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 .
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.
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.
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al (US 2013/0017425) in view of Ozaki et al (JP 2002-164031 A, cited in IDS filed 3/27/24).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe et al teaches a power storage module (fig 12, paragraph [0105], assembled battery 100) comprising a plurality of power storage devices (fig 12, paragraph [0106], plurality of cylindrical storage battery cells 10E and 10F), wherein
each of the plurality of power storage devices (figs 12, 13A, 13B, paragraph [0105]-[0109]) includes a positive electrode (520E, 520F), a negative electrode (530E, 530F), and a separator (540),
a low-temperature region with relatively low temperature and a high-temperature region with relatively high temperature exist in the power storage module when the plurality of power storage devices are charged and discharged (paragraph [0116]-[0120], non-uniform temperature distribution depending on the environment, such as a variation of heat dissipation performance, or presence or absence of an exothermic element, note that a non-uniform temperature distribution suggests at least one first region that is relatively higher than a second region that is relatively lower than the first region), and
a first power storage device disposed in the low-temperature region among the plurality of power storage devices (fig 12, paragraph [0116], small diameter batteries 10E are arranged remote from the heat source).
Watanabe et al is quiet to a thickness of the separator is smaller than that in a second power storage device disposed in the high-temperature region.
However, Watanabe et al teaches that in the relatively high temperature region, the larger diameter battery 10F which generates a smaller amount of heat is arranged (fig 12, paragraph [0116]), whereas the smaller diameter battery 10E which generates a larger amount of heat is arranged remote from the heat source (fig 12, paragraph [0116]), thus being arranged in the relatively low-temperature region. Watanabe et al teaches that large diameter batteries that generate the smaller amount of heat have larger thicknesses of the electrode layers than the small diameter batteries that generate the larger amount of heat (paragraph [0109]).
Ozaki et al teaches that demand for lithium second batteries that are lightweight and have high capacity density is increasing (paragraph [0002]), and that one method of increasing the capacity of a battery is to make the separator thinner (paragraph [0003]). Ozaki et al teaches of using a thin separator that enables high capacity without lowering battery performance (paragraph [0003]), by setting the separator thickness to be within a certain range (paragraph [0004]), such as a thickness of 5 to 20 µm (paragraph [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the small diameter battery of Watanabe et al, which generates the larger amount of heat and is arranged in the low temperature region, to have a separator with a smaller thickness than the large diameter batteries, as Ozaki et al teaches that there has been increasing demand for lightweight and high capacity batteries and that it is a known method of increasing the capacity of a battery by making the separator thinner (paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches a high-temperature region and a low-temperature region (Watanabe, fig 12, paragraph [0117]), and suggests that the smaller batteries that generate more heat and having smaller thicknesses are arranged in the lower temperature region (Watanabe, paragraph [0117], smaller battery having larger quotients of active material, Ozaki, paragraph [0001]-[0003], lightweight and higher capacity batteries with thinner separator).
Watanabe et al further suggests a middle-temperature region with temperature higher than the temperature in the low-temperature region and lower than the temperature in the high-temperature region exists between the low-temperature region and the high-temperature region inside the power storage module (fig 12, note heat source HS and that since there is a temperature distribution, the closer to the heat source the higher the temperature, the more remote the lower the temperature, and that a middle region can be construed as the middle region between the closest region to the heat source and the furthest region of the heat source), and the plurality of power storage devices are disposed so that the thickness of the separator gradually decreases in order of the high-temperature region, the middle-temperature region, and the low-temperature region (note that although Watanabe et al only discloses large and small batteries (combination suggesting large thickness and small thickness separators), it would have been obvious to further include a middle-sized battery producing a medium amount of heat in the middle region so as to make uniform the temperature distribution, resulting in batteries having equalized service lives (paragraph [0116])).
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches wherein the thickness of the separator is in a range of 10 µm or more and 20 µm or less in both the first power storage device and the second power storage device (Ozaki et al teaches thicknesses in the range of 5 to 20µm, providing good insulation even when porosity of separator is high, paragraph [0022]).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I). "[A] prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness." In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See also In re Harris, 409 F.3d 1339, 74 USPQ2d 1951 (Fed. Cir. 2005). MPEP 2144.05(I)¶3.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches wherein the separator has equal porosity in the first power storage device and the second power storage device (see combination, Watanabe et al teaches the separators are porous (paragraph [0054]) and does not indicate the porosity between the separators are different, Ozaki teaches optimizing the porosity such that the electrical characteristics will not deteriorate (paragraph [0008])).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the porosities of the first and second power storage devices so as to be equal, as Ozaki teaches porosity is a result effective variable where if porosity is too low the electrical characteristics will deteriorate (paragraph [0008]).
"[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe et al teaches wherein the separator (fig 13A, 13B, separator 540) is formed by polyolefin resin in both the first power storage device and the second power storage device (paragraph [0105], note that parts corresponding to parts of first embodiment are assigned with numerals in the 500s, paragraph [0054], note that in the first embodiment, the representative porous material of the separator 40 may include polyolefin, polyethylene, or polypropylene).
Regarding claim 6, Watanabe et al teaches wherein both the first power storage device and the second power storage device are nonaqueous electrolyte solution secondary batteries (paragraph [0105], note that parts corresponding to parts of first embodiment are assigned with numerals in the 500s, paragraph [0055], non-aqueous solution electrolyte used as the electrolyte 13).
Regarding claim 7, Watanabe et al teaches a manufacturing method for a power storage module (fig 12, paragraph [0105], assembled battery 100) including a plurality of power storage devices (fig 12, paragraph [0106], plurality of cylindrical storage battery cells 10E and 10F), in which each of the plurality of power storage devices (figs 12, 13A, 13B, paragraph [0105]-[0109]) includes a positive electrode (520E, 520F), a negative electrode (530E, 530F), and a separator (540), the manufacturing method comprising:
a preparing step of preparing, as the plurality of power storage devices, a first power storage device (fig 12, battery 10E, small diameter, large heat generation) and a second power storage device (fig 12, battery 10F, large diameter, small heat generation);
a temperature distribution predicting step of predicting a temperature distribution inside the power storage module when the plurality of power storage devices are charged and discharged (paragraph [0116]-[0120], non-uniform temperature distribution depending on the environment, such as a variation of heat dissipation performance, or presence or absence of an exothermic element, note that a non-uniform temperature distribution suggests at least one first region that is relatively higher than a second region that is relatively lower than the first region); and
a constructing step of constructing the power storage module by disposing the first power storage device in a low-temperature region with relatively low temperature (paragraph [0117], batteries having larger amounts of active material arranged closer to environment of lower temperature) and disposing the second power storage device in a high-temperature region with relatively high temperature, based on the temperature distribution (paragraph [0117], batteries having smaller amounts of active material arranged closer to a first environment of high temperature).
Watanabe et al is quiet to a thickness of the separator is smaller than that in a second power storage device disposed in the high-temperature region.
However, Watanabe et al teaches that in the relatively high temperature region, the larger diameter battery 10F which generates a smaller amount of heat is arranged (fig 12, paragraph [0116]), whereas the smaller diameter battery 10E which generates a larger amount of heat is arranged remote from the heat source (fig 12, paragraph [0116]), thus being arranged in the relatively low-temperature region. Watanabe et al teaches that large diameter batteries that generate the smaller amount of heat have larger thicknesses of the electrode layers than the small diameter batteries that generate the larger amount of heat (paragraph [0109]).
Ozaki et al teaches that demand for lithium second batteries that are lightweight and have high capacity density is increasing (paragraph [0002]), and that one method of increasing the capacity of a battery is to make the separator thinner (paragraph [0003]). Ozaki et al teaches of using a thin separator that enables high capacity without lowering battery performance (paragraph [0003]), by setting the separator thickness to be within a certain range (paragraph [0004]), such as a thickness of 5 to 20 µm (paragraph [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the small diameter battery of Watanabe et al, which generates the larger amount of heat and is arranged in the low temperature region, to have a separator with a smaller thickness than the large diameter batteries having a relatively large thickness, as Ozaki et al teaches that there has been increasing demand for lightweight and high capacity batteries and that it is a known method of increasing the capacity of a battery by making the separator thinner (paragraph [0001]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Iwase (JP 2000-231911A) teaches a battery collector comprising a plurality of batteries (paragraph [0001]) designed to prevent a decrease in overall output of the battery collector due to temperature differences occurring among the individual cells (paragraph [0005]). In an embodiment, batteries with larger storage capacities are arranged where the output characteristics are expected to decrease due to temperature distribution (paragraph [0008]). The part where output characteristics are expected to be low may be a part where the temperature is lower, and may be at the outer periphery of the battery collector (paragraph [0009]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACKY YUEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5749. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/JACKY YUEN/
Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights