ETAILED 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS’ filed 3/28/2024 and 4/18/2025 have been considered by examiner.
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 2-4 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.
The term “tightly” in claims 2-4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “tightly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The instant specification discloses in paragraph [0012] that a “tight” connection between the insulating component and the end cap and between the insulating component and the electrode terminal reduces the risk of separating the insulating component from the end cap and the electrode terminal under a condition that the electrode terminal is subjected to a force [0012 of published application]. However, the instant specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the degree of said force, thus rendering the claims indefinite.
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, 5-14, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun et al. (CN 110729421, referring to examiner-provided translation thereof, hereinafter "Sun").
Regarding claim 1, Sun teaches a battery cell (1) including a housing (5) and a core (3) (“electrode component”) accommodated within the housing [Sun Fig. 1, 0058]. Fig. 2 of Sun shows that the housing has an opening into which the core may be inserted. Sun further that the battery cell further comprises a battery cover assembly (2) which includes a cover plate (26) (“end cap”) which covers the opening of the housing [Sun Figs. 2 and 9, 0058-0059]. Sun teaches that the battery cover assembly also includes terminals (20) (“electrode terminal”), a negative terminal (21) and a positive terminal (22) disposed on the cover plate, and that the terminals are electrically connected to the core [Sun Figs. 2, 8, and 9, 0059]. Sun also teaches that the battery cover assembly includes a plastic (27, 29) [Sun Fig. 2, 0059]. Sun teaches that the plastic (29) includes a negative cover plate plastic (24) and a positive cover plate plastic (25) [0060]. Sun teaches that the plastic corresponding to a negative terminal is made of insulating material to ensure insulation between the cover plate and the negative terminal [0061]. Sun also discloses a sealing ring (23) between the cover plate and the terminal and embedded between the cover plate and the plastics (24, 25) [Sun Fig. 5B, 0062]. The plastic (24) and sealing ring together form an insulating component.
Further regarding claim 2, as best understood in light of the 112(b) issues mentioned above, Sun teaches that the terminals and cover plate are sealed together through the compression of the sealing ring [0066], which would ensure a tight connection between the sealing ring, the terminals, and the cover plate.
Further regarding claim 5, Sun teaches that the cover plate comprises terminal holes (260) (“electrode outlet hole”) [Sun Fig. 3, 0063]. Sun teaches that the terminals each comprise a terminal boss (202) (“terminal main body”) that passes through the terminal hole [Sun Fig. 3, 0065], and a terminal gasket (28) (“first limit portion”) connected to the terminal boss and protruding from an outer sidewall of the terminal boss, located under the cover plate [Sun Figs. 3 and 5B, 0064]. Sun teaches that the plastic (27) (“first insulating portion”) is located below the cover plate, on a side of the cover plate facing the core, between, and attached to, the cover plate and the terminal gasket [Sun Fig. 5B, 0059, 0062]. Sun Fig. 5B shows that the plastic (27) seals the terminal hole in the cover plate.
Further regarding claim 6, Sun teaches that the sealing ring (23) (“second insulating portion”) surrounds the terminal boss, which is within the terminal hole, providing insulation and separation of the terminal boss and the cover plate [Sun Fig. 5B, 0062].
Further regarding claim 7, Sun teaches that the sealing ring surrounds, or is attached to, the terminal boss and is embedded, or attached, between the cover plate and the plastics on the cover plate [Sun Fig. 5B, 0064].
Further regarding claim 8, Fig. 5B of Sun shows that the sealing ring is connected to the plastic (27).
Further regarding claim 9, Fig. 5B of Sun shows that the sealing ring extends beyond the cover plate in a direction away from the core.
Further regarding claim 10, Fig. 5B of Sun shows that the terminal boss extends beyond the sealing ring in a direction away from the core.
Further regarding claim 11, Sun teaches that the terminals may each include a terminal end plate (201) (“second limit portion”) protruding from an outer sidewall of the terminal boss and located on the outside of the cover plate, on a side of the cover plate facing away from the core [Sun Figs. 3 and 5B, 0059]. Sun teaches that plastic (24) (“third insulating portion”) is arranged around the terminal boss and located between the terminal end plate and the end cap, thus insulating and separating the terminal end boss from the end cap [Sun Fig. 5B].
Further regarding claim 12, Sun teaches that the plastic (24) is attached to the cover plate [Sun Fig, 5B, 0065].
Further regarding claim 13, Sun teaches that the plastic (24) is connected to the sealing ring [Sun Fig. 5B, 0065].
Further regarding claim 14, Sun teaches that the plastic (27) extends beyond the terminal gasket in a direction away from the terminal boss to separate the cover plate from the core [Sun Fig. 5B, 0072, 0079].
Further regarding claim 19, Sun teaches the core (3) (“core”/”main body portion”), further comprising an electrode tab (31) (“first electrode tab”) led out from an end of the core facing the cover plate [Sun Fig. 8, 0076]. Sun teaches that the terminals are each provided with a terminal cover plate groove (204) (“second recess”) recessed from a surface of the terminals away from the core [Sun Fig. 5B, 0059]. Sun discloses that a connecting piece (4) (“connecting portion”) is welded to the electrode tab in the ultrasonic welding area (44) (“first welded portion”) [Sun Fig. 7, 0078]. Sun teaches that the connecting piece is placed in a connecting piece guide groove (205) at the bottom of the terminal cover plate groove where it is connected to the terminal [Sun Fig. 9, 0081-0082].
Further regarding claim 20, Sun teaches a connecting piece guide groove (203) (“first via”) which connects the terminal cover groove (204) with the interior of the housing [Sun Fig. 5B, 0059]. Sun also discloses a terminal cover plate (6) (“sealing plate”) accommodated within the terminal cover plate groove and connected to the terminal, sealing the connecting piece guide groove [Sun Fig. 11, 0059].
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 110729421) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Naritomi et al. (US 2014/0065472, hereinafter "Naritomi").
Regarding claim 3, Sun teaches the battery cell of claim 2, as described in the rejection of instant claim 2. Sun is silent regarding the plastic being coupled with the cover plate and terminals through a thermo-compression composite process.
Naritomi teaches analogous art of a lithium-ion battery lid (“end cap”) comprising a lid (61) made out of aluminum alloy, an aluminum electrode (62) (“electrode terminal”), and a thermoplastic resin composition (“insulating component”) sealing a gap between the lid and the aluminum electrode [Naritomi Fig. 11, 0128]. Naritomi teaches that the thermoplastic resin composition is joined to the metal of the lid and aluminum electrode through nano-molding technology (NMT) or NMT 2, resulting in firm joining between the thermoplastic resin composition and the lid and between the thermoplastic resin composition and the aluminum electrode [0128]. Naritomi teaches that the NMT 2 process forms a composite of aluminum alloy and resin that is so integrated as not to easily separate from each other [0058].
Naritomi teaches that the composite formed by NMT 2 has gas-sealing properties improved to the highest level [0059]. Naritomi teaches that when the thermoplastic resin composition forms a composite with the lid and the aluminum electrode, the penetration of water into the battery can be prevented, thus extending the lifetime of the electrolyte and the durability of the battery [0059, 0129].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by Sun to include coupling the plastic and the cover plate and the plastic and the terminal by forming a composite between the plastic and the cover plate and the plastic and the terminal as taught by Naritomi, in order to prevent water from entering the battery cell, extend the lifetime of electrolyte in the battery cell, and improve the durability of the battery cell.
The limitation requiring the insulating component to be coupled with the end cap and the electrode terminal “through a thermo-compression composite process” is a product-by-process limitation. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) [MPEP 2113(I)]. The structure implied by the process steps should be considered when assessing the patentability of product-by-process claims over the prior art, especially where the product can only be defined by the process steps by which the product is made, or where the manufacturing process steps would be expected to impart distinctive structural characteristics to the final product. See, e.g., In re Garnero, 412 F.2d 276, 279, 162 USPQ 221, 223 (CCPA 1979) [MPEP 2113(I)]. In this case, the structure implied by limitation “through a thermo-compression composite process” is of a composite formed from the surfaces of the insulating component and the end cap and the insulating component and the terminal Sun where they are joined together. Sun as modified by Naritomi teaches this structure, therefore the claimed invention is obvious over the combination of Sun and Naritomi, regardless of the process in which the structure is formed.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 110729421) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Kadoi et al. (US 2022/0158279, hereinafter "Kadoi").
Regarding claim 4, Sun teaches the battery cell of claim 2, as described in the rejection of instant claim 2. Sun is silent regarding the plastic being coupled with the cover plate and terminals through a microscopic fitting structure.
Kadoi teaches analogous art of a battery comprising a battery case, an internal terminal, an external terminal, and an electrically insulating resin (“insulating component”) [0005]. Kadoi teaches that the insulating resin fills the space and provides bonding between the battery case and the internal and external terminals [0005]. Kadoi teaches that a roughened surface (“microscopic fitting structure”) having an arithmetical mean roughness of 500 nm to 30 nm may be formed in at least a portion of a part in which the electrically insulating resin (44) is joined to the lid (41b) (“end cap”) of the battery case, the internal terminal (42), and the external terminal (43) [0043]. Kadoi teaches that the electrically insulating resin is inserted into minute surface irregularities of the lid, the internal terminal, and the external terminal [0052].
Kadoi teaches that when the electrically insulating resin is inserted into minute surface irregularities of the lid, the internal terminal, and the external terminal, the electrically insulating resin functions as a nano-anchor, which strengthens the joining of the electrically insulating resin with the lid, the internal terminal, and the external terminal [0052].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by Sun to have the a roughened surface on the cover plate and terminals in contact with the plastic so as to form a nano-anchor as taught by Kadoi, in order to strengthen the joining of the plastic and cover plate and the plastic and terminals.
Claims 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 110729421) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tsutsumi et al. (US 2014/0255758, hereinafter "Tsutsumi").
Regarding claim 15, Sun teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Sun’s cover plate has a cap body [Sun Fig. 3, entire cover plate is the “cap body”]. Sun is silent regarding the cover plate comprising a first protruding portion surrounding an outer side of the cap body and an extending portion surrounding an outer side of the first protruding portion.
Tsutsumi teaches analogous art of an electric storage device (“battery cell”) including a case body (“housing”) and a cover plate (“end cap”) [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon]. Tsutsumi teaches that the cover plate (3) has a projecting ridge (34) (“first protruding portion”) formed on the lower surface of the cover plate [Tsutsumi Fig. 6, 0087]. Tsutsumi teaches that the projecting ridge may be formed in an annular shape, extending along the inside of the opening edge of the case body (2) and surrounding the rest of the cover plate [Tsutsumi Fig. 10, 0101]. Tsutsumi further teaches a thin portion (“extending portion”) surrounding an outer side of the projecting ridge [Tsutsumi Fig. 7, 0088]. Fig. 7 of Tsutsumi shows that the projecting ridge protrudes from a surface of the cover plate and thin portion facing the inside of the case body. Tsutsumi teaches that the thin portion is laser welded to the case body, and the projecting ridge protrudes into the case body to block the laser beam for welding the thin portion and case body together [Tsutsumi Fig. 7, 0098].
Tsutsumi teaches that by blocking the laser beam from penetrating into the case body, any effect on the contents in the case body may be avoided [0005, 0039]. Furthermore, Tsutsumi teaches that since the projecting ridge is only provided on part of the cover plate, the capacity inside the case body is not significantly reduced [0039].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by Sun to include a projecting ridge surrounding the outside of the cover plate and a thin portion to be welded with the housing surrounding the outside of the projecting ridge as taught by Tsutsumi, in order to prevent the laser welding from affecting the core of the battery cell while not significantly reducing its capacity.
Further regarding claim 18, Sun teaches the battery cell of claim 15, as described in the rejection of instant claim 15.
Tsutsumi teaches that the cover plate may further include a recess (35) (“first recess”) on the upper surface of the cover plate at a position corresponding to the position where the projecting ridge is formed [Tsutsumi Fig. 7, 0087].
Tsutsumi teaches that by providing the recess, the weight of the cover plate is not increased by providing the projecting ridge [0097].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by modified Sun to include a recess at a position corresponding to the projecting ridge as taught by Tsutsumi, in order to prevent increasing the weight of the cover plate.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 110729421) in view of Tsutsumi (US 2014/0255758) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Shimizu et al. (US 2023/0060460, hereinafter "Shimizu").
Regarding claim 16, modified Sun teaches the battery cell of claim 15, as described in the rejection of instant claim 15. Tsutsumi does not specifically teach an insulating component at least partially covering a top end surface of the projecting ridge.
Shimizu teaches analogous art of a power storage device (“battery cell”) including a case (“housing”) accommodating an electrode group (“electrode component”) therein, the case having an opening; and a sealing body, wherein the sealing body includes an annular sealing plate (“end cap”), a terminal plate (“electrode terminal”), and an annular gasket (“insulating component”) disposed between the sealing plate and the terminal plate [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon]. Fig. 1 of Shimizu shows that the sealing plate (131) has a portion 1311 (“cap body”) surrounded by a protrusion towards the inside of the case (“first protruding portion”) which is then surrounded by an outer peripheral portion (1312) (“extending portion”). Shimizu teaches that the annular gasket (133) insulates between the terminal plate and the sealing plate [0015]. Fig. 1 of Shimizu shows that the gasket partially covers the portion of the sealing plate that protrudes downwards into the case.
Both Sun and Shimizu teach an element for providing insulation (Sun’s plastic/sealing ring, Shimizu’s gasket) between a battery cell end cap (Sun’s cover plate, Shimizu’s sealing plate) and an electrode terminal (Sun’s terminal, Shimizu’s terminal plate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a persona having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the known gasket of Shimizu for the plastic of modified Sun, and the results of this substitution, i.e., the providing insulation between a battery cell end cap and an electrode terminal, would have been predictable [MPEP 2143(B)].
Further regarding claim 17, Sun teaches that the plastic (27) (“first insulating portion”) is located below the cover plate, on a side of the cover plate facing the core, between, and attached to, the cover plate and the terminal gasket [Sun Fig. 5B, 0059, 0062]. Sun teaches that the plastic (27) is attached to the cover plate [0065], and that at least part of the plastic (27) is located between the cover plate and the terminal (“first portion”) [Sun Fig. 5B].
As described previously, Fig. 1 of Shimizu shows that the sealing plate (131) has a portion 1311 (“cap body”) surrounded by a protrusion towards the inside of the case (“first protruding portion”) which is then surrounded by an outer peripheral portion (1312) (“extending portion”). Fig. 1 of Shimizu further shows that the gasket comprises a portion attached to the top end surface of the protrusion of the sealing plate (“third portion”, between portion 1312 of the sealing plate and element 1322 of the terminal plate), and a portion attached to a side surface of the protrusion (“second portion”, vertical portion of the gasket) which connects the portion of the gasket attached to the top end surface of the protrusion and the first sealing portion (1331) (“first portion”) of the gasket provided on the inner side of the sealing plate.
Both Sun and Shimizu teach an element for providing insulation (Sun’s plastic/sealing ring, Shimizu’s gasket) between a battery cell end cap (Sun’s cover plate, Shimizu’s sealing plate) and an electrode terminal (Sun’s terminal, Shimizu’s terminal plate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a persona having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the known gasket of Shimizu for the plastic of modified Sun, and the results of this substitution, i.e., the providing insulation between a battery cell end cap and an electrode terminal, would have been predictable [MPEP 2143(B)].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA F OROZCO whose telephone number is (571)272-0172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/M.F.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights