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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299).
Regarding claim 1, Kuramoto discloses a package 1 [packaging material] for a power storage device 30 includes a metal foil layer 4,14 [metal foil layer], an insulation layer 7,17 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] laminated on at least center portion of one surface of the metal foil layer 4, and a heat-sealable resin layer 3 [sealant layer] arranged one surface of the metal foil layer or a region corresponding to a periphery of the one surface of the metal foil layer [provided with an opening portion formed in a portion corresponding to the body to be encapsulated] (abstract, [0075], Figs 1-4 and 7). An acid-resistant layer 2,18 [substrate layer] can be laminated on the outer surface of the metal foil layer 4 ([0076], Figs 3-4 and 7). The insulation layer 7,17 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] is made of a resin ([0112]).
Because the heat-sealable resin layer 3 [sealant layer] is laminated on the periphery, the heat-sealable resin layer 3 is of a frame shape with an opening ([0134]) where the insulation layer [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] is exposed on an inner side in the opening portion (see Figs 3-4 and 7).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hatta et al. (US 2004/0229120).
Regarding claim 2, Kuramoto discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Kuramoto discloses acid-modified polyolefins including maleic acid-modified polypropylene, maleic acid modified polyethylene, ethylene-maleic anhydride-(meth)acrylate copolymer as the resin in the insulation layer ([0114]-[0115]), Kuramoto does not explicitly disclose wherein a resin constituting the heat-resistant gas barrier layer has a water vapor transmission rate of 50 (g/m2/day) or less, as measured in accordance with JIS K7129-1 (humidity sensor method 40C 90% Rh).
Hatta discloses a battery having a film-shaped casing 20 including a metal layer 21, a resin layer 23, and an adhesive layer 22 (abstract, Figs 1-2). The resin layer 23 can be made of a modified polyethylene or modified polypropylene, such as a maleic anhydride modified polyethylene or polypropylene ([0024]). Maleic anhydride is the acid anhydride of maleic acid. The maleic anhydride modified polypropylene and polyethylene have a water vapor transmission rate of 20 or 30 g/m2/day ([0072], see Examples 2-1 and 2-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an acid modified polypropylene or polyethylene (including maleic anhydride modified polypropylene and polyethylene) having a water vapor transmission rate of 20 or 30 g/m2/day as taught by Hatta with the resin of maleic acid-modified polypropylene or polyethylene of Kuramoto for the purpose of controlling the water vapor transmission through the case.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299).
Regarding claim 3, Kuramoto discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Kuramoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the insulation layer [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] is made of a resin having a melting point higher than that of the heat-sealable resin layer [sealant layer] by 10C or more.
However, Kuramoto teaches that the melting point of the insulation layer can be 140C and not show flowability at 150C ([0118]-[0119]), and the heat-sealable resin layer 3 [sealant layer] can be made of polyethylene ([0109]). As the melting point of polyethylene is known as about 130C (Yoshida [0021]), Kuramoto teaches a range where the melting point of the insulation layer is about 10C or more higher than that of the sealant layer [at about 140C]. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a resin having a high melting point (including 140C) as the resin of the insulation layer in order to prevent the insulation layer from melting or flowing (Kuramoto, [0118] “preferable that the insulation layer 7 and 17 do not show flowability at 150C”).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Zheng et al. (WO 2022/261876, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 4, Kuramoto discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Kuramoto discloses that the resin of the insulation layer is made of a resin including of polyethylenes ([0114]-[0115]), Kuramoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the resin constituting the heat-resistant gas barrier layer has a thermal conductivity of 0.2 W/m*K or higher.
Zheng discloses a secondary battery (abstract), wherein heat-spreading sections have a resin of high-density polyethylene (thermal conductivity: 0.4-0.5 W/m*K) or low-density polyethylene (thermal conductivity: 0.2-0.3 W/m*K) ([0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a resin material of a polyethylene with thermal conductivities between 0.2-0.5 W/m*K as taught by Zheng with the polyethylene resin materials of Kuramoto for the purpose of spreading heat.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Muraki (US 2021/0091435).
Regarding claims 5-6, Kuramoto discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Kuramoto discloses the packaging material of claim 1 (abstract, [0075], Figs 1-4 and 7), and wherein the insulation layer 7,17 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] and the power storage device body 31 are in contact with each other (see Fig 7), and the power storage device can be a lithium polymer battery or a lithium ion battery ([0179]), Kuramoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the power storage device is a solid-state battery body.
Muraki discloses a power storage device 100 as a fully solid-state battery including a power storage device 10, a packaging material 20, metal terminals 30, and a terminal coating resin film 40 ([0029]-[0030]). Muraki teaches that fully solid-state batteries can be used higher temperatures ([0006],[0010]). Muraki discloses that the PET has a melting temperature between 170-280C ([0038]), and uses a PET inner layer 18 in the packaging material 20 having a melting temperature of about 255C ([0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a solid-state battery as taught by Muraki as the power storage device of Kuramoto for the purpose of having a battery that can be used at higher temperatures.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (US 2013/0034772) in view of Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshida discloses a battery 100 having an outer package 1 (abstract, [0019]). The outer package 1 includes, from outermost to innermost: a PE-melt bonding layer 15, a PET layer 14 [either layer 14 or 15 is a substrate layer], an aluminum layer 13 [metal foil layer laminated on an inner surface of the substrate layer], a PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer made of resin, provided between the metal foil layer and the sealant layer], and a PE melt-bonding layer 11 [sealant layer laminated on an inner surface of the metal foil layer] ([0020], see Figs 3-4).
However, Yoshida does not explicitly disclose wherein the PE melt-bonding layer 11 [sealant layer] is provided with an opening portion in a portion corresponding to a battery to be encapsulated, nor wherein the PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] is exposed on an inner side of the opening portion.
Kuramoto discloses a package 1 for a power storage device 30 includes a metal foil layer 4, an insulation layer 7 laminated on at least center portion of one surface of the metal foil layer 4, and a heat-sealable resin layer 3 [sealant layer] arranged one surface of the metal foil layer or a region corresponding to a periphery of the one surface of the metal foil layer (abstract, [0075], Figs 1-4 and 7). An acid-resistant layer 2 can be laminated on the outer surface of the metal foil layer 4 ([0076]). Since the heat-sealable resin layer 3 [sealant layer] is not formed on the entire surface of the metal foil layer, and is formed on the periphery region of the package, thinning, weight saving, and shortening of the production time can be attained (abstract, [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the shape of the heat-sealable resin layer [sealant layer] (being open on the middle, not covering the entire surface of the metal foil layer, formed on the periphery of the metal foil layer) as taught by Kuramoto with the [interior] PE melt-bonding layer of Yoshida (thereby having the PE melt-bonding layer 11 having an open center, and attached to the periphery) for the purpose of achieving thinning, weight saving, and shortening of production time.
Regarding claim 2, modified Yoshida discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. As Yoshida discloses the PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] made of PET resin, and the instant application discloses that the water vapor transmission rate for PET is 29 g/(m2*D) (see instant Table 1, Example 1 and Comparative Example 1), the PET layer 12 has a water vapor transmission rate less than 50 g/m2/day.
Regarding claim 3, modified Yoshida discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yoshida teaches the PE melt-bonding layers 11 [sealant layer] are made of polyethylene, and have a melting point of about 130C ([0021]), and the PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] is made of PET, which has a melting point between 170-280C (Muraki at [0034],[0038]). Therefore, Yoshida teaches that the PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] is made of a resin having a melting point higher than that of the PE melt-bonding layer 11 [sealant layer] by 10C or more.
Regarding claim 4, modified Yoshida discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. As Yoshida discloses the PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] made of PET resin, and the instant application discloses that the thermal conductivity for PET is 0.23 W/m*K (see instant Table 1, Example 1 and Comparative Example 1), the PET layer 12 has a thermal conductivity of 0.2 W/m*K or higher.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (US 2013/0034772) in view of Kuramoto et al. (US 2017/0005299), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Muraki (US 2021/0091435).
Regarding claim 5, modified Yoshida discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Yoshida teaches that the battery is a lithium ion battery ([0019]), Yoshida does not explicitly disclose wherein the battery and power generating element 4 is a solid-state battery body.
Muraki discloses a power storage device 100 as a fully solid-state battery including a power storage device 10, a packaging material 20, metal terminals 30, and a terminal coating resin film 40 ([0029]-[0030]). Muraki teaches that fully solid-state batteries can be used a higher temperatures ([0006], [0010]). Muraki discloses that the PET has a melting temperature between 170-280C ([0038]), and uses a PET inner layer 18 in the packaging material 20 having a melting temperature of about 255C ([0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a solid-state battery as taught by Muraki as the power generating element of Yoshida for the purpose of having a battery that can be used at higher temperatures.
Regarding claim 6, modified Yoshida discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. As Kuramoto teaches that the heat-sealable resin layer 3 [sealant layer] is not formed on the entire surface of the metal foil ([0054]), and Muraki teaches a solid state battery ([0010]), the combination teaches that the PET layer 12 [heat-resistant gas barrier layer] and the battery body are in contact with each other.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BUCHANAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM (ET).
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.
/JACOB BUCHANAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights