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 .
Foreign Priority Documents
The Chinese foreign priority document(s) CN 202211391375.6, submitted under 35 U.S.C. § 119 (a)-(d), was/were been received on January 8, 2024, and placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed December 1, 2023, March 11, 2024, September 24, 2024, October 10, 2025, & April 21, 2026 has/have been received and complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner, and an initialed copied is attached herewith.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-6, drawn to a design method in the reply filed on July 27, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that:
Applicant respectfully submits that the amendments eliminate the basis for maintaining the restriction. Restriction is appropriate only when an application claims two or more independent and distinct inventions. 37 C.F.R. § 1.142(a). Here, claims 7-20 no longer define inventions that are independent of the elected design method. Rather, each of claims 7-20 now expressly requires a connection sheet made by that method, either directly through claim 7 or indirectly through claim 14. Thus, the subject matter of claims 7-20 necessarily includes the elected invention and cannot be practiced within the scope of those claims without satisfying the limitations of elected claim 1.
This is not found persuasive because the amendments do not overcome the considerations of the groups in changing dependency. Group I does not require the consideration of the battery charging/discharging (Group II) or features of the battery (Group III).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-6 are pending, claims 7-20 are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 & 2 are objected to because of the following informalities: the comma in “, of the connection sheet” separates the connection sheet from the elements composing the connection sheet. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morin et al. US-20200373584-A1.
With respect to claim 1, Morin teaches a design method for a connection sheet (connection sheet; Fig. 38), comprising: obtaining an area S of a welding region (area S; 1158; at the finished weld 1156; [0166]; Fig. 38), connectable to a tab of the connection sheet (area S is welding on the tab; [0166]; Fig. 38); dividing the connection sheet into a first effective region and a second effective region (first effective region and a second effective region; Fig. 38), wherein the first effective region is a region, having a regular shape of the connection sheet (first effective region is rectangular; Examiner Note: the tab area may be divided into regions) Fig. 38), the second effective region is a region connectable to a terminal post of the connection sheet (second effective region; Fig. 38; Examiner Note: the tab is connectable or capable of connecting to terminal posts); the first effective region is implemented as N first effective regions, N 1, and a plurality of first effective regions are connected on the same side of the second effective region (20) (The limited number of welds thus reduces, as well, the number of possible runaway charge sites, albeit with each exhibiting limited amperage, but with multiples such levels show increases in some situations, certainly. However, for high power or high current batteries, the number of welds per tab can be increased to accommodate the high amount of current needed for the battery to be effective in its application. In this case, it is possible to require a larger number of welds, potentially as many as 10, or 20, or even 50 welds per tab; Examiner Note: each weld is accommodated in a first effective region; claim 1). Examiner’s Note: The design method is embraced because the tab configuration of Morin (Fig. 38) is identical to the configuration of the instant clams. See Fig. 1 in the instant specification.
PNG
media_image1.png
489
978
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, wherein obtaining the area S of the welding region, connectable to the tab, of the connection sheet comprises: obtaining an area of a part of the connection sheet where the tab is subject to continuous overcurrent and having temperature rise less than a set threshold as the area S of the welding region (a welding operation may utilize ultrasonic, heat application (through an anvil, for instance). Such applications may include the utilization of a single anvil or multiple anvils simultaneously within a grid that applies to and over a certain region of the tab and current collector/electrode bodies; [0046]).
Morin does not teach or suggest: determining a gauge size of the first effective region according to S=a*S1, a being in a range of 0.095-0.96, and S1 being an area of the first effective region (claim 1); determining the gauge size of the first effective region comprises: when the welding region is in a shape of rectangle, a length of the first effective region is x1 and a width of the first effective region is y1, and a length of the welding region is x2 and a width of the welding region is y2, determining the length of the first effective region and the width of the first effective region according to x2=m*x1, y2= n*y1, a=m*n, m being in a range of 0.1-0.95, and n being in a range of 0.1-0.95 (claim 3); determining the gauge size of the first effective region comprises: when the welding region is in a shape of circle, a width of the first effective region is y1, and a radius of the welding region is r1, determining a length of the first effective region and the width of the first effective region according to r1 < 0.95y1 (claim 4); determining the gauge size of the first effective region comprises: when the welding region is in a shape of oval, a longitudinal axis of the welding region is parallel to a width direction of the first effective region, a length of the longitudinal axis of the welding region is L1, and a width of the first effective region is y1, determining a length of the first effective region and the width of the first effective region according to LI:y1 = (0.2-0.95):1(claim 5); adjacent first effective regions are spaced apart by a distance of w1, a width of each of the plurality of first effective regions is w2, a width of the second effective region is w3, and w3=w1+N*w2, N being the number of the plurality of first effective regions (claim 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ determining a gauge size of the first effective region according to S=a*S1, a being in a range of 0.095-0.96, and S1 being an area of the first effective region (claim 1); in the design method of Morin, in order to improve metal conduction. The design method is embraced because the tab configuration of Morin (Fig. 38) is identical to the configuration of the instant clams. See Fig. 1 in the instant specification. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Furthermore, "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to determining the gauge size of the first effective region comprises: when the welding region is in a shape of rectangle, a length of the first effective region is x1 and a width of the first effective region is y1, and a length of the welding region is x2 and a width of the welding region is y2, determining the length of the first effective region and the width of the first effective region according to x2=m*x1, y2= n*y1, a=m*n, m being in a range of 0.1-0.95, and n being in a range of 0.1-0.95 (claim 3); in the design method of Morin, in order to improve metal conduction. The design method is embraced because the tab configuration of Morin (Fig. 38) is identical to the configuration of the instant clams. See Fig. 1 in the instant specification. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to determining the gauge size of the first effective region comprises: when the welding region is in a shape of circle, a width of the first effective region is y1, and a radius of the welding region is r1, determining a length of the first effective region and the width of the first effective region according to r1 < 0.95y1 (claim 4); in the design method of Morin, in order to improve metal conduction. The design method is embraced because the tab configuration of Morin (Fig. 38) is identical to the configuration of the instant clams. See Fig. 1 in the instant specification. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Furthermore, "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to determining the gauge size of the first effective region comprises: when the welding region is in a shape of oval, a longitudinal axis of the welding region is parallel to a width direction of the first effective region, a length of the longitudinal axis of the welding region is L1, and a width of the first effective region is y1, determining a length of the first effective region and the width of the first effective region according to LI:y1 = (0.2-0.95):1 (claim 5); in the design method of Morin, in order to improve metal conduction. The design method is embraced because the tab configuration of Morin (Fig. 38) is identical to the configuration of the instant clams. See Fig. 1 in the instant specification. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Furthermore, "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to adjacent first effective regions are spaced apart by a distance of w1, a width of each of the plurality of first effective regions is w2, a width of the second effective region is w3, and w3=w1+N*w2, N being the number of the plurality of first effective regions (claim 6); in the design method of Morin, in order to improve metal conduction. The design method is embraced because the tab configuration of Morin (Fig. 38) is identical to the configuration of the instant clams. See Fig. 1 in the instant specification. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Duplication of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Furthermore, "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chen et al. US-20210276134-A1 teaches metalworking systems for joining metallic workpieces, methods for forming and welding such workpieces, and lithium-ion battery pouch cells with anodized aluminum tabs joined via knurling and laser welding. See the Abstract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Monique Wills whose telephone number is (571) 272-1309. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30am to 5:00 pm.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONIQUE M WILLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1309. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Tiffany Legette, may 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Monique M Wills/
Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
