DETAILED ACTION
Application 18/552194, “POWER STORAGE DEVICE”, is the national stage entry of a PCT application filed on 3/23/22 and claims priority from a foreign application filed on 3/30/21.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action on the merits is in response to communication filed on 8/6/26.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 8/6/26 have been fully considered, but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by amendment.
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.
Claims 2 and 9 is/are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the clause “wherein the first tab protrudes from an outer peripheral side of the first exposed part with respect to a midpoint of a line segment connecting a center of the first end surface of the wound body and a point on an outermost periphery of the first exposed part” is unclear.
Regarding claim 9, the clause “wherein the first tab protrudes from an outer peripheral side of the first exposed part beyond a midpoint of a line segment connecting a center of the first end surface of the wound body and a point on an outermost periphery of the second exposed part” is unclear.
More specifically, it is unclear what is meant by “with respect to” in claim 2 since the nature of the relativity is not described, and it is unclear what is meant by “a point on an outermost periphery of the first [or second] exposed part” in claims 2 and 9, respectively, since it is unclear what is the dimensional reference to determine the outermost periphery. As the particular requirements cannot be readily determined, the claim as worded is unclear. For the purposes of the art rejections below, it is presumed that prior art teaching tabs extending from the outer periphery of the exposed part of a wound electrode, such as illustrated in applicant’s Fig. 1, would read on the claimed limitation.
Appropriate correction or clarification 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Myerberg (US 2011/0212360), Kozuki (US 2009/0280406) and Taguchi (US 2015/0243453).
Regarding claims 1, 7, 8, 9 and 14, Myerberg teaches a power storage device (e.g. Figs. 1) comprising:
first and second electrodes each including a first current collector including an elongated sheet shape and a first active material layer supported on the first current collector, the first and second electrodes separated by a separator (paragraph [0047, 0090-0092]; Fig. 6B shows an exemplary elongated electrode) and formed into a wound body having a columnar shape (paragraph [0091]); an electrolyte (paragraph [0088]); and first and second current collecting plates (items 1 and 5 of Figs. 1 and 3) electrically connected to the first and second current collectors (electrical connection facilitated via items 2 and 5a).
Myerberg further teaches wherein for each of the first and second electrodes, a first end of the respective current collector along lengthwise is a first exposed part not including the respective active material layer and protruding from a respective end surface of the wound body, a respective tab protrudes from the first exposed part (see Figs. 1 and 6B, which illustrates a structure for “each of the electrodes” as described in paragraph [0090]).
Myerberg teaches that the power storage device may be a lithium battery (“Li-ion cell”, paragraph [0077]), but does not expressly teach that the electrolyte is a non-aqueous electrolyte.
In the battery art, Kozuki teaches that lithium ion batteries are a particular example of nonaqueous electrolyte batteries, the nonaqueous electrolyte being functional as a solvent to dissolve a lithium salt (paragraph [0066, 0081]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to employ a non-aqueous electrolyte within the device of Myerberg for the benefit of including an electrolyte suitable for dissolving a lithium salt to provide the lithium ions needed for a lithium-ion battery.
Regarding the 8/6/26 amendment to claim 1 and claim 7, Myerberg further teaches wherein the first tab is bent toward an inner peripheral side of the wound body so as to cover [with an interceding insulating disk 3] an inner peripheral portion of the first exposed part (Figs. 7 and 8) and teaches welding to facilitate electrical connections between the components (paragraphs [0096-0097]).
Due to the presence of the insulating plate 3; however, Meyerberg does not teach the bent first tab directly covering an inner peripheral side of the wound body [it is noted that direct covering is not required of claim 1], and does not teach the first current collecting plate is welded, via the first tab, to the inner peripheral portion of the first exposed part covered by the first tab. As to claim 7, Myerberg does not teach wherein a first insulating layer including a linear shape is disposed on a boundary between the associated exposed part and the associated active material layer.
In the battery art, Kozuki teaches a battery wherein a respective insulating layer including a linear shape is disposed on a boundary between the associated exposed part and the associated active material layer (Fig. 8A,8B item 21), for the benefit of serving as reinforcement (paragraph [0110-0112]). As best seen in Fig. 9 (and modified Fig. 9 below), the wound electrode is configured such that there is a region extending beyond the active material layers (items 1 and 2) which includes only the tab portions of the electrode, the insulating reinforcing members 21 and the insulating separator 3. Additionally, Kozuki teaches that the presence of the items 21 prevents the positive and negative electrode active material portions from being bent near the connection area (paragraph [0112]). Thus, the structural combination of the insulting layer 21 and the extended separators 3 provide an insulating region (see modified Fig. 9 below), where the oppositely charged electrodes are unable to contact, preventing short circuit.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to include a respective insulating layer including a linear shape is disposed on a boundary between the associated exposed part and the associated active material layer of Myerberg for the benefit of reinforcing the structure as taught by Kozuki.
PNG
media_image1.png
400
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Moreover, in such a Myerberg-Kozuki combined embodiment, the insulating disk 3 of Myerberg is unnecessary since the items 21 and extensions of items 3 provide an insulating region preventing shorting between the electrodes, the same purpose as the insulating disk 3 of Myerberg (Myerberg paragraph [0077]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to omit the insulating disk 3 of Myerberg, since it’s function is redundant in view of the inclusion of insulating reinforcements 21 (substituting for the insulating sheet a different item which provides the desired function). It is noted that a prima facie case of obviousness exists for the omission of a component when it’s function is no longer required or desired (MPEP 2144.04 II).
In view of this omission, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to weld the first current collecting plate, via the first tab, to the inner peripheral portion of the first exposed part covered by the first tab, for the benefit of facilitating a robust electrical pathway from the current collecting plate to the exposed part of the electrode, as no intervening insulating plate 3 is required to prevent such welding.
Furthermore, it is noted that such a structure where the current collector plate is welded directly to an exposed part of an electrode, via bent electrode tabs, was known in the battery art at the time of invention (see Taguchi at Figs. 4-7, particularly Fig. 7 which shows the current collecting plate 48-1,48-2 connected to bent electrode tabs 12N and connected by welding paragraph [0068]).
Thus, the claimed structure is obvious over the cited art as the insulating plate 3 of Myerberg may be replaced with insulating layer 21 of Kozuki, and removal of this plate facilitates direct connection/welding of the current conducting components, such as is disclosed by Taguchi.
Regarding claim 2 and 9, the cited art remains as applied to claim 2 and 8. Myerberg further teaches wherein the first tab protrudes from an outer peripheral side of the first exposed part with respect to a midpoint of a line segment connecting a center of the first end surface of the wound body and a point on an outermost periphery of the first exposed part (see Figs 1, 7 and 8 where tabs extend from the outer peripheral side of the exposed part of an electrode). As to claim 9, the second tab may have a corresponding structure and orientation as suggested by Fig. 1 which illustrates tabs 7 extending symmetrically compared to the first tabs 6 ).
Regarding claim 3 and 10, the cited art remains as applied to claim 2 and 9. Myerberg further teaches wherein the respective tab protrudes from an outermost periphery of the respective exposed part (see Fig. 6A, 6B with tabs extending from lower periphery, as illustrated).
Regarding claim 4, 11, 15 and 18, the cited art remains as applied to claim 1. Myerberg does not appear to teach wherein the first tab or the second tab is disposed by cutting out a part of an outermost periphery of the first current collector or the second current collector respectively, leaving a continuous part, and the first tab or the second tab folding back at the continuous part to a side of the first end surface or a side of the second end surface respectively, as required by claims 4, 11 and 18, or wherein the first current collecting plate or the second current collecting plate includes a cross shape as viewed along an axis of the wound body as required by claim 15.
In the battery art, Taguchi teaches wherein tabs are provided in a current collector by cutting out a part of an outermost periphery of the first current collector or the second current collector respectively, leaving a continuous part (e.g. Fig. 4), and folding back the tab at the continuous part to a side of a first end surface or a side of a second end surface respectively (see Figs. 6A, 6B) for the benefit of facilitating connection with another conductor of the battery such as a current collecting plate (paragraph [0066]). Taguchi further teaches a current collector plate having a cross shape (Fig. 7 item 48) designed to provide electrical connection to the current collector tabs (paragraph [0068]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the tabs of Myerberg by cutting, since this is a conventional technique for providing tabs in a current collector as taught by Taguchi, and further to fold back the tab at the continuous part to a side of a first end surface or a side of a second end surface respectively, for the benefit of facilitating connection with another conductor of the battery such as a current collecting plate as taught by Myerberg. Moreover, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the first current collecting plate or the second current collecting plate to include a cross shape for the benefit of facilitating electrical connection to the tab structure as taught by Taguchi.
It is noted that claim 1 is drawn to a product; therefore, the process steps described in these claims, for example cutting out, are only given weight in the structure implied by the recited process.
Regarding claim 5 and 13, the cited art remains as applied to claim 1 and 8. Myerberg further teaches wherein a plurality of first [or second] tabs protrude from the associated exposed part, the plurality of first [or second] tabs including the first [or second] tab and the first [or second] tabs radially cover an inner peripheral side of the first [or second] exposed part (see Fig. 7B and 8 and paragraph [0096] where the tabs protrude and are arranged to such that when bent they cover an inner peripheral side of the respective exposed part).
It is noted that in the combined embodiment, the insulation disc 3 of Myerberg is omitted as described above, such that the tabs would directly cover an inner peripheral side of the exposed part as best illustrated in Taguchi Figs. 6B and 7.
Claims 6, 12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Myerberg (US 2011/0212360), Kozuki (US 2009/0280406),Taguchi (US 2015/0243453) and Kim’489 (US 2005/0260489).
Regarding claim 6 and 12, the cited art remains as applied to claims 1 and 8. Myerberg does not appear to teach wherein the respective tab is thinner than the associated current collecting plate.
In the battery art, Kim’489 teaches a battery wherein the respective tab is thinner than the associated current collecting plate (paragraph [0028]), such as for a benefit of allowing bending of the tabs (see items 11a and 12a in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to for the tabs thinner than their associated current collector plates for the benefit of allowing the tabs the flexibility for proper electrical connection as taught by Kim’489.
Regarding claim 15, the cited art remains as applied to claim 1. Myerberg does not appear to teach wherein the first current collecting plate or the second current collecting plate includes a cross shape as viewed along an axis of the wound body.
In the battery art, Kim’489 teaches a battery wherein the first current collecting plate or the second current collecting plate includes a cross shape as viewed along an axis of the wound body (see Fig. 2) for the benefit of facilitating fixing of the collector plate to an uncoated region of the current collector (paragraph [0032]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to configure the current collector plate to include a cross shape as viewed along an axis of the wound body for the benefit of facilitating fixing of the collector plate to an uncoated region of the current collector as taught by Kim’489.
Claims 7, 14, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Myerberg (US 2011/0212360), Kozuki (US 2009/0280406),Taguchi (US 2015/0243453) and Kim’922 (US 2006/0093922).
Regarding claim 7, 14, 16 and 17, the cited art remains as applied to claim 1 or 8. Myerberg does not appear to teach wherein a respective insulating layer including a linear shape is disposed on a boundary between the associated exposed part and the associated active material layer or wherein an insulating layer is disposed on a second end of the first [or second] electrode along lengthwise.
In the battery art, Kim’922 teaches a battery wherein a respective insulating layer including a linear shape is disposed on a boundary between the associated exposed part and the associated active material layer and wherein an insulating layer is disposed on a second end of the first [or second] electrode along lengthwise (see Fig. 7b items 625) for the benefit protecting the separator from damage (paragraph [0067]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to include a respective insulating layer including a linear shape is disposed on a boundary between the associated exposed part and the associated active material layer and wherein an insulating layer is disposed on a second end of the first [or second] electrode along lengthwise for the benefit protecting the separator from damage as taught by Kim’922.
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 JEREMIAH R SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7005. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9 AM-5 PM (EST).
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 on (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.
/JEREMIAH R SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights