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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 3 and 14 are 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. With regards to claim s 3 and 14 , the claim depends upon claim s 1 and 12 respectively which establishes a first preset direction (the stacking direction). Claim 3 or 14 then recites “a third preset direction” rendering the claim indefinite as there is no recited “second preset direction”. Claim 1 or 12 does not establish lateral faces of the extension portion; however, claim 3 or 14 recites “the first extension portion comprises two second lateral faces disposed opposite to each other” however there are no recited “first lateral faces” in claim 1 or 3. A review of the specification discusses the second lateral surfaces in ¶ 0044, and it does not appear the disclosure supports or intends for claim 3 to depend upon claim 2 or claim 14 to depend upon 13 such that the extension portion has convex and concave regions on all four sides. As such the “third direction” of claim 3 or 14 will be interpreted as a direction perpendicular to both the first direction (stacking direction of claim 1 or 12 ) and an extension direction of the straight portion of the electrode profile. 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. Claim (s) 1 , 2, 4-13 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuno et al. (Pub No US 2022/0231384 A1, effectively filed 10/10/2019) in view of Nestle et al. (EP 3667761 A1, translation provided for citations) . With regards to claim s 1 and 12 , Okuno teaches a button battery (¶ 0030) comprising a housing assembly ( battery can, 10), an electrode assembly (20), a first tab (30) and a second tab (40) as seen in Figures 1 and 2. Okuno teaches that the battery can or housing assembly can take the form of a first conductive portion (61K, W, M) and a second conductive portion (70) in which the first and second conductive portions are insulated from each other by a gasket (80) as seen in Fig. 16. The electrode assembly, as seen in detail in Figure 3, comprises first (21) and second (22) electrode plates of opposite polarity with a separator (23) therebetween. The manner in which the first and second tabs are connected to the respective electrodes can be seen in Fig. 12 in which a tab may comprise a first connecting portion (40B, 30B) that connects to each respective electrode plate of a given polarity . Okuno is clear that there are different arrangements for the tab including the plate shaped connecting portion (30A) as one embodiment in which the electrode assembly is connected to the full wall of the can (Figure 1) or alternatively as seen in the embodiment of Figure 16 and first discussed with respect to Figure 14, the tab (30) is provided with an extension portion that extends in the stacking direction with a first end connected to the connecting portion and a second end connected to the second conductive portion (70) (¶ 0222-0225, 0230, 0245-0249). Okuno does not teach that the first extension portion (30C) assumes a curved shape. The particular shape of the extension portion (30C) is described in Okuno as having “a strip-like shape” In a similar field of endeavor related to button cells (¶ 0003), Nestle teaches that contact tabs which are typically formed of a strip of metal are typically bent , similar to the bent strip shaped contact tab of Okuno, and may be subjected to tensile stress (¶ 0026-0027). Nestle teaches an advantageous design by including an expansion section between a first tab end connected to the electrode assembly and a second tab end connected to a terminal (¶ 0055-0056) to address the possibility of stress. The expansion section can take the form of wavy, sinusoidal, sawtooth, triangular or rectangular wave (¶ 0037) and can be seen as section 107d in Figure 1F. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute the rectangular strip-shape of Okuno for the wavy strip shape of Nestle as both relate to strips to connect an electrode assembly to a terminal in a button battery presenting a reasonable expectation of success, Nestle teaches the expansion design allows for accommodating stress in the system which is necessarily improving resiliency of the battery, and as discussed in MPEP 2144.04. B changes in shape present a case of prima facie obviousness. With regards to claim s 2 and 13 , as seen in Figure 2 and 14 of Okuno, the electrode plates include a straight section extending in a second direction perpendicular to the stacking direction such that rather than perfectly round electrodes there is a flat section to which the connecting portion (30B) can attach to each plate. The extension portion as modified above includes a wavy or sinusoidal extension from the connecting portion to the terminal which provides for opposing lateral faces each having a concave and a convex portion in a direction that is parallel to the extension direction of the straight section as seen in Fig. 1E of Nestle providing each lateral side of the strip having both a protruding and recessed portion with respect to the centerline. With regards to claim s 4 and 15 , Nestle teaches it is a continuously curved shape (Fig. 1). With regards to claim s 5 and 16 , Okuno teaches that the tab includes a plurality of conductive strips that extend out from each straight portion of a given electrode plate, extend away from the face of the electrode with a connecting portion , bend and then continue with an extension portion such that an outermost first extension strip extends first and the remaining extension strips all combine to form a stacked extension portion to which the element (30B) is attached (Fig. 7). While the device of Okuno includes an additional element of 30B, the resulting bound extension portion is interpreted to be formed from or comprise the plurality of stacked individual extension portions protruding from each electrode. With regards to claim s 6 and 17 , Okuno teaches that the electrodes comprise an active material layer (21B) and a current collector (21A) and that the conductive strips (21AY and 21AY1) are extensions of the current collector (Fig. 7). With regards to claim s 7 and 18 , as seen in Figures 2, 12 and 14 of Okuno the second tab can be similarly designed to the first tab. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the second tab in a similar manner to the first tab as discussed in claim 1 above as both tabs serve to connect the electrodes to terminals presenting a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above. With regards to claim s 8 and 19 , as seen in Figure 12 of Okuno the electrodes can include a first straight section and a second straight section on opposite sides. The lateral faces of the second tab extension being present in modified Okuno for the same reasons as claim 2 above. With regards to claim s 9 and 20 , Nestle teaches it is a continuously curved shape (Fig. 1). With regards to claim 10 , Okuno teaches that the tab (30 presented in the figure but applies to the structure for 40) includes a plurality of conductive strips that extend out from each straight portion of a given electrode plate, extend away from the face of the electrode with a connecting portion, bend and then continue with an extension portion such that an outermost first extension strip extends first and the remaining extension strips all combine to form a stacked extension portion to which the element (30B) is attached (Fig. 7). While the device of Okuno includes an additional element of 30B, the resulting bound extension portion is interpreted to be formed from or comprise the plurality of stacked individual extension portions protruding from each electrode. With regards to claim 11, Okuno teaches the claimed walls and through hole structure for the first and second conductive portions in which the second portion is mounted with an insulator (gasket) (Fig. 16). Claim (s) 1 , 3, 4, 7-12, 14, 15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuno et al. (Pub No US 2022/0231384 A1, effectively filed 10/10/2019) in view of Ohta et al. ( Pub No US 2021/0119304 A1 , effectively filed 3/28/2018 ) . With regards to claims 1 and 12, Okuno teaches a button battery (¶ 0030) comprising a housing assembly (battery can, 10), an electrode assembly (20), a first tab (30) and a second tab (40) as seen in Figures 1 and 2. Okuno teaches that the battery can or housing assembly can take the form of a first conductive portion (61K, W, M) and a second conductive portion (70) in which the first and second conductive portions are insulated from each other by a gasket (80) as seen in Fig. 16. The electrode assembly, as seen in detail in Figure 3, comprises first (21) and second (22) electrode plates of opposite polarity with a separator (23) therebetween. The manner in which the first and second tabs are connected to the respective electrodes can be seen in Fig. 12 in which a tab may comprise a first connecting portion (40B, 30B) that connects to each respective electrode plate of a given polarity. Okuno is clear that there are different arrangements for the tab including the plate shaped connecting portion (30A) as one embodiment in which the electrode assembly is connected to the full wall of the can (Figure 1) or alternatively as seen in the embodiment of Figure 16 and first discussed with respect to Figure 14, the tab (30) is provided with an extension portion that extends in the stacking direction with a first end connected to the connecting portion and a second end connected to the second conductive portion (70) (¶ 0222-0225, 0230, 0245-0249). Okuno does not teach that the first extension portion (30C) assumes a curved shape. The particular shape of the extension portion (30C) is described in Okuno as having “a strip-like shape” In a similar field of endeavor, Ohta teaches that contact tabs which are typically formed of a strip of metal are typically bent, similar to the bent strip shaped contact tab of Okuno, and may be subjected to stress (¶ 0014 ). Ohta teaches an advantageous design by including a stress relaxation section between a first tab end connected to the electrode assembly and a second tab end connected to a terminal (Abstract, Fig. 2 ) to address the possibility of stress. The section can take the form of wavy, sinusoidal, sawtooth, triangular or rectangular wave (¶ 0022-0026 ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute the rectangular strip-shape of Okuno for the wavy strip shape of Ohta as both relate to strips to connect an electrode assembly to a terminal in a button battery presenting a reasonable expectation of success, Ohta teaches the expansion design allows for accommodating stress in the system which is necessarily improving resiliency of the battery, and as discussed in MPEP 2144.04.B changes in shape present a case of prima facie obviousness. With regards to claims 3 and 1 4 , as seen in Figure 2 and 14 of Okuno, the electrode plates include a straight section extending in a second direction perpendicular to the stacking direction such that rather than perfectly round electrodes there is a flat section to which the connecting portion (30B) can attach to each plate. The extension portion as modified above includes a wavy or sinusoidal extension from the connecting portion to the terminal which provides for opposing lateral faces each having a concave and a convex portion in a direction that is p erpendicular to the extension direction of the straight section and the stacking direction when bent as seen in Fig. 2 of Ohta providing each lateral side of the strip having both a protruding and recessed portion with respect to the centerline. With regards to claims 4 and 15, Ohta teaches it is a continuously curved shape ( ¶ 0026 ). With regards to claims 7 and 18, as seen in Figures 2, 12 and 14 of Okuno the second tab can be similarly designed to the first tab. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the second tab in a similar manner to the first tab as discussed in claim 1 above as both tabs serve to connect the electrodes to terminals presenting a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above. With regards to claims 8 and 19, as seen in Figure 12 of Okuno the electrodes can include a first straight section and a second straight section on opposite sides. The lateral faces of the second tab extension being present in modified Okuno for the same reasons as claim s 3 and 14 above. With regards to claims 9 and 20, Ohta teaches it is a continuously curved shape (Fig. 1). With regards to claim 10, Okuno teaches that the tab (30 presented in the figure but applies to the structure for 40) includes a plurality of conductive strips that extend out from each straight portion of a given electrode plate, extend away from the face of the electrode with a connecting portion, bend and then continue with an extension portion such that an outermost first extension strip extends first and the remaining extension strips all combine to form a stacked extension portion to which the element (30B) is attached (Fig. 7). While the device of Okuno includes an additional element of 30B, the resulting bound extension portion is interpreted to be formed from or comprise the plurality of stacked individual extension portions protruding from each electrode. With regards to claim 11, Okuno teaches the claimed walls and through hole structure for the first and second conductive portions in which the second portion is mounted with an insulator (gasket) (Fig. 16). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT GALEN H HAUTH whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5516 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 9:30 AM to 6 PM 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Alexa Neckel can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-2450 . 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. /GALEN H HAUTH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743