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 Status
Claims 1-3, 6, and 8-9 have been amended; support is found in Figures 4-5 and [0032,0034-0039,0041,0048] of the instant specification.
Claims 7 and 11 have been cancelled.
Claims 13-14 have been added, support is found in Figures 4-5 and [0032,0034-0039,0041,0048] of the instant specification. No new matter has been added.
Claims 1-6, 8-10, and 12-14 are currently pending and have been examined on the merits in this office action.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Muroya et al. (US 2020/0212415 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Muroya discloses a battery comprising:
A terminal which comprises a first conductive member, and a second conductive member electrically connected to the first conductive member (Figures 3/4 electroconductive member 14/15 can be read as the first conductive member for the positive electrode and the negative electrode, terminals 9/7 read as the second conductive member); and
A third conductive member that is connected to the terminal (Figures 3-4; current collectors 8/6 are electrically connected to the terminal members), wherein
The second conductive member comprises a crimp part at one of end parts (Figure 3 crimp part of the terminals 7/9), and comprises a positioning part on an outer surface of another one of the end parts (Figures 3-6 protrusion 9d),
PNG
media_image1.png
394
698
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The crimp part is crimped to the third conductive member (Figure 3 above; the crimped part is crimped to the third conductive member),
The first conductive member has a through-hole (Figures 3-6, first conductive through hole 15a), and
The positioning part is provided to overlap with the through hole when viewed along a central axis of the through-hole (Figure 3-6; positioning part is provided within the through hole),
The positioning part is entirely disposed within the through-hole (Figures 3-6), and
The positioning part and an inner wall of the through hole do not come into contact with each other (Figures 3-6).
Regarding claim 5, Muroya discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Muroya further teaches wherein the positioning part is a protruding part (Figure 3-6; the positioning part protrudes, 9d).
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.
Claims 6, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muroya et al. (US 2020/0212415 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Muroya discloses a manufacturing method of a battery comprising:
A terminal which comprises a first conductive member, and a second conductive member electrically connected to the first conductive member (Figures 3/4 electroconductive member 14/15 can be read as the first conductive member for the positive electrode and the negative electrode, terminals 9/7 read as the second conductive member), and comprising a third conductive member that is connected to the terminal (Figures 3-4; current collectors 8/6 are electrically connected to the terminal members), wherein
The second conductive member comprises a crimp part at one of end parts (Figure 3 crimp part of the terminals 7/9), and comprises a positioning part on an outer surface of another one of the end parts (Figures 3-6 protrusion 9d), and
The manufacturing method comprises:
Inserting the crimp part into a through hole provided at the third conductive member, crimping the crimp part to the third conductive member under a state of making the positioning part abut (Figure 3 above; [0030] terminal is inserted into the through hole and has the tip crimped to fix the terminal and the electrode collector),
Wherein the first conductive member has a through-hole (Figures 3-6, first conductive through hole 15a), and
The positioning part is provided to overlap with the through hole when viewed along a central axis of the through-hole when viewed along a central axis direction of the through hole of the first conductive member (Figure 3-6; positioning part is provided within the through hole),
The positioning part is entirely disposed within the through-hole (Figures 3-6), and
The positioning part and an inner wall of the through hole do not come into contact with each other (Figures 3-6).
Muroya is explicitly silent with respect to a jig/tool being used in the manufacturing method, however, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to use a tool/ positioning jig to insert and crimp the second conductive member to the third conductive member as a tool/jig is known to be used to perform the method of construction and thus a skilled art5isan would have found it obvious to use a tool to perform the construction of the battery.
Regarding claim 12, Muroya discloses all the claim limitations of claim 6. Muroya further teaches wherein the positioning part is a protruding part (Figure 3-6; the positioning part protrudes, 9d).
Regarding claim 13, Muroya discloses a battery comprising:
A terminal which comprises a first conductive member, and a second conductive member electrically connected to the first conductive member (Figures 3/4 electroconductive member 14/15 can be read as the first conductive member for the positive electrode and the negative electrode, terminals 9/7 read as the second conductive member); and
A third conductive member that is connected to the terminal (Figures 3-4; current collectors 8/6 are electrically connected to the terminal members), wherein
The second conductive member comprises a crimp part at one of end parts (Figure 3 crimp part of the terminals 7/9), and comprises a positioning part on an outer surface of another one of the end parts (Figures 3-6 protrusion 9d),
The positioning part is a protruding part (Figure 3-6; the positioning part protrudes, 9d),
The crimp part is crimped to the third conductive member (Figure 3 above; the crimped part is crimped to the third conductive member),
The first conductive member has a through-hole (Figures 3-6, first conductive through hole 15a), and
The positioning part is provided to overlap with the through hole when viewed along a central axis of the through-hole (Figure 3-6; positioning part is provided within the through hole).
Muroya discloses wherein the positioning part does not contact the conductive member within the through hole as seen in Figure 3 and appears to have a diameter of the positioning part to be less than 0.8 than the inner diameter of the through hole. Muroya is explicitly silent with respect to the ratio of a diameter of the positioning part to an inner diameter of the through hole is equal to or less than 0.8, however, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to adjust the size of the protruding part of Muroya to be less than 0.8 the diameter of the through hole as a simple adjustment of size that would yield predictable results and would not change the function of the battery and terminal member. The size of an article is not a matter of invention. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
PNG
media_image2.png
364
660
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Muroya discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Muroya discloses wherein the positioning part does not contact the conductive member within the through hole as seen in Figure 3 and appears to have a diameter of the positioning part to be less than 0.8 than the inner diameter of the through hole. Muroya is explicitly silent with respect to the ratio of a diameter of the positioning part to an inner diameter of the through hole is equal to or less than 0.8, however, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to adjust the size of the protruding part of Muroya to be less than 0.8 the diameter of the through hole as a simple adjustment of size that would yield predictable results and would not change the function of the battery and terminal member. The size of an article is not a matter of invention. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
PNG
media_image2.png
364
660
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 8-10 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the dependent claims 2 and 8 are objected to for containing the structure of the first conductive member having a plate shape with a recessed part, a second conductive member having a flange that is electrically connected to the first conductive member, a shaft column part extending downward from a lower end part which is a lower surface of the flange, wherein the flange part has an upper surface, a lower surface opposite the upper surface, a side surface between the upper surface and the lower surface and a narrowed part at which a part of the side surface is narrowed, wherein the flange part of the second conductive member is partially disposed within the recessed part of the first conductive member, and wherein a fastening part is a fit part on which the recessed part of the first conductive member and the narrowed part of the second conductive member are fit.
PNG
media_image3.png
748
828
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The prior art fails to teach nor disclose the connection between the first and second conductive members as claimed in dependent claims 2 and 8. Claims 3-4 and 9-10 are objected for depending upon claims 2 and 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amended claims overcome the rejection of record. Examiner notes that the rejection has been updated replacing the primary reference and thus renders the arguments moot.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam J Francis whose telephone number is (571)272-1021. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7 am-4 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571)270-7871. 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.
/ADAM J FRANCIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights