DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 and 20-21 are presented for examination, wherein claim 15 is currently amended; plus, claims 1-14 are withdrawn. Claims 16-19 are cancelled.
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 § 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 15 and newly added claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al (WO 2023/121364, with citations to US 2024/0421391).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 15, Hwang teaches a battery case (e.g. item 100) for a secondary battery, wherein said battery case is formed from a pouch film laminate body (e.g. item 1) with excellent moldability and less curling after molding a cup portion with a large molding depth, pouch film laminate body with layers stacked directly adjacently as provided below:
(i) a base layer (e.g. item 10) disposed on an outermost layer of said battery case to protect an electrode assembly from external impacts and to electrically insulate said electrode assembly,
wherein said base layer may have a single-layered structure, or may have a multi-layered structure in which different polymer films (e.g. item 12) and (e.g. item 14) are laminated, and
wherein said base layer may be composed of a polymer material, such as e.g. polyethylene terephthalate, wherein an express example provides said base layer may be said laminate structure including a polyethylene terephthalate film on an outer surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 12) and a nylon film on an inner surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 10), with an adhesive layer (e.g. item 16a) may be interposed therebetween;
(ii) a gas barrier layer (e.g. item 20) stacked directly adjacently to said base layer to secure mechanical strength of said battery case, block access of gas, moisture or the like outside said secondary battery, and prevent leakage of an electrolyte,
wherein said gas barrier layer may be composed of aluminum alloy, such as e.g. alloy number AA8021; and,
(iii) a sealant layer (e.g. item 30) disposed on an innermost layer of said battery case, stacked directly adjacently to said gas barrier layer, to completely seal an inside and block movement of substances between the inside and the outside,
wherein said base layer may have a single-layered structure, or may have a multi-layered structure including two or more layers composed of different polymer materials,
wherein said sealant layer may be composed of a polymer material, such as e.g. at least one of polypropylene, cast polypropylene, and acid-modified polypropylene,
wherein said battery case includes at least one cup portion (e.g. item 110a/b), with a space (e.g. item 112) for accommodating an electrode assembly (not shown) and an electrolyte (not shown), prepared by drawing-molding said pouch film laminate body by using a punch or the like, such that a slope of an edge portion of said cup portion may be formed to be large, and curling may be minimized after cup molding;
wherein said battery case comprises a lower case (e.g. item 110) and an upper case (e.g. item 120), and said cup portion be formed only in one of said lower case (e.g. item 110), said upper case (e.g. item 120), or both; and,
wherein said upper case (e.g. item 120) is folded to be placed on an upper end of said lower case (e.g. item 110) such that edge portions of said upper case and lower case are thermally compressed to perform a sealing process, such that that said electrode assembly and said electrolyte are isolated from the outside
(e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 09-17 , 33-35, 41-44, 46-48, 50-56, and 60-68 plus e.g. Figures 1 and 3-4), reading on “pouch wall for sealing a battery;” alternatively, the preamble limitation “for sealing a battery” is interpreted as merely intended use and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention, see also e.g. MPEP § 2111.02, said battery case comprising:
(1) said base layer (e.g. item 10) on said outermost layer of said battery case, wherein said base layer may be composed of said polymer material, such as e.g. polyethylene terephthalate, wherein said express example provides said base layer may be said laminate structure including said polyethylene terephthalate film on said outer surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 12) and said nylon film on an inner surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 10), with said adhesive layer (e.g. item 16a) may be interposed therebetween (e.g. supra), reading on “a first layer comprising a first polymer,…;”
(2) said gas barrier layer (e.g. item 20) stacked directly adjacently to said base layer, wherein said gas barrier layer may be composed of aluminum alloy, such as e.g. alloy number AA8021 (e.g. supra), reading on the newly amended limitation incorporating some of the subject matter of former claim 19, “a second layer comprising a metal, wherein the metal comprises aluminum, copper or stainless steel” and the newly added limitation incorporating some of the subject matter of former claim 16 “the second layer is adjacent to the first layer;” and,
(3) said sealant layer (e.g. item 30) disposed on said innermost layer of said battery case, stacked directly adjacently to said gas barrier layer, wherein said sealant layer may be composed of said polymer material, such as e.g. at least one of polypropylene, cast polypropylene, and acid-modified polypropylene (e.g. supra), reading on “a third layer comprising a second polymer” and the newly added limitation incorporating some of the subject matter of former claim 16 “the third layer is adjacent to the second layer,”
wherein said base layer may be made of said polymer material, such as e.g. polyethylene terephthalate; and, said sealant layer may be composed of said polymer material, such as e.g. at least one of polypropylene, cast polypropylene, and acid-modified polypropylene (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach polyethylene terephthalate is a “thermoplastic polymer resin,” polypropylene is a “thermoplastic polymer resin,” or “the first thermoplastic polymer resin and the second thermoplastic polymer resin having differing melting points.”
However, Hwang severably teaches substantially identical polymers (e.g. said base layer composed of polyethylene terephthalate; and, said sealant layer composed of polypropylene, see e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0011, 15, 18-19), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed properties, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01, reading on the newly added limitations incorporating some of the subject matter of former claim 19 “the first polymer comprises a first thermoplastic polymer resin;” “the second polymer comprises a second thermoplastic polymer resin;” and, “the first thermoplastic polymer resin and the second thermoplastic polymer resin having differing melting points,”
Hwang teaches said battery case is formed from said pouch film laminate body, wherein said upper case (e.g. item 120) is folded to be placed on said upper end of said lower case (e.g. item 110) such that edge portions of said upper case and lower case are thermally compressed to perform said sealing process, such that that said electrode assembly and said electrolyte are isolated from the outside (e.g. supra, see also Annotated Figure 3, infra), wherein the process limitation “fold” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2113; and, folding said upper case to be placed on said upper end of said lower case forms a fold that establishes a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range “approximately 180 degrees, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I),
said upper case and a lip portion of said lower case adjacent to said upper case (see annotated Figure 3, infra) correspond with the claimed “edge,”
reading on “the first layer, the second layer and the third layer comprise an edge,…” but does not expressly teach the limitation incorporating the subject matter of former claim 18 “the third layer is longer than the first layer.”
However, differences in shape do not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B), see further instant specification, at e.g. ¶0038; alternatively, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design said base layer, gas barrier layer, and sealant layer to be of equal length to one another, in order to provide a uniformly thick laminate body, thereby easing handling during manufacturing, wherein said layers having equal lengths to one another is sufficiently close to the claimed relationship “longer than,” to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), noting e.g. that even an angstrom longer in length reads on said limitation, as claimed, see further instant specification, at e.g. ¶0038.
Hwang teaches said battery case is formed from said pouch film laminate body, wherein said upper case (e.g. item 120) is folded to be placed on said upper end of said lower case (e.g. item 110) such that edge portions of said upper case and lower case are thermally compressed to perform said sealing process, such that that said electrode assembly and said electrolyte are isolated from the outside (e.g. supra, see also Annotated Figure 3, infra), wherein the process limitation “fold” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2113; and, folding said upper case to be placed on said upper end of said lower case forms a fold that establishes a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range “approximately 180 degrees, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I),
said upper case and a lip portion of said lower case adjacent to said upper case (see annotated Figure 3, infra) correspond with the claimed “edge,”
reading on the newly added limitation incorporating the cancelled subject matter within claim 15, “the edge comprises a first fold of approximately 180 degrees;” and/or, differences in shape do not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B), see further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0018 and 35;
wherein said battery case includes at least one cup portion (e.g. item 110a/b), with said space (e.g. item 112) for accommodating said electrode assembly (not shown) and said electrolyte (not shown), prepared by drawing-molding said pouch film laminate body by using said punch or the like, such that said slope of said edge portion of said cup portion may be formed to be large, and curling may be minimized after cup molding (e.g. supra), wherein the process limitation “fold” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2113; and, said draw molding to form a large slope of said edge portion of said cup portion establishes a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range “approximately 90 degrees, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on newly added limitation incorporating the cancelled subject matter within claim 15, “the edge comprises…a second fold of approximately 90 degrees,” as claimed; and/or, differences in shape do not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B), see further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0018 and 35; and,
wherein said battery case is formed from said pouch film laminate body; and, said base layer may have said multi-layered structure, wherein said express example provides said base layer may be said laminate structure including said polyethylene terephthalate film on said outer surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 12) and said nylon film on said inner surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 10), with said adhesive layer (e.g. item 16a) may be interposed therebetween (e.g. supra), wherein said adhesive layer on a side wall of said lower case and/or said lip portion of said lower case portion reading on the newly added limitation incorporating similar subject matter to that of former claim 17 “the edge comprises…an adhesive positioned adjacent to the second fold,” as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
637
954
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding newly added claims 20-21, Hwang is applied as provided supra, with the following modifications.
Still regarding newly added independent claim 20, Hwang teaches said secondary battery comprising said battery case (e.g. item 100), wherein said battery case is formed from said pouch film laminate body (e.g. item 1) with excellent moldability and less curling after molding a cup portion with a large molding depth, said pouch film laminate comprising:
(1) said base layer (e.g. item 10) on said outermost layer of said battery case, wherein said base layer may be composed of said polymer material, such as e.g. polyethylene terephthalate, wherein said express example provides said base layer may be said laminate structure including said polyethylene terephthalate film on said outer surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 12) and said nylon film on an inner surface of said base layer (i.e. e.g. item 10), with said adhesive layer (e.g. item 16a) may be interposed therebetween;”
(2) said gas barrier layer (e.g. item 20) stacked directly adjacently to said base layer, wherein said gas barrier layer may be composed of aluminum alloy, such as e.g. alloy number AA8021; and,
(3) said sealant layer (e.g. item 30) disposed on said innermost layer of said battery case, stacked directly adjacently to said gas barrier layer, wherein said sealant layer may be composed of said polymer material, such as e.g. at least one of polypropylene, cast polypropylene, and acid-modified polypropylene
(e.g. supra),
said battery case formed from said pouch film laminate body corresponding with the claimed “a layered pouch wall housing;” and,
said pouch film laminate body (see e.g. supra for layers of said laminate) corresponding with the claimed “at least one thermoplastic resin layer containing multiple resins with different melting points,
reading on “A battery comprising a layered pouch wall housing, the housing comprising at least one thermoplastic resin layer containing multiple resins with different melting points.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, the applicant alleges the following.
As amended, claim 15 is not rendered obvious by Hwang. Although the Office Action alleges that Hwang’s folded battery case generally corresponds to the claimed folded edge structure, Hwang does not teach or suggest the specific claimed relationship that the third layer is longer than the first layer at the edge together with an adhesive positioned adjacent to the second fold. The Office Action acknowledges that Hwang does not expressly disclose the “third layer is longer than the first layer” limitation and instead reasons that equal lengths would be “sufficiently close” to the claimed relationship. That rationale is insufficient. “Longer than” is a direct structural requirement, not an approximation or result-effective variable. A laminate in which two layers are equal in length does not disclose, and would not inherently render obvious, a laminate in which one specified layer extends beyond another at the edge.
(Remarks, at 6:4.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that as provided in the prior and instant Office actions, there does not appear to be patentable significance to the shape of the third layer being “longer than” the second layer, citing instant specification, at e.g. ¶0038.
[0038] Example No. 18 includes all the features of Example Nos. 15-17, and optionally includes a pouch wall wherein the third layer is longer than the first layer.
(Instant specification, at e.g. ¶0038, emphasis added.)
Further, the examiner noted that equal length layers is “sufficiently close” to the relative relationship “longer than,” as claimed. As a first example, if the third layer is 100.0000001 mm long and the first layer is 100.0000000 mm long, then the example reads on the limitation, as claimed, even though the third layer is only 0. 0000001 mm longer than the first layer.
In comparison, if the third and first layer are each 100.0000000 mm long, then the comparison’s 100.0000000 mm length is “sufficiently close” to the first example’s 100. 0000001 mm length.
Finally, the examiner respectfully notes that it appears that the argument is intended to suggest that the third layer is on an outer side of said folds. However, the scope of the argument is not commensurate with the claim, as claimed, see e.g. supra.
The examiner respectfully notes that the direction of said two folds has not been claimed and further notes that the “first fold” and “second fold” have not been claimed (1) relative to one another (e.g. proximal/distal/co-radial) and not been claimed (2) relative (e.g. proximal/distal) to the center/edge of the pouch wall.
Second, the applicant alleges the following.
Nor does Hwang teach or suggest the presently claimed adhesive placement. The rejection points to an adhesive layer that may be interposed within Hwang’s multilayer base layer and equates that internal lamination adhesive with “an adhesive positioned adjacent to the second fold.” However, an internal adhesive used between constituent films of a base layer is structurally and functionally different from an adhesive intentionally positioned adjacent to the second fold of the folded edge, as now claimed. The present application discloses this arrangement in the context of the folded edge geometry shown in FIGS. 3B and 3C, where the adhesive is placed next to the 90-degree fold. See para. [0018]. Hwang does not disclose such placement, and the Office Action does not provide a sufficient reason why one of ordinary skill would have modified Hwang's structure to relocate or provide adhesive adjacent to the second fold while also forming the third layer longer than the first layer at the edge.
The added thermoplastic-resin limitations further clarify the claimed laminate structure. While Hwang may mention polymers that can be used in certain layers, the present claim requires first and second thermoplastic polymer resins having differing melting points in the specific folded-edge pouch wall recited in claim 15, together with the above-noted edge-length and adhesive- placement limitations. The rejection does not identify a teaching or suggestion in Hwang of that claimed combination as a whole. Accordingly, the cited reference does not teach or render obvious amended claim 15.
(Remarks, at 7:1-2.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that the argument is not commensurate with the scope of the claim, as claimed.
While a claim is read in light of a specification, the specification is not read into the claims, see e.g. MPEP § 2111.
Here, the adhesive within the pouch film laminate body, noting said adhesive layer on a side wall of said lower case and/or said lip portion of said lower case portion reading on “an adhesive positioned adjacent to the second fold,” as claimed.
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 YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights