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 without traverse of group I (claims 1-9 and 11-13) in the reply filed on August 7, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10, 14, and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 7, 2026.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Element 60 is used to refer to both a “connection member” and a “linking element” (instant specification pg. 8).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
It is suggested that line 1 of claim 1 be amended to remove “of the type”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 and 11-13 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation "the envelope" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-9 and 11-13 are indefinite as they depend from an indefinite base and fail to cure the deficiencies of said claim.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 states “a connection member of the first polarity” and “a connection member of the second polarity”. It is unclear if these structural elements are the same as the “first connection member of the first polarity” and the “second connection member of the second polarity” recited in claim 1. For the purpose of examination, “a connection member of the first polarity” is interpreted as the “first connection member of the first polarity” of claim 1 and “a connection member of the second polarity” is interpreted as the “second connection member of the second polarity” of claim 1, pending further clarification from applicant.
Additionally, it is unclear what the scope of “a connection member of the electrochemical element” is. For example, it is unclear if this is a physical connection or an electrical connection. Thus, it is unclear if claim 3 requires the other corners to be completely devoid of any form of “connection member”, whether it be a frame element, a plastic piece, or any other structural element that forms a connection with another structure.
Pending clarification from applicant and for the purpose of examination, claim 3 is interpretated, in accordance with Figures 1 and 2 of the instant disclosure, as requiring the following:
the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity must be arranged in only one corner of the enveloping geometric shape
no other corner of the enveloping geometric shape can have any connection member present that is of the same type as the “first connection member of the first polarity” or “the second connection member of the second polarity”
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 appears to be reciting the limitations “the first connection member…are arranged side-by-side” and “the first connection member…are juxtaposed” as having different meanings (“or” is included between these two limitations). However, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “juxtaposed” as meaning “placed side by side”. Therefore, it is unclear what the difference is between these two options presented in claim 4.
PNG
media_image1.png
552
1072
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, it is unclear what is meant by each terminal portion having “a substantially triangular shape”. The instant specification uses “68” to denote the terminal portion and this terminal portion is depicted in Fig. 5 of the disclosure. It is noted that element 68 in Fig. 5 is not itself a triangle shape, rather it has a portion with a triangular shape, as shown below on annotated Fig. 5.
PNG
media_image2.png
621
702
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 recites the limitation "the connection member" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that applicant intends for this recitation of “the connection member” to mean the “linking element of plastic material” recited in claim 6 and is interpreted as such, pending clarification from applicant.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites the limitation "the thickness of the metal base sheets" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Han (US 2023/0318060 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches:
an electrochemical element (battery module 100)
a first electrode of a first polarity (electrode in battery cell 110)
a first connection member of the first polarity (electrode lead 111)
a second electrode of a second polarity (electrode in a battery cell 110 that is directly next to the first electrode of a first polarity, as shown in annotated figure below). It is noted that claim 1 does not require that the “first polarity” and the “second polarity” be different polarities, in terms of being negative versus positive. For example, both polarities can be positive or both can be negative.
a second connection member of the second polarity (electrode lead 111 corresponding to the second electrode of a second polarity)
a casing comprising a first wall and a second wall (element 600, Fig. 2)
envelope comprising at least one first edge and at least one second edge, the first and second edges forming an enveloping geometric shape having at least one corner (element 700, Fig. 2)
wherein the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity are arranged completely within the enveloping geometric shape (Fig. 2)
wherein the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity are arranged in a first corner of the enveloping geometric shape (corner circled in Fig. 2 below)
PNG
media_image3.png
833
1350
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Han teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Han further teaches the enveloping geometric shape being an enveloping quadrilateral (element 700, Han Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Han teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Han further teaches the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity being arranged side-by-side (Han annotated Fig. 2 shown above).
Regarding claim 8, Han teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Han further teaches the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity being attached to respective electrodes thereof (Han Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Han teaches all features of claims 1 and 2, as described above. Han further teaches the enveloping quadrilateral being a rectangle (Han Fig. 2)
Claims 1-4, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (US 2017/0062794 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches:
an electrochemical element (battery cell 10, Lee Fig. 1)
a first electrode of a first polarity and a second electrode of a second polarity (Lee [53])
a first connection member of the first polarity (annotated Lee Fig. 1 shown below)
a second connection member of the second polarity (annotated Lee Fig. 1 shown below)
a casing comprising a first wall and a second wall (123, Lee Fig. 1)
envelope comprising at least one first edge and at least one second edge, the first and second edges forming an enveloping geometric shape having at least one corner (121, Lee Fig. 1)
wherein the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity are arranged completely within the enveloping geometric shape (annotated Lee Fig. 1 shown below)
wherein the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity are arranged in a first corner of the enveloping geometric shape (annotated Lee Fig. 3 shown below)
PNG
media_image4.png
818
902
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
819
723
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee further teaches the enveloping geometric shape being an enveloping quadrilateral (Lee Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee further teaches the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity being arranged in only one corner of the enveloping geometric shape (Lee annotated Fig. 3 shown below).
PNG
media_image6.png
822
791
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee further teaches the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity being arranged side-by-side (Lee Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee further teaches the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity being attached to the respective electrodes thereof (Lee [53]).
Regarding claim 11, Lee teaches all features of claims 1 and 2, as described above. Lee further teaches the enveloping quadrilateral being a rectangle (Lee Fig. 3).
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Spare (US 2012/0015236 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Han teaches all features of claims 1 and 8, as described above. Han is silent to the method used to attach the first connection member of the first polarity to the first electrode of a first polarity or the second connection member of the second polarity to the second electrode of a second polarity.
Spare teaches that it is known and suitable to connect elements of an electrochemical element using ultrasonic welding (Spade [10]). Since Han is silent to the method used to attach the connection members to their respective electrodes and Spare teaches that ultrasonic welding is a suitable method for attaching elements in an electrochemical element, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the first connection member of the first polarity or the second connection member of the second polarity to their respective electrode using ultrasonic welding in order to achieve the predictable result of the first connection member of the first polarity being attached to the first electrode of a first polarity or the second connection member of the second polarity being attached to the second electrode of a second polarity.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Seo (US 2022/0200106 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee further teaches the first connection member of the first polarity including a terminal portion and the second connection member of the second polarity including a terminal portion, wherein each terminal portion is suitable for being electrically connected to an associated terminal (annotated Lee Fig. 2 shown below).
PNG
media_image7.png
462
801
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Lee does not teach the terminal portion having a “substantially triangular shape”. However, Seo teaches that forming a triangular shaped depression (Seo Fig. 2) in terminal portions (electrode tabs) that extend from electrode assembles can result in improved ability to stack electrode assemblies (Seo [47], [75]). Thus, Seo teaches a terminal portion having “a substantially triangular shape” (annotated Seo Fig. 2 shown below).
PNG
media_image8.png
454
630
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to for the terminal portions of Lee to have a “substantially triangular shape”, as taught by Seo, in order to improve electrode stacking.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Yamazaki (US 2004/0029001 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee teaches the addition of insulating members to the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity (118, 119, Lee Fig. 1). However, Lee does not teach a linking element of plastic material that holds together the first connection member of the first polarity and the second connection member of the second polarity in a predetermined configuration and electrically isolates the first connection member of the first polarity from the second connection member of the second polarity.
Yamazaki teaches a battery comprising a linking element (61, Yamazaki Fig. 37(a)) of plastic material (Yamazaki [728-730]) that covers connection members (exposed tabs, Yamazaki [697]) that are connected to electrodes (Yamazaki [697]), electrically insulates the connection members, and holds the connection members together in a predetermined configuration in order to prevent accidental contact between the connection members (Yamazaki [697]). Yamazaki Fig. 37(a) depicts the linking element of plastic material being overmolded around the connection members.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified Lee to include the linking element of plastic material of Yamazaki, thus resulting in the first and second connection members being held together in a predetermined configuration and electrically insulated and the linking element being overmolded around the first and second connection members, in order to prevent accidental contact between the first and second connection members, where this accidental contact can result in a short-circuit due to one connection member in the electrochemical element of Lee having a positive polarity and the other having a negative polarity.
Claims 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Yu (Yu, M. et al. Experimental study on the formability of aluminum pouch for lithium polymer battery by manufacturing processes. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology. 33, 9, 4353-4359 (2019)).
Regarding claims 9 and 13, Lee teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Lee further teaches the electrochemical element including a pouch with an aluminum metal sheet (the casing comprising a first wall and a second wall, claim 1) located between two polymer layers (Lee [47]). Lee is silent to the thickness of the first wall and the thickness of the second wall (thickness of the aluminum sheet, Lee [47]).
Yu teaches a pouch cell, as taught in Lee, wherein the pouch comprises an aluminum foil in between two polymer layers (Yu Fig. 1). Yu teaches that the thickness of the aluminum foil layers is 40 µm (Yu Section 2.1 Materials).
Since Lee and Yu both teach pouch cells wherein the pouch includes an aluminum metal sheet layer in between two polymer layers and Yu teaches that an aluminum sheet having a thickness of 40 µm is suitable, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an aluminum sheet having a thickness of 40 µm, which falls within the range of 20 µm to 150 µm recited in claim 9 and the range of 30 µm to 60 µm recited in claim 13, in the electrochemical element of Lee in order to obtain the predictable result of a pouch suitable for use in a pouch cell.
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Spare.
Regarding claim 12, Lee teaches all features of claims 1 and 8, as described above. Lee teaches that the first and second connection members are connected to the respective electrodes (Lee [53]); however, Lee is silent to how they are connected.
Lee teaches the use of welding to attach electrochemical tabs to terminals (Lee [62]) and Spare teaches that it is known and suitable to connect elements of an electrochemical element using ultrasonic welding (Spade [10]).
Since Lee is silent to how the first and second connection member are connected to the respective electrodes, Lee teaches that welding is a suitable method for forming connections in an electrochemical element, and Spare teaches that ultrasonic welding is a suitable method for attaching elements in an electrochemical element, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the first connection member of the first polarity or the second connection member of the second polarity to their respective electrode using ultrasonic welding in order to achieve the predictable result of the first connection member of the first polarity being attached to the first electrode of a first polarity or the second connection member of the second polarity being attached to the second electrode of a second polarity.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Radmall (US 5,230,967): appears to disclose a battery comprising connection members on its corners (Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA S CASERTO whose telephone number is (571)272-5114. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/J.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights