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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
The part “thin type stacked battery 100” appears in Paragraphs [0007-0020], [0022-0023], [0067-0072], [0076], and [0087-0089], but the reference 100 is not present in any of the drawings (FIGs 1-7B).
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. 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 [0002], Line 10 and Paragraph [0003], Line 16, the abbreviation “PLT 1” is misspelled and should be changed to “PTL 1”.
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.
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.
Claims 1-12 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda et al (US 20210288348 A1) in view of Yoda et al (US 20210005934 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Honda teaches a thin type stacked battery (FIG. 10) comprising a battery pack formed by a plurality of stacked unit cells (laminated battery 2000; Paragraph [0124]), each unit cell being formed by positive electrode current collector (220; Paragraph [0052]), positive electrode (positive electrode active material layer 120; Paragraph [0052]), electrolyte (solid electrolyte layer 130; Paragraph [0052]), negative electrode (negative electrode active material layer 110; Paragraph [0052]), and negative electrode current collector (210; Paragraph [0052]) stacked in that order (FIG. 1), and a seal material (sealing member 310; Paragraph [0052]). Referring to FIG. 10, the positive electrode current collector 220 in battery cell 2006 does not abut against the negative electrode current collector
PNG
media_image1.png
473
886
media_image1.png
Greyscale
210 of an adjacent battery cell 2004, and the negative electrode current collector 210 in battery cell 2002 does not abut against the positive electrode current collector 220 of an adjacent battery cell 2004.
As seen in FIG. 10, the external encapsulating material 340 surrounds all components of the battery 1000 except for the positive electrode current collector 220 on the top battery cell 2006 and the negative electrode current collector 210 on the bottom battery cell 2002. The term “encapsulating material” is used by Honda to describe materials which comprise the sealing members 310 of the battery 1000 (Paragraph [0110]).
The positive electrode current collector 220 and the negative electrode current collector 210 can each be made of metal (Paragraph [0070]), but Honda is silent on using a conductive resin layer. However, Yoda teaches use of an electroconductive resin for use in the current collectors 31 for the purpose of reducing weight of the unit cells 20 (Paragraph [0038]). 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 interior current collectors in the battery stack taught by Honda to use the electroconductive resin material of Yoda for the purpose of reducing the weight of the battery.
Regarding Claim 2,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Additionally, Honda teaches use of a solid electrolyte layer 130 (Paragraph [0052]).
Regarding Claim 3,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Honda does not teach that the negative electrode current collector of the first end unit cell, the positive electrode current collector of the second end unit cell, and the positive electrode current collector and the negative electrode current collector of the unit cell other than the first end unit cell and the second end unit cell among the plurality of stacked unit cells forming the battery pack are embedded in the seal material. However, FIG. 2B of Yoda shows an embodiment where the sealing member 50 completely encapsulates the current collectors. The sealing member 50 forms a liquid tight seal to protect the components of the unit cell 20, 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 battery of Honda to encapsulate the battery components as taught by Yoda.
PNG
media_image2.png
201
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Additionally, Honda teaches the thickness of the negative electrode active material 110 as between 0.005 mm and 0.3 mm (Paragraph [0059]), the thickness of the positive electrode active material layer 120 as between 0.005 mm and 0.3 mm (Paragraph [0064]), the thickness of the solid electrolyte layer 130 as between 0.005 mm and 0.3 mm (Paragraph [0065]), the thickness of the negative electrode current collector 210 as between 0.005 mm and 0.1 mm (Paragraph [0071]), and the thickness of the positive electrode current collector 220 as between 0.005 mm and 0.1 mm (Paragraph [0072]). This sums to an approximate thickness of between 0.025 mm and 1.1 mm for each stacked battery cell, which overlaps with the claimed thickness of 0.1 mm to 2 mm. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges overlap or are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding Claim 5,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Honda further teaches a solid electrolyte may be used as a component material of the negative electrode active material layer 110 (Paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 6,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. As can be seen in FIG. 1 of Honda (shown in response to Claim 1 above), the positive electrode current collector 220 is larger in the left/right direction than the positive electrode active material layer 120 and the negative electrode current collector 210 is larger in the left/right direction than the negative electrode active material layer 110.
Regarding Claim 7,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Although Honda is silent on welding the positive electrode current collector and the negative electrode current collector to the seal material, Yoda teaches a sealing step S30 in which the seal parts 50 comprising the peripheral portions 60 of the unit cell 20 are heated with a heat sealing device 100 and placed in contact with the positive electrode current collector 31a and the negative electrode current collector 31b under pressure to weld the portions together (Paragraphs [0102 – 0106]). This results in an increased joining strength and better reliability than bonding with an adhesive agent, 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 a welding method to connect the electrode current collectors with the seal material.
Regarding Claim 8,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. As shown by Honda in FIG. 10 (seen in response to Claim 1 above), a laminated battery 2000 comprised by stacking a plurality of batteries 1000 is shown to have an external encapsulating material 340 surrounding all members of the stacked batteries 1000 (Paragraph [0126]). The term “encapsulating material” is used by Honda to describe materials which comprise the sealing members 310 of the battery 1000 (Paragraph [0110]). The encapsulating material 340 may be comprised of a thermosetting or thermoplastic resin (Paragraph [0075]) and heat treatment of the resin (Paragraph [0112]) may be used to fuse the plurality of batteries 1000 together.
Regarding Claim 9,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1, but does not teach the presence of resin layers on the electrode current collectors. However, Yoda teaches a plurality of unit cells 20 being formed in a stack 11 to form a battery 10 in which there are multiple unit cells 20 which are not an end unit cell 20 (FIG. 1; Paragraph [0026]). Yoda also teaches an embodiment of current collectors 31 made from an electroconductive resin (Paragraph [0037]). 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 resin layers in the non-end unit cells in order to reduce the weight of the stacked battery as taught by Yoda.
PNG
media_image3.png
476
531
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Honda teaches the number of batteries 1000 included in the laminated battery 2000 may be only two (Paragraph [0127]).
Regarding Claim 11,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Although Honda does not teach an electrode current collector with a resin layer, Yoda teaches a current collector 31 in which an electroconductive resin or a metal can be used (Paragraph [0037]). 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 electrode current collector(s) of Honda in order to reduce the weight of the stacked battery as taught by Yoda.
Regarding Claim 12,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 1. Honda further teaches using a metal to form the positive electrode current collector 220 and the negative electrode current collector 210 (Paragraph [0070]).
Regarding Claims 15-16,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 12. Honda further teaches preferred embodiments of the positive electrode current collector 220 and negative electrode current collector 210 as being made from metal without mentioning inclusion of a resin layer (Paragraphs [0070 – 0072]).
Regarding Claim 17,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 9, but does not teach the electrode current collectors comprising a resin layer. However, Yoda teaches current collectors 31 made from a conductive resin stacked in a manner in which the positive electrode current collector 31a of one unit cell 20 abuts against the negative current collector 31b of an adjacent unit cell 20 (Paragraph [0038]; FIG. 1). 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 electrode current collector(s) of Honda in order to reduce the weight of the stacked battery as taught by Yoda.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda and Yoda as applied to claims 1-12 and 15-17 above, and further in view of Horie et al (JP 2020061300 A).
Regarding Claim 13,
Honda, in view of Yoda, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 12 and current collectors which may be made from conductive resin or metal, but do not specifically teach a combination of resin and metal layers. However, Horie teaches a current collector 11 having a conductive resin layer as well as one or more metal layers in order to reduce electrolytic leakage and lower resistance of the current collector 11 (Paragraph immediately before [Cathode active material layer]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the current collectors taught by Honda and Yoda with the current collector taught by Horie.
Regarding Claim 14,
Honda, in view of Yoda, and further in view of Horie, teaches the thin type stacked battery according to claim 13, but does not teach a resin layer of the electrode current collector in contact with the electrode. However, Horie teaches an optional metal layer on either side of the conductive resin current collector 11, meaning a positive electrode current collector 11a can be designed to have only the resin layer on the side abutting the positive electrode 13 of a unit cell, while the opposite site of the positive electrode current collector 11a (in the stacking direction) has a metal layer. This can similarly be done in terms of the negative electrode current collector 11b. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the current collectors taught by Honda and Yoda with the current collector taught by Horie in order to reduce electrolytic leakage and lower resistance of the current collector 11.
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
/TRAVIS M FIGG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights