector including a polymer-based support layer 101 and a conductive layer 102, composite current collector has a thermal conductivity of 0.01 to 2 W/(mK) [0030]-[0039]; Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-12 µm, i.e., 3.4*10-6 - 12*10-6 m; Thus, the calculated range of λ0*d0 for Liu is 3.4*10-8 – 2.4*10-5 and within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 4, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the thermal conductivity λ0 of the barrier and the thickness d0 of the barrier satisfy the condition: λ0/d0<1×107 W/(K*m2) (composite current collector including a polymer-based support layer 101 and a conductive layer 102, composite current collector has a thermal conductivity of 0.01 to 2 W/(mK) [0030]-[0039]; Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-12 µm, i.e., 3.4*10-6 - 12*10-6 m; Thus, the calculated range of λ0/d0 for Liu is 833 - 5.88*105 and within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 6, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the thickness d0 of the barrier satisfies the condition: 3 μm≤d0≤20 μm (Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-12 µm).
Regarding claim 7, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the thickness d0 of the barrier further satisfies the condition: 3 μm≤d0≤10 μm (Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-10 µm).
Regarding claim 8, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the barrier comprises at least one main body layer, the thermal conductivity of the main body layer in the thickness direction of the electrode assembly being denoted as λ1, and the thickness of the main body layer being denoted as d1, with λ1/d1<1×107 W/(K*m2), and with the sum of the thicknesses d1 of all the main body layers being less than or equal to d0 (composite current collector including a polymer-based support layer 101 and a conductive layer 102, composite current collector has a thermal conductivity of 0.01 to 2 W/(mK) [0030]-[0039]; Table 1-1,1-2 shows thickness of current collector ranging from 3.4-12 µm, i.e., 3.4*10-6 - 12*10-6 m; Thus, the calculated range of λ0/d0 for Liu is 833 - 5.88*105 and within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 9, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the barrier further comprises an auxiliary layer stacked on at least one side face of the main body layer (polymer-based support layer 101 [0030]-[0039]), the thermal conductivity of the auxiliary layer in the thickness direction of the electrode assembly being denoted as λ2, with the thermal conductivity λ1 and the thermal conductivity λ2 satisfying the condition: λ2<λ1 (composite current collector including support layer has a significantly reduced thermal conductivity [0031]).
Regarding claim 13, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses each of the electrode plate portions further comprises an active layer, the active layer being disposed on at least one side face of the current collector ([0028]).
Regarding claim 14, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses a secondary battery (lithium ion secondary battery [0027]), comprising an electrode assembly according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 15, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses a battery pack (battery pack [0137]), comprising a secondary battery according to claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above).
Regarding claim 16, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses an electrical apparatus (electric vehicle [0140]), comprising a battery pack according to claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15 above), the battery pack being used to provide electrical energy (used as a power source [0140]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2021/0151770A1), as applied to claims 1-4, 6-9, 13-16 above, in view of Fukuzawa et al. (US 2004/0161667A1).
Regarding claim 5, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Although Liu further discloses the current collector material is copper or aluminum ([0008]), the reference does not further disclose the material of the barrier comprises at least one of bronze, iron, stainless steel, or tin.
Fukuzawa discloses using aluminum foil; stainless steel foil; cladding material comprising nickel and aluminum; cladding material comprising copper and aluminum; and plated material combining these metals as the current collector material ([0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to replace the aluminum and/or copper current collector of Liu with stainless steel or plated with stainless steel as taught by Fukuzawa as it is merely the selection of functionally equivalent current collector materials recognized in the art and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so.
In reRuff, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) (The mere fact that components are claimed as members of a Markush group cannot be relied upon to establish the equivalency of these components. However, an applicant’s expressed recognition of an art-recognized or obvious equivalent may be used to refute an argument that such equivalency does not exist.); Smithv.Hayashi, 209 USPQ 754 (Bd. of Pat. Inter. 1980) (The mere fact that phthalocyanine and selenium function as equivalent photoconductors in the claimed environment was not sufficient to establish that one would have been obvious over the other. However, there was evidence that both phthalocyanine and selenium were known photoconductors in the art of electrophotography. “This, in our view, presents strong evidence of obviousness in substituting one for the other in an electrophotographic environment as a photoconductor.” 209 USPQ at 759.). See MPEP 2144.06(II).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2021/0151770A1), as applied to claims 1-4, 6-9, 13-16 above.
Regarding claim 10, Liu discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses the elasticity modulus of the barrier is denoted as E0, E0×d0≥500 GPa*μm (Young’s modulus E is greater than or equal to 2 GPa [0049]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In reWertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Claim reciting thickness of a protective layer as falling within a range of “50 to 100 Angstroms” considered prima facie obvious in view of prior art reference teaching that “for suitable protection, the thickness of the protective layer should be not less than about 10 nm [i.e., 100 Angstroms].” The court stated that “by stating that ‘suitable protection’ is provided if the protective layer is ‘about’ 100 Angstroms thick, [the prior art reference] directly teaches the use of a thickness within [applicant’s] claimed range.”). see MPEP 2144.05(I).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM.
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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached at (571)270-3879. 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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 8/6/2026
Prosecution Insights