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 without traverse of Species IA and IIA, encompassing claims 1-3, 5, 6 and 8-20, in the reply filed on May 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
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, 2 and 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (hereinafter “Wang”) (CN 101950816 A, cited by Applicant; see English machine translation).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 9 and 19, Wang teaches a lithium-ion battery electric core comprising a positive plate (first electrode sheet), a barrier film, a negative plate (second electrode sheet), positive lugs (tab group) connected to the positive plate, and negative lugs (tab group) connected to the negative plate, wherein the electric core is wound around a winding pin (winding body) (see paragraphs 34 and 38). The density of the positive lugs and negative lugs may be selected according to the needs of production, such that the positive lugs and negative lugs may be provided at every e (where e is any positive integer) complete winding, or circle, of the electric core (symmetrically arranged with respect to the winding axis) (see paragraph 39; FIGS. 1-3). Thus, for example, as illustrated in FIG. 2, when e=2, a pair of positive lugs and negative lugs may be provided every two complete windings of the electric core (at least two adjacent tabs in the tab group are separated by at least one electrode sheet layer of same polarity in the radial direction) (see paragraph 66).
Regarding claim 8, as illustrated in FIGS. 1-3, Wang teaches that the positive lugs and negative lugs both extend from the same side of the electric core.
Regarding claims 10-17, Wang teaches that the positive lugs and negative lugs may be overlapped together and connected to respective pole terminals (electrode terminals) in a battery container (housing; end cover) by a bolt connection (adaptors) (see paragraph 51; FIG. 9). Although Wang does not explicitly teach an insulator including an insulator body and a projector, these elements are conventional in the art for avoiding contact between electrode tabs of opposite polarity, and further for avoiding direct contact between electrode tabs and external terminals.
Regarding claim 18, Wang teaches that the battery core may be utilized to supply power to an electric tool (see paragraph 4).
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied to claims 1, 2 and 8-19 above.
Regarding claim 20, although Wang is silent as to an electrode sheets providing apparatus and an electrode sheets winding apparatus, it is noted that any automated manufacturing of the electric core of Wang would be expected to include such apparatuses, given that that the positive and negative plates of Wang must be layered with the barrier film therebetween prior to being wound.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied to claims 1, 2 and 8-19 above, and further in view of Cao et al. (hereinafter “Cao”) (WO 2020/015362 A1; see U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0376427 A1 for English translation).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Wang is silent as to spacings between every two adjacent tabs in the tab group are equal along a winding direction.
Cao teaches an electrode plate for a wound lithium-ion battery, the electrode plate comprising an electrode plate body 110 and a plurality of tabs 120. The plurality of tabs are divided into at least two groups, wherein the widths of each tab 120 in each group are sequentially increased, and wherein the interval between adjacent tabs in each group is equal (see paragraph 50; FIG. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have adapted the increasing tab widths and constant tab intervals of Cao to the electric core of Wang because Cao teaches that by fixing the interval between tabs and gradually increasing the widths of the tabs, only one time of die-cutting is required for the same tab and its interval, which avoids the secondary die-cutting caused by the increasing interval between the tabs, thereby further avoiding the problem of burrs caused by the two times of die-cutting and reducing the possibility of battery's self-discharge (see paragraph 29).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHAN J ESSEX whose telephone number is (571)270-7866. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 6:00 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571) 272-1330. 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.
/STEPHAN J ESSEX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights