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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/10/26 has been entered. Claims 1-12 are pending examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 조아라 et al (KR 101783914; citations directed to machine translation provided previously; hereafter KR) in view of Yun et al (KR20210061113; machine translation provided previously; hereafter Yun) and Zeng et al (US 2022/0359959; hereafter Zeng).
Claim 1: KR teaches a method for manufacturing a secondary battery (See, for example, [0001], Figures) comprising:
an electrode assembly formation process in which a unit stack comprising at least one negative electrode plate and at least on positive electrode plate is stacked to form an electrode assembly (See, for example, [0008-0010], [0043], [0056], Figures 1, 3-4, 6-9);
a coating process in which an area of a non-coating portion (by the end of the processing, the uncoated extending portions which make electrical connection with the electrode leads (12) ) comprising a negative electrode tab (11/110) extending from the at least one negative electrode plate and a positive electrode tab (11/110) extending from at least one positive electrode plate of the electrode assembly is coated (such as with insulation layer (insulating member) to cover at least the negative electrode tab and the positive electrode tab of the non-coating portion and a partial area of at least one of the negative electrode plate or the positive electrode plate with a coating; wherein the coating process is performed in a state in which the at least one negative electrode and the at least one positive electrode plate are stacked with each other (see, for example, [0043-0044], [0059-62], and Figures 6-9, wherein the plurality of stacked / laminated electrode plates /tabs are taught to be provided with the insulating coating by an immersion method to prevent short circuiting from positive – negative contact, further explicitly wherein it describes the structure of Fig 7 and 8 as a laminated assembly and wherein “at this time, the electrode tab (110) may be provided with an insulating material…” wherein “at this time …” would reference the laminated / stacked structure described in the directly preceding sentence in [0059] of KR);
a width of each of the negative electrode plate (10) and the positive electrode plate (10) being greater than a width of each of the negative electrode tab (11/110) and the positive electrode tab (11/110) (See, for example, Fig 1 and 4).
KR further teaches wherein the electrode tabs are connected to and form an electrical connection with positive and negative electrode leads (12/120) (see, for example, [0009], [0043-44]). But considering the above taught embodiments wherein the insulating coating is applied by immersion, KR is silent as to how an electrical connection could be made between such insulated tabs and the leads, so it does not explicitly teach exposing the ends of the electrode tabs via the recited cleaning process.
Yun teaches a method for manufacturing a secondary battery (See, for example, [0001-0002]). The positive and negative electrode tabs of Yun are similarly coated with an insulating layer, and in order to achieve the intended electrical connection, Yun teaches removal of the insulating layer from at least a portion of the tabs to provide for a suitable electrical connection with the respective positive and negative electrode leads (see, for example, [0008], [0021], [0023], [0032-33], [0047] [0050],Fig 4). Yun further teaches wherein selective removal from portions connecting with the leads can predictably occur by organic solvent washing / elution (see, for example, [0009-0013], [0050-52] Fig 4, Fig 6). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated organic solvent elution / cleaning of the insulative coating from the ends of the positive and negative electrode tabs since it would provide a predictable means to achieve the desired result of retaining insulative coating on portions more adjacent to the laminated electrode assembly to prevent short circuiting and similarly provide sufficient conductivity to provide sufficient electrical connection among all the positive electrode tab(s) and the positive lead as well as the negative electrode tab(s) and the negative lead and since when a primary reference is silent as to a certain detail, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to consult a secondary reference which satisfies the deficiencies of the primary reference.
KR (above) teaches a wherein the electrode tabs of the plurality of laminated electrode plates are provided with the insulating coating by an immersion method to prevent short circuiting from positive – negative contact; but it does not explicitly teach wherein the immersion process results in application to the tabs, a partial area of at least one of the negative electrode plate or the positive electrode plate, but while a central area of the at least one of the negative electrode plate or the positive electrode plate remains uncoated from the coating. Zeng is similarly directed to a method for manufacturing a secondary battery (See, for example, abstract, Figures). Zeng further is concerned with minimizing / preventing shorting and addresses this concern by the application of an insulative coating, similarly by immersion, not only on the tabs but also to a minimal height portion of the electrodes (226) lying adjacent to the tabs ((See, for example, [0002], [0006], [0074-0075], Fig 3A-B). Zeng teaches the application of the insulative coating to the tab and is coextensive with and extends along the terminal edge from a first side of the electrode to a second side defining a lateral strip (226) of insulating material results in an additional measure of protection from possible shorting by shielding and electrically insulating corner and edge regions (See, for example, [0074-0075]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated coating the tabs, a partial area of at least one of the negative electrode plate or the positive electrode plate, but while a central area of the at least one of the negative electrode plate or the positive electrode plate remains uncoated from the coating since application to only the tab and immediate minimal height portions of the electrodes coextensive with the tabs are particularly identified to be sources of shorting and application to just these areas would predictably provide additional measures of protection from shorting. Further as one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate that there exists an economy wherein the area of the electrode covered comes at a cost; thus as the prior has identified only a limited tab- adjacent portion of the electrodes as benefiting from application of insulative coating, application to just the tabs and this area would use the least amount of material / time, while maximizing the gains in protection. Additionally / alternatively , considering the beveled structure of electrode stack of KR, and the guidance to vertical dipping as a predictable means to achieve targeted immersion application to the tabs (gleaned from Yun); when intending to apply full coating of all tabs (including the outermost tabs, which are recessed with respect to electrodes in the middle of the stack), while minimizing waste, only extending portions of middle-stacked electrode surfaces would receive the coating.
Additionally / alternatively with respect to the limitation of wherein the coating process is performed in a state in which the at least one negative electrode and the at least one positive electrode plate are stacked with each other. For sake of argument that (“at this time, the electrode tab (110) may be provided with an insulating material…” would not reference the laminated / stacked structure described in the directly preceding sentence in [0059] of KR, and thus not explicitly teach the timing of the dipping coating as being performed following stacking instead of before stacking: Zeng and Yun have each taught the predictably in treating a plurality of electrode tabs within stacked / wound electrode assembly by dipping to simultaneously apply compositions to tabbed surfaces extending from ends thereof (see, for example, [0055], and Fig 6 of Yun, and [0101], [0114], of Zeng (particularly in reference to “third insulation material / coating”)). Therefore if not already taught in KR, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated performing the coating process in a state in which the at least one negative electrode and the at least one positive electrode plate are stacked with each other since application via dipping to such stacked structures is well known in the art and would predictably achieve such application simultaneously and / or since the selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946)).
Claim 2: KR in view of Yun and Zheng teach the method of claim 1 wherein Yun has further taught drying the electrode assembly after the coating and the immersing / cleaning to predictably remove the solvent (See, for example, [0014], and [0061]).
Claim 3: KR further teaches wherein the coating process comprises a dip coating process (immersion) in which the area of the non-coating portion comprising the negative electrode tab and the positive electrode tab is immersed in an insulating material solution to be coated (See, for example, [0062]).
Claim 4: KR is silent as to specific insulating materials for the coating, so it does not explicitly teach PI or PAI. But Yun demonstrates the conventionality and predictability of polyimide and polyamide as insulating coating materials within secondary battery applications including upon electrode tabs (See, for example, [0042]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated polyimide in the insulating material solution since such a material is conventionally known in the art as a suitable insulating material and as it would perform predictably as an insulating material for electrode tabs for secondary batteries.
Claim 5: KR in view of Yun teach the method of claim 1 above, Yun further teaches that in the cleaning process, the positive and negative electrode tabs are immersed in a cleaning material solution to be cleaned (See, for example [0009], [0012-14], [0054], Fig 6).
Claim 7: Refer to the rejection of claim 1 above, KR further teaches connecting the exposed ends of the negative electrode tab and the positive electrode tab to a negative electrode terminal and a positive electrode terminal (such as leads 12) (See, for example, [0009], Fig 1 and 4).
Claim 8: Refer to the rejections of claim 2 and 7 above.
Claim 9: refer to the rejections of claims 3 and 7 above.
Claim 10: refer to the rejections of claims 4 and 9 above.
Claim 11: Refer to the rejections of claim 5 and 7 above.
Claim(s) 6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR in view Yun and Zeng as applied to claim 5 and 11 above, and further in view of Nishida et al (JP 2004-349080; machine translation provided herein; hereafter Nishida).
Claim 6: KR in view Yun and Zeng teaches the method of claim 5 above, wherein Yun has further taught wherein the insulative material can be polyimide (See, for example, [0042]). Yun has additionally taught wherein the removal of the coating is conducted via elution with an organic solvent (See, for example, [0009-0014]), but they are silent as to a suitable organic solvent that would predictably elute polyimide, so they do not explicitly teach the cleaning material solution comprises dimethyl carbonate (DMC). Nishida teaches a method of manufacturing a secondary battery (See, for example, abstract, [0001]). Nishida further teaches wherein the battery comprises materials comprising polyimide, and wherein DMC is a solvent for polyimide (See, for example, [0058-0059]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated on organic solvent solution comprising dimethyl carbonate (DMC) since such a solvent is recognized in the art as a predictable organic solvent for polyimide, and since when a primary reference is silent as to a certain detail, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to consult a secondary reference which satisfies the deficiencies of the primary reference.
Claim 12: refer to the rejections of claims 6 and 11 above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s 1/8/26 arguments (entered via 2/10/26 RCE) that the references do not teach the newly added limitations are unconvincing. The examiner disagrees with Applicant’s argument that KR appears “to be silent with respect to whether or not the spraying on or immersing of the metal plate may be performed in a state in which at least one negative electrode plate and at least one positive electrode plate would be stack with each other.” The examiner maintains that KR (see, for example, [0043-0044], [0059-62], and Figures 6-9,) the plurality of stacked / laminated electrode plates /tabs are taught to be provided with the insulating coating by an immersion method to prevent short circuiting from positive – negative contact, further explicitly at [0059] wherein it describes the structure of Fig 7 and 8 as a laminated assembly and wherein “at this time, the electrode tab (110) may be provided with an insulating material…” ). Wherein “at this time…” would reference the laminated / stacked structure described in the directly preceding sentence in [0059] of KR
Additionally / alternatively, for sake of argument that (“at this time, the electrode tab (110) may be provided with an insulating material…” would not reference the laminated / stacked structure described in the directly preceding sentence in [0059] of KR; Zeng and Yun have each taught the predictably in treating a plurality of electrode tabs within stacked / wound electrode assembly by dipping to simultaneously apply compositions to tabbed surfaces extending from ends thereof (see, for example, [0055], and Fig 6 of Yun, and [0101], [0114], of Zeng (particularly in reference to “third insulation material / coating”)). Therefore if not already taught in KR, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated performing the coating process in a state in which the at least one negative electrode and the at least one positive electrode plate are stacked with each other since application via dipping to such stacked structures is well known in the art and would predictably achieve such application simultaneously and / or since the selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946)).
In response to applicant's argument (pg 8-9) that Yun appears to teach insulating layers covering central portions of electrode plates, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). The structure of battery and its electrodes are derived from primary reference KR, Yun is not relied upon for such features, but rather for its teachings directed to details directed tab fluid immersion to remove insulative coatings allowing for suitable electrical connection.
In response to applicant's argument that Zeng is silent as to the timing of coating, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). As described above, the rejection over a combination of references wherein primary reference has taught coating to the stacked article; and further in addition to the exemplary teaching described by Applicant, Zeng and Yun have further each taught the predictably in treating a plurality of electrode tabs within stacked / wound electrode assembly by dipping to simultaneously apply compositions to tabbed surfaces extending from ends thereof (see, for example, [0055], and Fig 6 of Yun, and [0101], [0114], of Zeng (particularly in reference to “third insulation material / coating”)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN H EMPIE whose telephone number is (571)270-1886. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 5:30AM - 4 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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/NATHAN H EMPIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712