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 with traverse of Group I, claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 8/19/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search burden. This is not found persuasive because the search burden is present as a result of how the claims are recited. A search for the elected method claims does not require a sealing ring which is a materially distinct feature from that sealing coating of the method claims.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for multiple cathodes and anodes with individual separators interposed between them, does not reasonably provide enablement for multiple separators between multiple cathodes and anodes. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The claims utilize the variables “C,” “A,” and “S” to denote integers greater than one. This is supported by the instant specification. However, the claims are written in a manner such that, for example, two separators could be between two cathodes and two anodes. The specification does not enable such a configuration. In other words, the claims encompass possible structural configurations unsupported by the specification in scope and functionality. It is assumed for purposes of prosecution that one separator is present between one cathode and one anode but that multiple stacks of this cathode/separator/anode combination are present as depicted in the Drawings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhong (US 7,147,674 B1).
Zhong discloses a method comprising: coating both sides of a cathode current collector and anode current collector with active materials and interposing a separator between the electrodes (column 3, line 66 to column 4, line 7). Zhong discloses pretreating the active electrode materials with a blend of activated carbon, polymer, and conductive carbon by immersion in a sealing coating (column 6, lines 1-3); it should be noted that the claims as written do not require the coating step to occur prior to the application of the seal coatings. Zhong discloses multiple battery cells (column 1, lines 14-21).
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 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hoffert (US 2022/0359912 A1).
Zhong does not disclose heat sealing or a pouch enclosure. Hoffert—in an invention for a battery with coated materials—discloses placing the battery stack in a pouch and heat sealing three of the four sides so that the stack can be produced in a roll-to-roll high-throughput process (paragraph 173). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the stack of Zhong by the process of Hoffert to produce the batteries in large quantities quickly and effectively.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong and Hoffert as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Locke (US 2018/0115012 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Zhong discloses immersing the electrodes in electrolyte (column 4, lines 56-62) but not displacing gas in the process. Locke—in an invention for manufacturing batteries with coated current collectors—discloses forming gas to be removed from the interior of the electrolyte pouch cell after some time has elapsed after the temporary closure and then enabling the interior of the electrolyte pouch cell to be finally closed, largely reducing accumulation of contaminated waste (paragraph 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to temporarily keep the battery enclosure upon to allow any unwanted gases to escape from Zhong as suggested by Locke.
Regarding claim 7, Hoffert discloses heat sealing the fourth side (paragraph 173).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong, Hoffert, and Locke as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Jeong (US 2022/0102783 A1).
Locke does not disclose a sealing bar. Jeong—in an invention for a secondary pouch battery—discloses sealing bars with independently controllable heating units (paragraph 20) so as to control the temperature of the sealing bar at a plurality of separate sections and achieve a uniform sealing quality regardless of the sealing position of a pouch foil (paragraph 42). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize the heating bars of Jeong for the heating process of Locke to achieve uniform sealing in over Zhong, Hoffert, and Locke.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Dafoe (US 11,018,343 B1).
Zhong does not disclose chromate. Dafoe—in an invention for current collector surface treatment—discloses utilizing chromate as a coupling material between a metal current collector and polymeric seal while maintaining a gap (column 2, lines 27-42). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize the coupling material of Dafoe in Zhong to improve cohesion between its current collector and polymeric seal.
Claims 12, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong in view of Hoffert and Locke.
Zhong discloses a method comprising: coating both sides of a cathode current collector and anode current collector with active materials and interposing a separator between the electrodes (column 3, line 66 to column 4, line 7). Zhong discloses pretreating the active electrode materials with a blend of activated carbon, polymer, and conductive carbon by immersion in a sealing coating (column 6, lines 1-3); it should be noted that the claims as written do not require the coating step to occur prior to the application of the seal coatings. Zhong discloses multiple battery cells (column 1, lines 14-21).
Zhong does not disclose heat sealing or a pouch enclosure. Hoffert—in an invention for a battery with coated materials—discloses placing the battery stack in a pouch and heat sealing three of the four sides so that the stack can be produced in a roll-to-roll high-throughput process (paragraph 173). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the stack of Zhong by the process of Hoffert to produce the batteries in large quantities quickly and effectively.
Zhong discloses immersing the electrodes in electrolyte (column 4, lines 56-62) but not displacing gas in the process. Locke—in an invention for manufacturing batteries with coated current collectors—discloses forming gas to be removed from the interior of the electrolyte pouch cell after some time has elapsed after the temporary closure and then enabling the interior of the electrolyte pouch cell to be finally closed, largely reducing accumulation of contaminated waste (paragraph 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to temporarily keep the battery enclosure upon to allow any unwanted gases to escape from Zhong as suggested by Locke.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong, Hoffert, and Locke as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Jeong.
Locke does not disclose sealing bars. Jeong—in an invention for a secondary pouch battery—discloses sealing bars with independently controllable heating units (paragraph 20) so as to control the temperature of the sealing bar at a plurality of separate sections and achieve a uniform sealing quality regardless of the sealing position of a pouch foil (paragraph 42). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize the heating bars of Jeong for the heating process of Locke to achieve uniform sealing in over Zhong, Hoffert, and Locke.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong, Hoffert, and Locke as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Dafoe.
Zhong does not disclose chromate. Dafoe—in an invention for current collector surface treatment—discloses utilizing chromate as a coupling material between a metal current collector and polymeric seal while maintaining a gap (column 2, lines 27-42). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize the coupling material of Dafoe in Zhong to improve cohesion between its current collector and polymeric seal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights