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 .
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 10, 11 and 18 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a first longitudinal end of the battery cell”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. One possible amendment is “the [] first longitudinal end of the battery cell”.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “inserting a tubular battery cell into an open end of a can such a tubular space is present”. The limitation is unclear. One possible amendment is “inserting a tubular battery cell into an open end of a can such that a tubular space is present”.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1) in view of Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Singer discloses a battery (para 19, “battery structure 101”) comprising: a tubular battery cell (fig.1) including an anode 221, a cathode 213 and a electrolyte 214, the battery cell defining a central through hole (para 20, “central axial hole 113”); and a container (para 20, “casing 110”), the battery cell being inside of the container (fig.1), the container including a fluid inlet 141 capable of providing fluid to the central through hole and a fluid outlet 142 capable of receiving fluid from the central through hole.
Singer does not explicitly disclose electrolyte 214 is a solid electrolyte. Hettrich discloses a “solid electrolyte” (para 6). Hettrich also discloses anodes paired with solid electrolytes “benefit from being deployed with devices and mechanisms that can accommodate volume and pressure changes” (para 3). It would have been obvious, at the time of the invention, to modify the battery of Singer such that the electrolyte is solid as taught by Hettrich as doing such can prevent delamination and reduction in performance (para 3).
Regarding claim 2, Singer discloses the battery cell has a jelly roll configuration (para 21, “jelly roll assembly 210”).
Regarding claim 3, Hettrich discloses a flexible housing (para 6, “flexible pouch”) inside the container (para 6, “housing”) surrounding the battery cell, the flexible housing capable of allowing the battery cell to radially expand and contract within the flexible housing (para 68).
Regarding claim 5, Hettrich discloses an electrochemical cell in a flexible pouch and a housing surrounding the cell (para 6). Hettrich also discloses the cells may expand by more than 10% volume when charged from a state of charge of 10% or less and recognizes that “accommodating the increase in the volume of the battery upon charge is important to battery design “ (para 76). Hettrich further teaches managing “the expansion of the battery upon charge [within] the limits of the battery system housing (para 76).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of invention, to oversize the flexible housing with respect to the battery cell to accommodate the disclosed volume expansion, including up to 10% expansion of the battery cell during charge and/or discharge of the battery cell, in order to accommodate the expected volume change of the cell and extend lifetime of the battery (para 76). Such sizing would have been a predictable design consideration based on the known expansion characteristic of the cell and would have been within the ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 9, Singer discloses a radially extending section of the can defines a first longitudinal end of the container (para 20, “upper cover 115”) and the lid defines a second longitudinal end of the container (para 20, “lower cover 114”), the lid including the fluid outlet 142, the radially extending section of the can including the fluid inlet 141 (para 25; fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, the radially extending section of the can includes an axially extending centering part (para 124, “thermal control feature 140”) protruding into the central through hole of the battery cell at a first longitudinal end of the battery cell.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1) and Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1), as applied to claim 1 and 3, and further in view of Hata (US 20100227213 A1; Assignee: Showa Denko Packaging Co.).
Regarding claim 4, Hettrich discloses the flexible housing is a bag including an polypropylene (para 41). Hettrich also discloses that the pouch may comprise an aluminum laminated film including nylon, aluminum foil inner layer, cast polyethylene (PE), and cast polyethylene terephthalate (PET) etc.
Although Hettrich does not explicitly disclose an internal polypropylene formed of a first polymer and an external shell formed of second polymer, Hettrich identifies commercially available Showa Denko aluminum laminated film as exemplary pouch materials. Hata/Showa Denko discloses Showa Denko aluminum laminated film “has a structure in which… outer layer made of a stretched polyamide film, an aluminum foil layer, an inner layer made of unstretched polypropylene film are integrally bonded in this order” (para 3).
It would have been obvious, at the time of the invention, to modify the battery of Singer and Hettrich such that flexible housing includes an internal polypropylene formed of a first polymer and an external shell formed of second polymer because Hettrich expressly identifies Showa Denko aluminum laminated film as exemplary materials for the pouch.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1) and Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Ogata et al. (US 20200185756 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Hettrich discloses outer surface of the battery cell (para 6, “flexible pouch”) and an inner surface of the container (para 6, “housing”) define a space therebetween to allow gas to flow outside of the outer surface of the battery cell to generate a radially inward force on the outer surface of the battery cell (para 8).
Hettrich does not disclose the outer surface is circumferential or the section of the container is tubular defining a tubular space. Ogata discloses an outer circumferential surface of the battery cell (para 26, ”cylindrical pouch cell 110”) and an inner circumferential surface of a tubular section of the container (para 26, “sealed housing top 210”) define a tubular space (para 26, “gap spaces”) therebetween to allow liquid to flow outside of the outer circumferential surface of the battery cell to generate a radially inward force on the outer circumferential surface of the battery cell (fig 4). Ogata further discloses using liquid, rather than air, transfers heat “significantly quicker” (para 50).
It would have been obvious, at the time of the invention, to modify the battery of Singer and Hettrich such that an outer circumferential surface of the battery cell and an inner circumferential surface of a tubular section of the container define a tubular space therebetween capable of allowing gas to flow outside of the outer circumferential surface of the battery cell to generate a radially inward force on the outer circumferential surface of the battery cell as taught by Ogata as doing such “distribute[s] heat evenly” (para 19).
Claim(s) 7-8 and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1), Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1) and Ogata et al. (US 20200185756 A1), as applied to claim 6 and 10 and further in view of Kim (US 200900233160 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Ogata discloses supports 120 anchored on the top and bottom to a sealed housing which holds the cell in particular location (para 22). Accordingly, Ogata discloses internal retainer (supports 120) inside the container and fixed to a first longitudinal end of the battery cell (fig. 1-2). Singer, Hettrich and Ogata do not disclose the internal retainer including a central hole therein aligned with the central through hole of the battery cell to cause fluid flowing from the fluid inlet to the fluid outlet to pass through the central hole of the internal retainer.
Kim discloses integrated assembly 140 which fixes and supports the electrode assembly 110. Particularly, central pin 143 is disposed at the central region of the electrode assembly while maintaining a central passage through which gas generated by the electrode assembly is discharged toward the cap assembly (para 51). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to incorporate the central pin taught by Kim into the battery taught by Singer as doing such “prevent[s] deformation of the electrode assembly” (para 51; fig 3).
Regarding claim 8, Singer discloses the container (para 20, “casing 110”) includes a can (para 20, “external tube 111”) and a lid fixed to the can (para 20, “upper cover assembly 115”; fig 2), the can including the tubular section (para 20, “internal tube 112”). Singer does not disclose internal retainer being physically connected to the lid and held in place within the can by the lid.
Kim discloses the retainer (para 51, “central pin 143’) physically connected to the lid (para 58, “cap assembly 130”) and held in place within the can by the lid (fig 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to modify the battery of Singer such that the retainer is connected and held in place within the can by the lid as disclosed by Kim while retaining the fluid inlet of Singer. The modification would have involved applying known retainer to lid mounting arrangement to the known battery structure of Singer for known purpose of securing electrode assembly (para 33), with predictable results (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses internal retainer includes an axially extending centering part protruding into the central through hole of the battery cell at a second longitudinal end of the battery cell (see annotated figure 3 from Kim below).
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 1: Annotated Figure 3 from Kim)]
PNG
media_image1.png
527
642
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses internal retainer (“central pin 143”) is electrically connected to the lid (para 33, “cap assembly 130”). Kim discloses retainer is connected to sub-plate 135 and cathode tab 114 (para 45; fig 3). Sub-plate 135 is part of the cap assembly 130 (para 140). Accordingly, Kim discloses internal retainer electrically connects a first lead of the battery cell to the lid.
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses the can 120 is electrically connected to a second lead (“anode tab 115”) of the battery cell (para 39).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses first lead is positive and the second lead is negative (see rejection of claims 12-13).
Regarding claim 15, Singer disclose the lid (para 20, “upper cover assembly 115”) and Kim discloses the retainer (“central pin 143”). It would have been obvious to combine the lid of Singer with the retainer of Kim (refer to rejection of claim 8 above). The resulting arrangement provides a space between the lid and the internal retainer through which fluid may flow from the central through hole to the tubular space. It would have been obvious to maintain such an open space to permit the fluid flow disclosed by Singer as the modification would have involved applying known structures for their known functions yielding predictable results (MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1) in view of Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Singer and Hettrich disclose at least two of batteries as recited in claim 1 (refer to rejection of claim 1 and fig. 4 from Singer). Singer discloses at least one of the batteries being an upstream battery with respect to a fluid flow and at least one of the batteries being a downstream battery with respect to the fluid flow; and the central through holes of the at least upstream battery and the at least one downstream battery being aligned with each other and the fluid inlet of one of the at least one downstream battery being connected to the fluid outlet of the at least upstream battery (fig. 4).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1) in view of Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Singer and Hettrich disclose the battery assembly as recited in claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above). Hettrich also discloses pressurization system for conveying compressed gas into the batteries to generate a force on the battery cells (para 8) for maintaining uniform pressure on each battery cell (claim 41). It would have been obvious, at the time of the invention, to modify the battery assembly of Singer such that pressurization system for conveying compressed gas into the batteries to generate a force on the battery cells as taught by Hettrich is incorporated as doing such can predictably maintain uniform pressure.
PNG
media_image2.png
658
394
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 20210280928 A1) in view of Hettrich (US 20200168959 A1), and further in view of Kim (US 200900233160 A1).
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 2: Annotated fig.1 from Singer)]Regarding claim 18, Singer discloses a method of constructing a battery (claim 12) comprising: inserting a tubular battery cell into an open end of a can such that a tubular space is present between an outer circumferential surface of the battery cell and an inner circumferential surface of the can (para 29; fig 5, 501 and 502), a first longitudinal end of the battery cell facing a radially extending end section of the can , the radially extending end section of the can including a fluid inlet configured to provide fluid to a central through hole of the battery cell (see annotated fig.1 from Singer), the battery cell including an anode 221, a cathode 213 and a electrolyte 214 (para 20); the lid (para 20, “upper cover assembly 115”) including a fluid outlet 142 capable of receiving fluid from the central through hole (para 25).
Singer does not explicitly disclose a solid electrolyte. Hettrich discloses a “solid electrolyte” (para 6). Hettrich also discloses anodes paired with solid electrolytes “benefit from being deployed with devices and mechanisms that can accommodate volume and pressure changes” (para 3). It would have been obvious, at the time of the invention, to modify the battery of Singer such that the electrolyte is solid as taught by Hettrich as doing such can prevent delamination and reduction in performance (para 3).
Singer fails to disclose installing an internal retainer onto a second longitudinal end of the battery cell. Kim discloses an internal retainer which is on both longitudinal ends of the battery cell (para 46, “central pin 143”; fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to incorporate the central pin taught by Kim into the second longitudinal end of the battery cell taught by Singer as doing such “prevent[s] deformation of the electrode assembly” (para 51; fig 3).
Singer discloses connecting a lid to the open end of the can (fig.1 and 7) but does not explicitly disclose connecting the lid to the internal retainer such that the lid is electrically connected to the internal retainer during operation of the battery. Kim discloses the lid is electrically connected to the internal retainer (refer to rejection of claim 12). The retainer and the lid are electrically connected in the assembled battery; thus, the electrical connection would exist during the operation of the battery. It would have been obvious, at the time of the invention, to connect internal retainer of Kim to the lid in the battery of Singer as taught by Kim as doing such would have predictably yielded electrical relationship between the retainer and the lid during operation of the battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARTI KHANAL whose telephone number is (571)272-8608. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-5pm.
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, Michael N Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights