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 § 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakimoto et al. (US 20190036088), hereinafter Wakimoto, in view of Kim, June-Sop et al. (US 20130062344), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 1, Wakimoto teaches:
An insulation holder that is an insulating box-shaped body to house an electrode body of an electricity storage device, the insulation holder comprising (Abstract):
a bottom face having a rectangular shape in a plan view ([0026], Fig. 4);
the bottom face including a pair of first edges extending substantially in parallel with each other in a width direction ([0026], [0047], Fig. 4, 6, 11, 12);
a pair of second edges extending substantially in parallel with each other in a depth direction ([0026], [0047], Fig. 4, 6, 11, 12);
a pair of first side faces each extending upward in a height direction from an associated one of the first edges ([0026], [0047], Fig. 4, 6, 11, 12);
a pair of second side faces each extending upward in the height direction from an associated one of the second edges ([0026], [0047], Fig. 4, 6, 11, 12);
four third edges each extending in the height direction along a boundary between an associated one of the first side faces and an associated one of the second side faces ([0026], [0047], Fig. 4, 6, 11, 12);
four corners each of which is an intersection of an associated one of the first edges, an associated one of the second edges, and an associated one of the third edges ([0026], [0047], [0063], [0070], Fig. 4, 6, 11, 12);
Wakimoto fails to teach a groove which is adjacent to at least one of the four corners.
Kim teaches a groove which is adjacent to at least one of the four corners ([0024], Fig. 8).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the insulating box-shaped body of Wakimoto to include a groove in an outer surface adjacent to at least one corner as taught by Kim, to facilitate controlled deformation of the box shaped structure at the corner and reduce stress, wrinkling, and/or cracking of the material during formation or bending of the structure.
The reason for combining the teachings of Wakimoto and Kim is that Kim expressly recognizes the benefit of providing a groove in the outer surface of a box-shaped structure adjacent to a corner to accommodate deformation of the material at the corner. Applying this known groove structure to the insulting holder of Wakimoto would have been a predictable use of a known techniques to improve a similar box-shaped structure in the same general field, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, Wakimoto and Kim teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Wakimoto fails to teach the groove is provided in the bottom face, an associated one of the first side faces, and an associated one of the second side faces.
Kim teaches the groove is provided in the bottom face, an associated one of the first side faces, and an associated one of the second side faces ([0024], Fig. 8).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the insulating box-shaped body of Wakimoto to include a groove in an outer surface adjacent to at least one corner as taught by Kim, to facilitate controlled deformation of the box shaped structure at the corner and reduce stress, wrinkling, and/or cracking of the material during formation or bending of the structure.
The reason for combining the teachings of Wakimoto and Kim is that Kim expressly recognizes the benefit of providing a groove in the outer surface of a box-shaped structure adjacent to a corner to accommodate deformation of the material at the corner. Applying this known groove structure to the insulting holder of Wakimoto would have been a predictable use of a known techniques to improve a similar box-shaped structure in the same general field, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 3, Wakimoto and Kim teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Wakimoto fails to teach the groove is provided in an outer surface of the insulation holder.
Kim teaches the groove is provided in an outer surface of the insulation holder ([0024], Fig. 8).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the insulating box-shaped body of Wakimoto to include a groove in an outer surface adjacent to at least one corner as taught by Kim, to facilitate controlled deformation of the box shaped structure at the corner and reduce stress, wrinkling, and/or cracking of the material during formation or bending of the structure.
The reason for combining the teachings of Wakimoto and Kim is that Kim expressly recognizes the benefit of providing a groove in the outer surface of a box-shaped structure adjacent to a corner to accommodate deformation of the material at the corner. Applying this known groove structure to the insulting holder of Wakimoto would have been a predictable use of a known techniques to improve a similar box-shaped structure in the same general field, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 4, Wakimoto and Kim teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Wakimoto fails to teach the groove is not provided in any of the corners directly.
Kim teaches the groove is not provided in any of the corners directly ([0024], Fig. 8).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the insulating box-shaped body of Wakimoto to include a groove in an outer surface adjacent to at least one corner, and not on any of the corners directly, as taught by Kim, to facilitate controlled deformation of the box shaped structure at the corner and reduce stress, wrinkling, and/or cracking of the material during formation or bending of the structure.
The reason for combining the teachings of Wakimoto and Kim is that Kim expressly recognizes the benefit of providing a groove in the outer surface of a box-shaped structure adjacent to a corner to accommodate deformation of the material at the corner. Applying this known groove structure to the insulting holder of Wakimoto would have been a predictable use of a known techniques to improve a similar box-shaped structure in the same general field, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 5, Wakimoto and Kim teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Wakimoto fails to teach a shortest distance between the at least one of the four corners and the groove adjacent thereto is between 1 mm and 3 mm. Kim teaches a groove ([0024], Fig. 8).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the insulating box-shaped body of Wakimoto to include a groove in an outer surface adjacent to at least one corner, and not on any of the corners directly, as taught by Kim, to facilitate controlled deformation of the box shaped structure at the corner and reduce stress, wrinkling, and/or cracking of the material during formation or bending of the structure.
With respect to the limitation that a shortest distance between the corner and the groove is between 1-3 mm. selecting the particular spacing of the groove from the corner would have been a matter of routine optimization based on the desired amount of deformation and the material properties of the insulating holder. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that positioning the groove at an appropriate distance from the corner would provide predictable control over the deformation of the material.
Regarding claim 6, Wakimoto and Kim teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Wakimoto fails to teach a residual wall thickness at the groove is between 10 μm and 100 μm. Kim teaches a groove ([0024], Fig. 8).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the insulating box-shaped body of Wakimoto to include a groove in an outer surface adjacent to at least one corner, and not on any of the corners directly, as taught by Kim, to facilitate controlled deformation of the box shaped structure at the corner and reduce stress, wrinkling, and/or cracking of the material during formation or bending of the structure.
With respect to the limitation that the residual wall thickness at the groove is between 10 μm and 100 μm, selecting an appropriate residual wall thickness would have been a matter of routine optimization of a known groove structure. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the residual thickness determines the flexibility and strength of the grooved portion and therefore would have selected a suitable thickness based on the desired degree of deformation and the properties of the insulating material. Accordingly, the claimed residual wall thickness represents an optimization of a result-effective variable and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art absent evidence that the claimed range produces unexpected results.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakimoto, in view of Kim, in further view of Kawate (JP 6815716).
Regarding claim 7, Wakimoto and Kim teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Wakimoto further teaches:
An electricity storage device comprising (Abstract):
an electrode body (Abstract);
a case housing the electrode body (Abstract);
a case body that is a box-shaped body including an upper opening (Abstract);
a sealing plate closing the upper opening ([0026], Fig. 2, sealing plate 80, opening 61);
the upper opening has a rectangular shape in a plan view ([0026], Fig. 2, sealing plate 80, opening 61),
an insulation holder located between the electrode body and the case ([0003], [0008], [0051]),
the insulation holder (Abstract).
Wakimoto fails to teach the upper opening including curved portions in four corners of the upper opening.
Kawate teaches the upper opening including curved portions in four corners of the upper opening ([0058-0060], 32f, 33f).
Wakimoto and Kim are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of protective structures for housing and insulating an enclosed article, including box-shaped structures formed from insulating or packaging material.
Wakimoto and Kawate are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the electric storage device of Wakimoto to include the curved corner portions of the upper openings as taught by Kawate to facilitate positioning and insertion of the electrode body and associated components within the case and to reduce stress concentrations at the corners of the case openings. Further, it would have been obvious and readily accomplished to incorporate the insulation holder described in claim 1 into the electric storage device of Kawate, thereby providing the claimed insulation holder between the electrode body and the case.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tamara Orduna whose telephone number is (571)431-1457. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/TAMARA ORDUNA/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights