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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of a process (claims 1-15) in the reply filed on July 16, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the identified groups share common structural components, have an overlapping field of search, and searching Groups I and II would not impose a serious search/examination burden. This is not found persuasive because the product of Group I and the process of Group II would require distinctly different searches based on classification and terminology. Example representative classifications of each group are as follows:
Group I: H01M50/103; H01M50/131; H01M50/15; H01M50/30
Group II: H01M50/60; H01M50/609; H01M50/618; H01M50/636
It should be noted that Claim 10 in Group II imposes a limitation regarding prismatic cells, corresponding with H01M50/103, but a single dependent claim with an overlap in one classification category does not substantially alleviate the search/examination burden.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 16-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on July 16, 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
In FIG. 3A, the part reference 300A is present, but is not described in the specification
In FIG. 3C, the part reference 300C is present, but is not described in the specification
In FIG. 4A, the part reference 400A is present, but is not described in the specification
Further, the drawings are objected to because in FIG. 5, Step 562 should be rewritten as “Introduce liquid electrolyte to interior of battery container having electrodes therein” and Step 564 should be rewritten as “Apply pressure above atmospheric pressure to an interior of the container”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Paragraph [0042], “In the implementations of battery module 115a and battery module 115a,” should read as “In the implementations of battery module 115a and battery module 115b,”
In Paragraph [0043], the statement “For example, the battery module 115d includes a battery module housing 211 in which the length of the battery module housing 211 is substantially greater than a width of the battery module housing 211. In this regard, the battery module 115d (representative of one or more similar battery modules) may span the entire front-to-back length of a battery pack within a battery pack frame.” first appears. This exact statement is repeated in [0045] and seems to be out of place and should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Günther et al (DE 102022100863 A1). A version of this document, translated by Espacenet, has been attached to provide paragraph numbers for better identifying where the claims are anticipated by the art.
Regarding Claims 1 and 11,
PNG
media_image1.png
762
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gunther teaches a container (cell body 12) comprising an open face (upper opening 14), a bottom face (bottom area 18), and one or more sidewalls (wall area 16) that extend upward from the bottom face 18, where the area of the open face 14 is approximately equal to the area of the bottom face 18 (Paragraph [0032]; FIG. 1) and the container 12 includes electrodes (electrode arrangement 36) therein (Paragraph [0039]). A liquid electrolyte 40 is introduced to the container 12 through the open face 14 (Paragraph [0041]).
Regarding Claim 7,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 1, and further teaches sealing a cap (lid assembly 42) over the open face 14 and side walls 16 to seal the container 12 after adding the electrolyte 40 (Paragraph [0043]).
Regarding Claim 8,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 1, wherein the area of the open face 14 relative to the bottom face 18 is not particularly limited and appears to be approximately 100% as seen in FIG. 1.
Regarding Claim 10,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 1 and that although the embodiment is of a cylindrical cell, it can be applied to other shapes, such as prismatic cells (Paragraph [0029]).
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.
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunther.
Regarding Claim 9,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 1 and describes the cylindrical cell being cut from a metal material having a diameter of several tens of millimeters (Paragraph [0031]). Although Gunther is silent on a specific diameter, the minimum value of a plurality of tens would be 20, so the diameter of the material would be 20 mm and the radius would be 10 mm. This would result in a minimum cross-sectional area of the open face of approx. 314 mm2 (A=πr2), which is greater than 250 mm2.
Claim(s) 2-4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunther in view of Nielsen et al (US 20100175235 A1).
Regarding Claims 2-4 and 12,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 1 (in relation to claims 2-4) and the process of claim 11 (in relation to claim 12), but is silent on any modifications relating to the interior pressure of the container 12 after introducing the liquid electrolyte 40.
However, Nielsen teaches a backfilling method of connecting a container (capacitor) to a vacuum source and a liquid electrolyte reservoir and adjusting the pressure of the interior of the container to remove gas and introduce electrolyte to the interior (Paragraphs [0036-0042]. By using the vacuum to evacuate the container, the interior pressure of the container is reduced from atmospheric pressure and gas is displaced from the container and the liquid electrolyte is able to wet the electrodes. Additionally, the container may be charged with greater than atmospheric pressure, which moves liquid electrolyte to the electrodes and displaces the gas. This increased pressure may also be achieved mechanically through a syringe. Nielsen also teaches optional re-evacuation of the container after an initial backfilling, indicating the process can cycle through iterations of applying reduced pressure and applying increased pressure. Nielsen describes gas bubbles remaining in the container as interfering with performance of the capacitor and relates size of bubbles to the pressure and empty volume remaining in the container.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the methods taught by Nielsen of reducing and applying pressure to the interior of the container in order to reduce the size and frequency of bubbles present in the container taught by Gunther for the purpose of improving performance.
Claim(s) 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunther in view of Takada (KR 20130006683 A).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 1 (in relation to claim 6) and the process of claim 11 (in relation to claim 15), but is silent on the process taking place inside a hermetically sealed chamber under an inert atmosphere.
However, Takada teaches an electrolytic solution injecting apparatus 1 which includes a hermetically sealed chamber (decompression chamber 2). Takada also teaches an atmosphere introducing line 6 connected to the decompression chamber, which may be optionally connected to a storage tank for inert gas. Operating in a hermetically sealed, inert environment prevents unwanted contaminants from external sources, therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the process taught by Gunther to use the decompression chamber disclosed by Takada to better ensure reliability of the filling process and performance of Gunther’s energy storage cell.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunther in view of Horiuchi (JP 2022120351 A).
Regarding Claim 14,
Gunther teaches the process of claim 11, but does not teach an electrically connected, offset cap assembly during liquid electrolyte introduction.
PNG
media_image2.png
822
670
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Horiuchi teaches an electrolyte injection device 1 and cell batteries 82 and a battery module 8 with integrated open ends 83 that act as a lid after electrolyte 84 is added (Fig 2). The electrolyte is added to the cell battery 82 while the ends 83 are open and after injection and degassing, the ends are closed and sealed.
Horiuchi teaches this design prevents electrolyte from adhering to the sealing portion of the battery case using a simple and inexpensive configuration. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the integrated, electrically connected lid in an offset position taught by Horiuchi in order to reliably distribute the electrolyte in a simple, cost-reductive manner.
Claim(s) 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gunther in view of Nielsen as applied to claims 2-4 and 12 above, and further in view of Takada.
Regarding Claims 5 and 13,
In view of Nielsen, Gunther teaches the process of claim 4 (in relation to claim 5) and the process of claim 12 (in relation to claim 13), but is silent on the process taking place inside a hermetically sealed chamber under an inert atmosphere.
However, Takada teaches an electrolytic solution injecting apparatus 1 which includes a hermetically sealed chamber (decompression chamber 2). Takada also teaches an atmosphere introducing line 6 connected to the decompression chamber, which may be optionally connected to a storage tank for inert gas.
Operating in a hermetically sealed, inert environment prevents unwanted contaminants from external sources, therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the container taught by Nielsen to use the decompression chamber disclosed by Takada to better ensure reliability of the filling process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M KNOWLAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00am - 4:30pm.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571)272-8519. 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.
/KEVIN M KNOWLAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights