DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8-14, 16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al. (US 2016/0043361).
Regarding claim 1, Bao discloses a secondary battery(electrochemical energy storage device comprises a cell 1, Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]), comprising an electrode assembly(positive electrode plate, negative electrode plate, and a separator, [0028]), an electrolyte([0028]), a housing(package 2, Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]), and an adhesive member(binding material 3, Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]); wherein the adhesive member comprises a first adhesive layer (second functional layer 32, Figs. 3-7, [0028]) and a second adhesive layer stacked together(first adhesive layer 31, Figs. 3-7, [0028]), and the adhesive member is disposed between the electrode assembly and the housing(Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]); wherein the first adhesive layer is attached to an inner surface of the housing([0028]), and the second adhesive layer is attached to an outer surface of the electrode assembly(Fig. 7, [0028]); the first adhesive layer comprises a styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer and wax([0049]).
Continuing with claim 1, Bao discloses the second functional layer 32 of the binding material 3 is not adhered to the package 2 before a pressure is applied on the electrochemical energy storage device, therefore the problem that the cell is difficult to put into the package 2 because of the two adhesive surfaces of the binding material 3 can be resolved; after the binding material 3 is put into the package 2, and the second functional layer 32 is adhered to the package 2 under the pressure, therefore the cell 1 can be fixedly connected to the package 2([0029]), the naphthenoid oil cannot be used independently ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose based on a mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the wax is 1% to 5%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery of Bao with a mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the wax is 1% to 5% in order to balance the cell connection to the package, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 2, Bao discloses the wax comprises at least one of paraffin wax ([0049]).
Regarding claim 3, Bao discloses the second functional layer 32 of the binding material 3 is not adhered to the package 2 before a pressure is applied on the electrochemical energy storage device, therefore the problem that the cell is difficult to put into the package 2 because of the two adhesive surfaces of the binding material 3 can be resolved; after the binding material 3 is put into the package 2, and the second functional layer 32 is adhered to the package 2 under the pressure, therefore the cell 1 can be fixedly connected to the package 2([0029]), the naphthenoid oil cannot be used independently ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, the mass percentage of the wax is 2% to 4%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery of Bao with based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the wax is 2% to 4% in order to balance the cell connection to the package, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 4, Bao discloses the first adhesive layer further comprises a functional resin([0049]); and the functional resin comprises at least one of ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer, or polyurethane elastomer([0049]).
Continuing with claim 4, Bao discloses the electrochemical energy storage device can not only fixedly connect the cell to the package so as to resolve the problems during the drop test, but also can resolve the problem that the cell is difficult to put into the package because the two surfaces of the binding material are all adhesive([0005]) and drop test is a relatively strict safety test of the lithium-ion secondary battery([0004]). Bao does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer is 65% to 95%, and a mass percentage of the functional resin is 10% to 30%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Bao with based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer is 65% to 95%, and a mass percentage of the functional resin is 10% to 30% in order to balance difficulty of putting the cell into the package and safety, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 6, Bao discloses the adhesive member further comprises a substrate layer(33, Fig. 4, [0046]), and the substrate layer is located between the first adhesive layer and the second adhesive layer(Fig. 4, [0046]); and the substrate layer comprises at least one of polyethylene terephthalate, polyimide, or polypropylene([0048]).
Regarding claim 8, Bao discloses the housing is a packaging bag([0028], Figs. 1 & 2).
Regarding claim 9, Bao discloses a thickness of the first adhesive layer is 3 μm to 40 μm ([0038]) which overlaps the claim range of 2 μm to 20 μm, thus reading on the limitation.
Bao is explicitly silent to the claim range however “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.
Regarding claim 10, Bao discloses the second functional layer is adhered to the package under a pressure, therefore the cell can be fixedly connected to the package and the problems during the drop test can be resolved([0009]) but does not explicitly disclose a peeling strength between the first adhesive layer and the housing is 10 N/m to 500 N/m.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery of Bao with a peeling strength between the first adhesive layer and the housing is 10 N/m to 500 N/m in order to balance the cell connection to the package and pass rate of drop test, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 11, Bao discloses an electronic apparatus([0003]), wherein the electronic apparatus comprises a secondary battery (electrochemical energy storage device comprises a cell 1, Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]); the secondary battery comprises an electrode assembly (positive electrode plate, negative electrode plate, and a separator, [0028]), an electrolyte ([0028]), a housing (package 2, Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]), and an adhesive member (binding material 3, Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]), wherein the adhesive member comprises a first adhesive layer (second functional layer 32, Figs. 3-7, [0028]) and a second adhesive layer stacked together (first adhesive layer 31, Figs. 3-7, [0028]), and the adhesive member is disposed between the electrode assembly and the housing (Figs. 1 & 2, [0028]); wherein the first adhesive layer is attached to an inner surface of the housing ([0028]), and the second adhesive layer is attached to an outer surface of the electrode assembly (Fig. 7, [0028]); the first adhesive layer comprises a styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer and wax ([0049]).
Continuing with claim 11, Bao discloses the second functional layer 32 of the binding material 3 is not adhered to the package 2 before a pressure is applied on the electrochemical energy storage device, therefore the problem that the cell is difficult to put into the package 2 because of the two adhesive surfaces of the binding material 3 can be resolved; after the binding material 3 is put into the package 2, and the second functional layer 32 is adhered to the package 2 under the pressure, therefore the cell 1 can be fixedly connected to the package 2([0029]), the naphthenoid oil cannot be used independently ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose based on a mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the wax is 1% to 5%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the electronic apparatus of Bao with a mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the wax is 1% to 5% in order to balance the cell connection to the package, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 12, Bao discloses the wax comprises at least one of paraffin wax ([0049]).
Regarding claim 13, Bao discloses the second functional layer 32 of the binding material 3 is not adhered to the package 2 before a pressure is applied on the electrochemical energy storage device, therefore the problem that the cell is difficult to put into the package 2 because of the two adhesive surfaces of the binding material 3 can be resolved; after the binding material 3 is put into the package 2, and the second functional layer 32 is adhered to the package 2 under the pressure, therefore the cell 1 can be fixedly connected to the package 2([0029]), the naphthenoid oil cannot be used independently ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, the mass percentage of the wax is 2% to 4%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the electronic apparatus of Bao with based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the wax is 2% to 4% in order to balance the cell connection to the package, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 14, Bao discloses the first adhesive layer further comprises a functional resin([0049]); and the functional resin comprises at least one of ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer, or polyurethane elastomer([0049]).
Continuing with claim 14, Bao discloses the electrochemical energy storage device can not only fixedly connect the cell to the package so as to resolve the problems during the drop test, but also can resolve the problem that the cell is difficult to put into the package because the two surfaces of the binding material are all adhesive([0005]) and drop test is a relatively strict safety test of the lithium-ion secondary battery([0004]). Bao does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer is 65% to 95%, and a mass percentage of the functional resin is 10% to 30%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic apparatus of Bao with based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer is 65% to 95%, and a mass percentage of the functional resin is 10% to 30% in order to balance difficulty of putting the cell into the package and safety, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 16, Bao discloses the adhesive member further comprises a substrate layer(33, Fig. 4, [0046]), and the substrate layer is located between the first adhesive layer and the second adhesive layer(Fig. 4, [0046]); and the substrate layer comprises at least one of polyethylene terephthalate, polyimide, or polypropylene([0048]).
Regarding claim 18, Bao discloses the housing is a packaging bag([0028], Figs. 1 & 2).
Regarding claim 19, Bao discloses a thickness of the first adhesive layer is 3 μm to 40 μm ([0038]) which overlaps the claim range of 2 μm to 20 μm, thus reading on the limitation.
Bao is explicitly silent to the claim range however “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.
Regarding claim 20, Bao discloses the second functional layer is adhered to the package under a pressure, therefore the cell can be fixedly connected to the package and the problems during the drop test can be resolved([0009]) but does not explicitly disclose a peeling strength between the first adhesive layer and the housing is 10 N/m to 500 N/m.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the electronic apparatus of Bao with a peeling strength between the first adhesive layer and the housing is 10 N/m to 500 N/m in order to balance the cell connection to the package and pass rate of drop test, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
5. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al. (US 2016/0043361) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Luo et al. (CN113913138) as cited in IDS dated 3/29/24 with citations from machine translation provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 5, Bao discloses the first adhesive layer further comprises an additive ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose an antioxidant.
Luo teaches electrolyte-resistant adhesives for lithium batteries and double-sided hot melt adhesive tapes using them(title). Luo teaches the invention optimizes the adhesive formulation used in the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer and the hot melt adhesive layer, so that the adhesive layer is less likely to generate bubbles during use after bonding the bare battery cell and outer packaging([n0010]). Luo teaches an electrolyte-resistant adhesive for lithium batteries comprises the following raw materials in parts by weight: 20-40 parts of hydrogenated styrene block copolymer, 10-30 parts of styrene block copolymer, 5-15 parts of amorphous α-olefin copolymer, 5-15 parts of polyolefin plasmon, 50-70 parts of tackifying resin, and 0-2 parts of antioxidant, for forming an adhesive layer([n0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Bao with an antioxidant and a mass percentage of the antioxidant is 0-2 parts as taught by Luo in order to provide an electrolyte-resistant adhesive.
Continuing with claim 5, modified Bao discloses the use of the inorganic additive may effectively control the homogeneous flow of the first adhesive layer 31 and the second functional layer 32, therefore the binding material 3 will not flow to a sealing edge of the cell 1 under heating and pressing, thereby resolving the problem of poor sealing caused by the inhomogeneous flow of the binding material 3(Bao [0052]) but does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the additive is 1% to 5%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of modified Bao with based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the additive is 1% to 5% in order to control the homogeneous flow of the first adhesive layer.
6. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al. (US 2016/0043361) as applied to claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Zhao et al. (CN114892307) with citations from machine translation provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 7, Bao discloses the first adhesive layer further comprises a polar resin, and the polar resin comprises a styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene block copolymer ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose a polyolefin elastomer.
Zhao teaches a lithium battery aluminum-plastic film temperature-regulating adhesive layer, wherein the lithium battery aluminum-plastic film temperature-regulating adhesive layer includes the elastic phase change temperature-regulating fiber([n0007]). Zhao teaches when applied to the aluminum-plastic film adhesive layer of lithium batteries, it can effectively disperse the stress of the adhesive layer, provide a certain buffer for the temperature rise and fall of the battery, improve the safety performance of the battery, and give it better mechanical properties such as toughness and depth of impact resistance([0035]). Zhao teaches the elastomer includes at least one of polyolefin elastomer, nitrile rubber, ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber, thermoplastic polyester elastomer, styrene-ethylene-butene-styrene block copolymer, styrene-butadiene-styrene block copolymer, styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer, styrene-ethylene-propylene-styrene block copolymer, and styrene-ethylene-ethylene-propylene-styrene block copolymer([n0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Bao with the polar resin comprises a polyolefin elastomer as taught by Zhao in order to disperse the stress of the adhesive layer.
Continuing with claim 7, modified Bao does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the polar resin is 5% to 10%, a mass percentage of the styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene block copolymer is 3.5% to 9.5%, and a mass percentage of the polyolefin elastomer is 0.5% to 1.5%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of modified Bao with a mass percentage of the polar resin is 5% to 10%, a mass percentage of the styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene block copolymer is 3.5% to 9.5%, and a mass percentage of the polyolefin elastomer is 0.5% to 1.5% in order to disperse the stress of the adhesive layer and improve the safety performance of the battery.
7. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al. (US 2016/0043361) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Luo et al. (CN113913138) as cited in IDS dated 3/29/24 with citations from machine translation provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 15, Bao discloses the first adhesive layer further comprises an additive ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose an antioxidant.
Luo teaches electrolyte-resistant adhesives for lithium batteries and double-sided hot melt adhesive tapes using them(title). Luo teaches the invention optimizes the adhesive formulation used in the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer and the hot melt adhesive layer, so that the adhesive layer is less likely to generate bubbles during use after bonding the bare battery cell and outer packaging([n0010]). Luo teaches an electrolyte-resistant adhesive for lithium batteries comprises the following raw materials in parts by weight: 20-40 parts of hydrogenated styrene block copolymer, 10-30 parts of styrene block copolymer, 5-15 parts of amorphous α-olefin copolymer, 5-15 parts of polyolefin plasmon, 50-70 parts of tackifying resin, and 0-2 parts of antioxidant, for forming an adhesive layer([n0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic apparatus of Bao with an antioxidant and a mass percentage of the antioxidant is 0-2 parts as taught by Luo in order to provide an electrolyte-resistant adhesive.
Continuing with claim 15, modified Bao discloses the use of the inorganic additive may effectively control the homogeneous flow of the first adhesive layer 31 and the second functional layer 32, therefore the binding material 3 will not flow to a sealing edge of the cell 1 under heating and pressing, thereby resolving the problem of poor sealing caused by the inhomogeneous flow of the binding material 3(Bao [0052]) but does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the additive is 1% to 5%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic apparatus of modified Bao with based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the additive is 1% to 5% in order to control the homogeneous flow of the first adhesive layer.
8. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao et al. (US 2016/0043361) as applied to claims 11 and 16 above, and further in view of Zhao et al. (CN114892307) with citations from machine translation provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 17, Bao discloses the first adhesive layer further comprises a polar resin, and the polar resin comprises a styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene block copolymer ([0049]) but does not explicitly disclose a polyolefin elastomer.
Zhao teaches a lithium battery aluminum-plastic film temperature-regulating adhesive layer, wherein the lithium battery aluminum-plastic film temperature-regulating adhesive layer includes the elastic phase change temperature-regulating fiber([n0007]). Zhao teaches when applied to the aluminum-plastic film adhesive layer of lithium batteries, it can effectively disperse the stress of the adhesive layer, provide a certain buffer for the temperature rise and fall of the battery, improve the safety performance of the battery, and give it better mechanical properties such as toughness and depth of impact resistance([0035]). Zhao teaches the elastomer includes at least one of polyolefin elastomer, nitrile rubber, ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber, thermoplastic polyester elastomer, styrene-ethylene-butene-styrene block copolymer, styrene-butadiene-styrene block copolymer, styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymer, styrene-ethylene-propylene-styrene block copolymer, and styrene-ethylene-ethylene-propylene-styrene block copolymer([n0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic apparatus of Bao with the polar resin comprises a polyolefin elastomer as taught by Zhao in order to disperse the stress of the adhesive layer.
Continuing with claim 17, modified Bao does not explicitly disclose based on the mass of the first adhesive layer, a mass percentage of the polar resin is 5% to 10%, a mass percentage of the styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene block copolymer is 3.5% to 9.5%, and a mass percentage of the polyolefin elastomer is 0.5% to 1.5%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic apparatus of modified Bao with a mass percentage of the polar resin is 5% to 10%, a mass percentage of the styrene-ethylene-butylene-styrene block copolymer is 3.5% to 9.5%, and a mass percentage of the polyolefin elastomer is 0.5% to 1.5% in order to disperse the stress of the adhesive layer and improve the safety performance of the battery.
Double Patenting
9. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
10. Claims 1-3 and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 6, 8, 10, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,668,719 in view of He et al. (US 2024/0396167).
Regarding instant claim 1, claims 1, 5, and 6 of U.S. 12,668,719 teach an electrochemical apparatus having all of the limitations of instant claim 1, except for a secondary battery and an electrolyte.
He teaches the electrochemical apparatus may be specifically a battery, for example, a lithium-ion battery or the like([0038]). He teaches generally, the electrochemical apparatus includes an electrolyte solution, an electrochemical cell, and a packaging material packaging the electrochemical cell([0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have a lithium ion battery including an electrolyte solution as taught by He as the electrochemical apparatus of claim 6 of U.S. 12,668,719 as it is well known in the art. MPEP 2144.03.
Claim 2 of the instant application recites the limitations of the wax similar to claim 10.
Claim 3 of the instant application recites the limitation of the mass percentage of the wax similar to claim 8.
Claim 9 of the instant application recites the limitation of a thickness of the first adhesive layer similar to claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA HOM LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-0489. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/VICTORIA H LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights