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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on FILLIN "Enter date IDS was filed" \* MERGEFORMAT 12/23/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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 applicant regards as his invention. Claim FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 2 is 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. Claim FILLIN "Enter claim identification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 2 recites the limitation " FILLIN "Enter appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT the nonwoven fabric in contact with one surface of the positive electrode plate and the nonwoven fabric in contact with another surface of the positive electrode plate " in FILLIN "Enter appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT Lines 1-3 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 provides antecedent basis for “the nonwoven fabric” but does not describe the nonwoven fabric as “ FILLIN "Enter appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT in contact with one surface of the positive electrode plate and the nonwoven fabric in contact with another surface of the positive electrode plate ." Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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. center 2835910 0 0 center 5008880 Fig. 2 (Matsuya et al.) 40000 20000 Fig. 2 (Matsuya et al.) Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 2 ]" Matsuya et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20200220158 A1, equivalent to WO. Pat. No. 2019077953 A1) in view of Lee et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20070020515 A1) . Regarding Claim 1, Matsuya et al. teaches a zinc secondary battery (Title), comprising: a unit cell ([0008]), comprising: a positive electrode plate including a positive electrode active material layer ([0008]); a negative electrode plate including a negative electrode active material layer containing at least one selected from the group consisting of zinc, zinc oxide, a zinc alloy, and a zinc compound ([0008]); a nonwoven fabric covering or wrapping up each of the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate ([0041]-[0042]) teach a liquid retention material 20 including a non-woven fabric in which can cover or wrap the negative electrode plate 16 ; the positive electrode plate 12 ([0031]) can further be wrapped with the nonwoven fabric 20 , see Fig. 2). a hydroxide ion conductive separator separating the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate so as to make hydroxide ions conductable (layered double hydroxide (LDH) separator, [0008]; the LDH separator conducts hydroxide ions, [0054]); and an electrolytic solution ([0008]); and a battery container housing the unit cell ([0005]-[0006]), wherein each of the positive electrode plate 12 , the negative electrode plate 16 , and the hydroxide ion conductive separator 22 is vertically arranged ([0047] teaches said vertical arrangement in which the one closed edge of the separator resides on the bottom while the connector tabs extend from opposite (top) edges), Matsuya et al. does not teach that an excessive portion of the electrolytic solution is always retained on a bottom of the battery container in an amount corresponding to a liquid level lower than lower ends of the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate regardless of change in an amount of the electrolyte caused by charge/discharge; and wherein the nonwoven fabric has a lower extension portion contactable with the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution, and a lower end of the lower extension portion is always positioned below the liquid level of the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution regardless of change in an amount of the electrolyte caused by charge/discharge, whereby the nonwoven fabric is capable of absorbing the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution by capillary action thereof upward from the lower end thereof. Lee et al. teaches an excessive portion of the electrolytic solution in which is retained on a bottom of the battery container in an amount corresponding to a liquid level lower than lower ends of the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate ([0009] teaches an electrolyte in which is injected into a battery container (case) and a portion analogous to an excessive portion of the electrolytic solution is formed at the bottom of the battery container, [0073]; the bottom insulator plate 245 , formed of a non-woven fabric, is located below lower ends of the positive electrode plate 210 and negative electrode plate 220 , [0074]). One of ordinary skill in the art would expect the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution to always be retained at the bottom of the battery regardless of a change in an amount of the electrolyte caused by charge/discharge based on the absorption capabilities of the nonwoven fabric in which is located at a bottom of the battery container of Lee et al.; “Office personnel may also take into account ‘the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ.’ Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396” (see MPEP 2141.03,I). Lee et al. further teaches that the non-woven fabric ([0031]) comprises a bottom or lower portion contactable with the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution ([0035]), allowing the electrolyte located at a bottom of the case to be absorbed and impregnated into the electrode assembly ([0074]); [0073] teaches that the non-woven fabric comprises a liquid-absorbing property comparable to a diaper or a wet towel in which a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would consider to be a process analogous to capillary action as claimed, in which allows the absorption of the electrolyte upward from a lower end thereof. A person having ordinary skill in the art would expect a lower end of the lower portion to be positioned below the liquid level of the excessive portion the electrolytic solution to allow sufficient absorption of the electrolyte as the non-woven fabric covers the surface of the bottom of the container ([0073]) (see MPEP 2141.03,I). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nonwoven fabric covering or wrapping up the positive electrode plate of Matsuya et al. to have an excessive portion of the electrolytic solution retained on a bottom of the battery container in an amount corresponding to a liquid level lower than lower ends of the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate, (a skilled artisan would expect the electrolyte to always be retained on a bottom of the battery container within the nonwoven fabric regardless of a change in an amount of the electrolyte caused by charge/discharge based on the electrolyte absorption capabilities of the nonwoven fabric in which is located at a bottom of the battery container of Lee et al., see MPEP 2141.03,I). and a lower portion contactable with an excessive portion of the electrolytic solution of the electrolytic solution, and a lower end of the lower portion positioned below the liquid level of the excessive potion of the electrolytic solution, whereby the nonwoven fabric is capable of absorbing the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution by capillary action thereof upward from the lower end thereof as taught or suggested by Lee et al. As the non-woven fabric is located at a bottom of the container of Lee et al., one of ordinary skill in the art would expect a lower end of the lower portion to always be positioned below the liquid level of the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to a PHOSITA to utilize known techniques to provide the non-woven fabric of Matsuya et al. at a bottom end surface of the battery container as taught by Lee et al; known methods can include extending the non-woven fabric to a bottom end of the electrode assembly and battery container providing a lower extension portion; one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to maximize absorption of the electrolyte while also improving the use of materials and production time (using the existing non-woven fabric rather than adding additional pieces below). Extending the non-woven fabric involves merely integrating the non-woven fabric at the closed edge of Matsuya et al. with the non-woven fabric located at the bottom surface of the container as modified by Lee et al.; whereas, making elements integral is generally recognized as within the ambit of a skilled artisan (MPEP 2144.04.V.B.). Further, "Applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. , 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.)." One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the described modification by Lee et al. to enhance the absorbing ability of the electrolyte ([0074]) in which reduces the overall battery manufacturing time and improves productivity ([0081]). Regarding Claim 2, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the nonwoven fabric is in contact with one surface of the positive electrode plate and the nonwoven fabric is in contact with another surface of the positive electrode plate (Fig. 2 shows the nonwoven fabric 20 wrapped around the positive electrode plate 12 providing nonwoven fabric on both sides of the electrode plate). Matsuya et al. teaches thermally mutually welding a surface corresponding to the closed folded edge ([0050]) of the negative electrode plate (16) in which is located at a bottom surface of the battery container when arranged according to a preferred embodiment as applied to Claim 1; it is preferred that the non-woven fabric is held by the LDH separator and indirectly welded to provide an effective sealing effect ([0050]). Matsuya et al. does not directly teach that the lower extension portions thereof are thermally welded to together form a welded portion, and a remaining part of the lower extension portions is an unwelded portion not thermally welded, and a lower end of the unwelded portion is always positioned below the liquid level of the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution. However, when performing the described modification of Matsuya et al. in view of Lee et al. as applied to Claim 1, it would be obvious to provide lower extension portions in which together form a welded portion and an unwelded portion. As Matsuya et al. only suggests indirect thermal wedding via the LDH separator of the negative electrode plate; and does not teach direct welding of the non-woven fabric, it would be obvious for the welded portion to exist along the lower extension portion of the negative electrode plate as the negative electrode plate includes an LDH separator around the non- woven fabric; and for an unwelded portion to exist along the lower extension portion of the positive electrode as the positive electrode plate does not include the LDH separator. One of ordinary skill in the art would avoid directly welding the non-woven fabric to prevent negatively affecting the absorption capabilities. It would be obvious for a lower end of the unwelded portion to always be positioned below the liquid level of the excessive portion of the electrolytic solution as Lee et al. teaches direct contact between the nonwoven fabric and the battery container in which the electrolytic solution and said configuration ensures maximum absorption of the electrolyte. Regarding Claim 3, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the nonwoven fabric has a thickness of 20 μm to 100 μm (0.02 to 0.1 mm), within and overlapping the claimed range of 50 to 150 μm . "In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976)" (see MPEP 2144.05.I). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 4, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the non-woven fabric can be composed of thermoplastic resin such as polyethylene or polypropylene in which are polyolefins ([004 3 ] , [0062] ). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 5, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the negative electrode plate (16) is covered or wrapped up with the hydroxide ion conductive separator (33) from outside the nonwoven fabric (20) in which covers or wraps up the negative electrode plate ([0041]-[0042], Fig. 2). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 6, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As applied to Claim 1, Matsuya et al. teaches that the hydroxide ion conductive separator is a layered double hydroxide (LDH) separator, [0008]. Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 7, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 6 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the LDH separator further includes a porous substrate, and is composited with the porous substrate with the LDH filled in pores in the porous substrate ([0044]). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 8, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the porous substrate is made of a polymer material ([0050]). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 9, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the positive electrode active material layer contains nickel hydroxide, whereby the zinc secondary battery is configured as a nickel zinc secondary battery ([0030]). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 10, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches wherein the positive electrode active material layer is an air electrode layer ([0030] teaches a positive air electrode in which implicates air electrode layer as the positive electrode active material layer), whereby the zinc secondary battery is configured as an air-zinc secondary battery ([0030]). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Regarding Claim 11, Matsuya et al. is modified by Lee et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Matsuya et al. teaches that the zinc secondary battery comprises a plurality of the unit cells 11 ([0030]), whereby the plurality of the unit cells form a multilayer cell as a whole ([0050] teaches the multiple unit cells forming a stacked-cell battery providing a multilayer configuration). Therefore, all claim limitations are met. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize the teachings of Matsuya et al. to provide a secondary zinc battery in which can block propagation of zinc dendrites in a simple configuration that is easy to assemble and easy to collect electricity ([0007]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHRISTINA RENEE DAULTON whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (703)756-5413 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT ULA RUDDOCK can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-1481 . 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. /C.R.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 1729 /ULA C RUDDOCK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729