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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
Argument:
The applicant argues that "cross-sectional observation" is simply not enough to suggest the details of what is claimed in claim 1, 8, 11 or 18; namely, calculating summation values of “long and short diameters of the case” for the two images and determining deformation by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value and comparing the result to a reference value.
Applicants state that the focus of the Yamamoto reference is to reduce deformation by building elongated active material members on bumps created on a current collector, and determining a minimum linear voidage ( or space) between elongated active material members. Applicants further state that to get the minimum linear voidage, the Yamamoto reference uses a ratio of a closest distance between active material members to a distance between centers of adjacent active material members. Thus, Applicants conclude that the Yamamoto reference is simply different from the noted portions of claim 1.
Lastly, Applicants state that the Sato reference nor the cited combination of references remedy the noted shortcoming of the Yamamoto reference.
Response:
The examiner would like to respectfully note that, while US Patent Publication 2010 0203387 A1, (Yamamoto et al.) is directed to a different invention, the disclosure is sufficient (Thus a 35 USC 103 rejection) that a person of ordinary skill would be able to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments in the disclosure to come up with the invention as described in the claim language. Using two diameters (long and short) in a cross sectional observation is common. The examiner believes that the long and short diameters that the applicant is referring to are different, possibly the length of the major axis of the case as opposed to the cross or minor axis diameter, as described in paragraph [0041] and [0042] of the specification. However, in American practice, the specification cannot be imported into the claims, and the claims as they exist allow for a broad, reasonable interpretation that differs from what the Applicant is arguing.
Our reviewing Court has made clear that examined claims are interpreted as broadly as is reasonable using ordinary and accustomed term meanings so as to be consistent with the Specification. In re Thrift, 298 F.3d 1357, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2002). The Court further has explained that the interpretations are to be made without reading limitations from examples given in the Specification into the claims, In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Moreover, there is no ipsissimis verbis test for determining whether a reference discloses a claim element, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 832 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Thus, US Patent Publication 2010 0203387 A1, (Yamamoto et al.) shows the limitation calculating a first summation value of long and short diameters of the case from the first image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11).
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged that application claims priority to foreign application with application number KR10-2023-0136716 dated 13 October 2023. Copies of certified papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 have been received. Priority is acknowledged under 35 USC 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDSs dated 28 April 2024 and 29 April 2025 that have been previously considered remain placed in the application file.
1st 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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Patent Publication 2010 0203387 A1, (Yamamoto et al.).
PNG
media_image1.png
468
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1
Regarding Claim 1, Yamamoto et al. teach a method for analyzing deformation of a secondary battery having an electrode assembly received in a case ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]), the deformation analysis method comprising:
obtaining a first image by performing computed tomography (CT) imaging on the secondary battery ("thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculating a first summation value of long and short diameters of the case from the first image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11);
obtaining a number of charge and discharge cycles of the secondary battery after charging and discharging the secondary battery multiple times so that the secondary battery deteriorates ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
obtaining a second image by performing CT imaging on the deteriorated secondary battery ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculating a second summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if a value obtained by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value is greater than a reference value ("FIGS. 11(a) and (b) are cross-sectional photographs of the negative electrodes of battery a and battery b. Based ~n these results, no deformation of the electrode was observed m battery a in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of8.1 % and an elongation rate at full charge of 2.8% was used; however, electrode buckling was confirmed in battery b in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 7 .8% and an elongation rate at full charge of 4.2% was used, indicative of electrode deformation," paragraph [0208]).
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments, because Yamamoto et al. explicitly motivates doing so at least in paragraphs [0274] and [0147] including “Thus, other than the fact that an electrode according to the present invention is used as a negative electrode or a positive electrode, there is no particular limitation as to the constituent elements of a lithium secondary battery according to the present invention, and various materials which are generally used as materials of a lithium-ion battery can be selected.” and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization.
The rejection of method claim 1 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of method claim 8 while noting that the rejection above cites to both device and method disclosures. Claim 8 is mapped below for clarity of the record and to specify any new limitations not included in claim 1.
Claim 2
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the obtaining the first image further includes:
obtaining a first region image corresponding to a first region and a second region image corresponding to a second region by performing CT imaging on each of the first and second regions of the secondary battery ("whereas any portion that has less than the average height will be defined as a "groove" or a "dent". A "dent" may be a single continuous region as in the illustrated example, or may be a plurality of regions which are separated from one another by the bumps 12," paragraph [0082]);
calculating a long diameter of the first region of the case from the first region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter);
calculating a long diameter of the second region of the case from the second region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter and adjoining shows a second region); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if an absolute value obtained by subtracting the long diameter of the first region from the long diameter of the second region is greater than a reference value ("the total area A2 of the dents is preferably no less than 10% and no more than 30%," paragraph [0083] Where the reference value is between 10 and 30 percent, in any direction, which is absolute value).
Claim 3
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the obtaining the second image further includes:
obtaining a first region image corresponding to a first region and a second region image corresponding to a second region by performing CT imaging on each of the first and second regions of the secondary battery ("whereas any portion that has less than the average height will be defined as a "groove" or a "dent". A "dent" may be a single continuous region as in the illustrated example, or may be a plurality of regions which are separated from one another by the bumps 12," paragraph [0082]);
calculating a long diameter of the first region of the case from the first region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter);
calculating a long diameter of the second region of the case from the second region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter and adjoining shows a second region); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if an absolute value obtained by subtracting the long diameter of the first region from the long diameter of the second region is greater than a reference value ("the total area A2 of the dents is preferably no less than 10% and no more than 30%," paragraph [0083] Where the reference value is between 10 and 30 percent, in any direction, which is absolute value).
Claim 4
Regarding claim 4, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the case has a cylindrical shape ("If the aforementioned cross section is substantially circular, it will be an average value of the diameter," paragraph [0099]).
Claim 5
Regarding claim 5, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the electrode assembly is wound in a cylindrical shape in which a positive electrode plate, a separator and a negative electrode plate are stacked ("The electrode group 84 is obtained by winding a strip like positive electrode plate 81 and a strip-like negative electrode plate 82 together with a wide separator 83 interposed there between," paragraph [0146]).
Claim 6
Regarding claim 6, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the first and second regions are spaced apart from each other perpendicular to a winding axis of the electrode assembly ("may be a cylindrical battery, a prismatic-type battery, or the like having a wound-type electrode group. FIG. 7 is a schematic cross-sectional view of a cylindrical battery in which electrodes according to the present embodiment are used," paragraph [0145]).
Claim 7
Regarding claim 7, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 3, wherein the first and second regions are spaced apart from each other perpendicular to a winding axis of the electrode assembly ("Moreover, the shape of a bump 12 in a cross section perpendicular to the surface of the current collector 11 may be a polygon, a semicircular shape, an arc shape, or the like," paragraph [0082]).
Claim 8
Regarding claim 8, Yamamoto et al. teach a method for analyzing deformation of a secondary battery having an electrode assembly received in a case("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]), the method comprising:
obtaining a first region image corresponding to a first region and a second region image corresponding to a second region by performing computed tomography (CT) imaging on the first region and the second region of the secondary battery, respectively ("thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] and "whereas any portion that has less than the average height will be defined as a "groove" or a "dent". A "dent" may be a single continuous region as in the illustrated example, or may be a plurality of regions which are separated from one another by the bumps 12," paragraph [0082]);
calculating a long diameter of the first region of the case from the first region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter);
calculating a long diameter of the second region of the case from the second region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter and adjoining shows a second region); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if an absolute value obtained by subtracting the long diameter of the first region from the long diameter of the second region is greater than a reference value ("the total area A2 of the dents is preferably no less than 10% and no more than 30%," paragraph [0083] Where the reference value is between 10 and 30 percent, in any direction, which is absolute value).
Claim 9
Regarding claim 9, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 8, further comprising:
calculating a first summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the first region image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11);
obtaining a number of charge and discharge cycles of the secondary battery after charging and discharging the secondary battery multiple times so that the secondary battery deteriorates ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
obtaining a second image of the first region by performing CT imaging on the secondary battery ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculating a second summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second image of the first region ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if a value obtained by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value is greater than a reference value ("FIGS. 11(a) and (b) are cross-sectional photographs of the negative electrodes of battery a and battery b. Based ~n these results, no deformation of the electrode was observed m battery a in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 8.1 % and an elongation rate at full charge of 2.8% was used; however, electrode buckling was confirmed in battery b in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 7 .8% and an elongation rate at full charge of 4.2% was used, indicative of electrode deformation," paragraph [0208]).
Claim 10
Regarding claim 10, Yamamoto et al. teach the method as claimed in claim 8, further comprising:
calculating a first summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second region image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11);
obtaining a number of charge and discharge cycles of the secondary battery after charging and discharging the secondary battery multiple times so that the secondary battery deteriorates ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
obtaining a second image of the second region by performing CT imaging on the secondary battery ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculating a second summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second image of the second region ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if a value obtained by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value is greater than a reference value ("FIGS. 11(a) and (b) are cross-sectional photographs of the negative electrodes of battery a and battery b. Based ~n these results, no deformation of the electrode was observed m battery a in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 8.1 % and an elongation rate at full charge of 2.8% was used; however, electrode buckling was confirmed in battery b in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 7 .8% and an elongation rate at full charge of 4.2% was used, indicative of electrode deformation," paragraph [0208]).
2nd Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Patent Publication 2010 0203387 A1, (Yamamoto et al.) in view of US Patent Publication 2021 0372953 A1, (Sato).
Claim 11
Regarding Claim 11, Yamamoto et al. teach a device for analyzing deformation of a secondary battery having an electrode assembly received in a case ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]), the device comprising:
wherein the processor executes a program code stored in the memory and is configured to:
obtain a first image by performing computed tomography (CT) imaging on the secondary battery ("thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculate a first summation values of long and short diameters of the case from the first image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11);
obtain a number of charge and discharge cycles of the secondary battery after charging and discharging the secondary battery multiple times so that the secondary battery deteriorates ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
obtain a second image by performing CT imaging on the secondary battery deteriorated ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculate a second summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if a value obtained by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value is greater than a reference value ("FIGS. 11(a) and (b) are cross-sectional photographs of the negative electrodes of battery a and battery b. Based ~n these results, no deformation of the electrode was observed m battery a in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of8.1 % and an elongation rate at full charge of 2.8% was used; however, electrode buckling was confirmed in battery b in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 7 .8% and an elongation rate at full charge of 4.2% was used, indicative of electrode deformation," paragraph [0208]).
PNG
media_image2.png
445
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yamamoto et al. do not explicitly teach all of processors and memory.
However, Sato teaches a control circuit ("FIG. 7 is a functional diagram of a controller," paragraph [0027]);
a processor installed in the control circuit ("The controller 22 has, as its main components, a processor 30, a memory 32, a communication interface (I/F) 34, and an input/output I/F 36," paragraph [0042]); and
a memory installed in the control circuit and operably coupled to the processor ("The controller 22 has, as its main components, a processor 30, a memory 32, a communication interface (I/F) 34, and an input/output I/F 36," paragraph [0042]),
Therefore, taking the teachings of Yamamoto et al. and Sato as a whole, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to modify “Electrode for Lithium Rechargeable Battery and Lithium Rechargeable Battery Comprising the Electrode” as taught by Yamamoto et al. to use computer hardware as taught by Sato. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been that, “The present invention has been made to solve such problems, and an object thereof is to provide an X-ray analysis device and an X-ray analysis method capable of improving the accuracy of calculating a mean valence of a metal in a sample.” as noted by the Sato disclosure in paragraph [0009], which also motivates combination because the combination would predictably have a higher ability to handle the mathematical load as there is a reasonable expectation that hardware will improve over time; and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
The rejection of device claim 1 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 18 while noting that the rejection above cites to both device and method disclosures. Claim 18 is mapped below for clarity of the record and to specify any new limitations not included in claim 11.
Claim 12
Regarding claim 12, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the processor executes the program code stored in the memory and is further configured to:
obtain a first region image corresponding to a first region and a second region image corresponding to a second region by performing CT imaging on each of the first and second regions of the secondary battery ("whereas any portion that has less than the average height will be defined as a "groove" or a "dent". A "dent" may be a single continuous region as in the illustrated example, or may be a plurality of regions which are separated from one another by the bumps 12," paragraph [0082]);
calculate a long diameter of the first region of the case from the first region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter);
calculate a long diameter of the second region of the case from the second region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter and adjoining shows a second region); and
determine that the electrode assembly is deformed if an absolute value obtained by subtracting the long diameter of the first region from the long diameter of the second region is greater than a reference value ("the total area A2 of the dents is preferably no less than 10% and no more than 30%," paragraph [0083]).
Claim 13
Regarding claim 13, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the processor executes the program code stored in the memory and is further configured to:
obtain a first region image corresponding to a first region and a second region image corresponding to a second region by performing CT imaging on each of the first and second regions of the secondary battery ("whereas any portion that has less than the average height will be defined as a "groove" or a "dent". A "dent" may be a single continuous region as in the illustrated example, or may be a plurality of regions which are separated from one another by the bumps 12," paragraph [0082]);
calculate a long diameter of the first region of the case from the first region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter);
calculate a long diameter of the second region of the case from the second region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter and adjoining shows a second region); and
determine that the electrode assembly is deformed if an absolute value obtained by subtracting the long diameter of the first region from the long diameter of the second region is greater than a reference value("the total area A2 of the dents is preferably no less than 10% and no more than 30%," paragraph [0083] Where the reference value is between 10 and 30 percent, in any direction, which is absolute value).
Claim 14
Regarding claim 14, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the case has a cylindrical shape ("If the aforementioned cross section is substantially circular, it will be an average value of the diameter," paragraph [0099]).
Claim 15
Regarding claim 15, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the electrode assembly is wound in a cylindrical shape in which a positive electrode plate, a separator and a negative electrode plate are stacked ("The electrode group 84 is obtained by winding a strip like positive electrode plate 81 and a strip-like negative electrode plate 82 together with a wide separator 83 interposed there between," paragraph [0146]).
Claim 16
Regarding claim 16, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 12, wherein the first and second regions are spaced apart from each other perpendicular to a winding axis of the electrode assembly ("may be a cylindrical battery, a prismatic-type battery, or the like having a wound-type electrode group. FIG. 7 is a schematic cross-sectional view of a cylindrical battery in which electrodes according to the present embodiment are used," paragraph [0145]).
Claim 17
Regarding claim 17, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 13, wherein the first and second regions are spaced apart from each other perpendicular to a winding axis of the electrode assembly ("Moreover, the shape of a bump 12 in a cross section perpendicular to the surface of the current collector 11 may be a polygon, a semicircular shape, an arc shape, or the like," paragraph [0082]).
Claim 18
Regarding claim 18, Yamamoto et al. teach a device for analyzing deformation of a secondary battery having an electrode assembly received in a case ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]), the device comprising:
wherein the processor executes a program code stored in the memory and is configured to:
obtain a first region image corresponding to a first region and a second region image corresponding to a second region by performing computed tomography (CT) imaging on the first region and second region of the secondary battery, respectively ("thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] and "whereas any portion that has less than the average height will be defined as a "groove" or a "dent". A "dent" may be a single continuous region as in the illustrated example, or may be a plurality of regions which are separated from one another by the bumps 12," paragraph [0082]);
calculate a long diameter of the first region of the case from the first region image("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter);
calculate a long diameter of the second region of the case from the second region image ("Furthermore, the "interval between adjoining bumps 12" as used in the present specification means a distance between adjoining bumps 12 on a plane which is parallel to the current collector 11, referring to "the width of a groove" or "the width of a dent"," paragraph [0082] where the width is a long diameter and adjoining shows a second region); and
determining that the electrode assembly is deformed if an absolute value obtained by subtracting the long diameter of the first region from the long diameter of the second region is greater than a reference value ("the total area A2 of the dents is preferably no less than 10% and no more than 30%," paragraph [0083] Where the reference value is between 10 and 30 percent, in any direction, which is absolute value).
Yamamoto et al. do not explicitly teach all of a processor and memory.
However, Sato teaches a control circuit ("FIG. 7 is a functional diagram of a controller," paragraph [0027]);
a processor installed in the control circuit ("The controller 22 has, as its main components, a processor 30, a memory 32, a communication interface (I/F) 34, and an input/output I/F 36," paragraph [0042]); and
a memory installed in the control circuit and operably coupled to the processor ("The controller 22 has, as its main components, a processor 30, a memory 32, a communication interface (I/F) 34, and an input/output I/F 36," paragraph [0042]),
Yamamoto et al. and Sato are combined as per claim 1.
Claim 19
Regarding claim 19, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 18, wherein the processor executes the program code stored in the memory and is further configured to:
calculate a first summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the first region image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11);
obtain a number of charge and discharge cycles of the secondary battery after charging and discharging the secondary battery multiple times so that the secondary battery deteriorates ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
obtain a second image of the first region by performing CT imaging on the secondary battery ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculate a second summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second image of the first region ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11); and
determine that the electrode assembly is deformed if a value obtained by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value is greater than a reference value ("FIGS. 11(a) and (b) are cross-sectional photographs of the negative electrodes of battery a and battery b. Based ~n these results, no deformation of the electrode was observed m battery a in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of8.1 % and an elongation rate at full charge of 2.8% was used; however, electrode buckling was confirmed in battery b in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 7 .8% and an elongation rate at full charge of 4.2% was used, indicative of electrode deformation," paragraph [0208]).
Claim 20
Regarding claim 20, Yamamoto et al. teach the device as claimed in claim 18, wherein the processor executes the program code stored in the memory and is further configured to:
calculate a first summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second region image ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11);
obtain a number of charge and discharge cycles of the secondary battery after charging and discharging the secondary battery multiple times so that the secondary battery deteriorates ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
obtain a second image of the second region by performing CT imaging on the secondary battery ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207]);
calculate a second summation value of the long and short diameters of the case from the second image of the second region ("For the resultant batteries a and b, constant-current charging was carried out with a end voltage of 4.2 V and a current value of 50 hours rate, and thereafter deformation of the negative electrodes in these batteries a and b was observed through CT (Computed Tomography) cross-sectional observation," paragraph [0207] where cross sectional observation is a sum value of several diameters as seen in Fig. 11); and
determine that the electrode assembly is deformed if a value obtained by subtracting the first summation value from the second summation value is greater than a reference value ("FIGS. 11(a) and (b) are cross-sectional photographs of the negative electrodes of battery a and battery b. Based ~n these results, no deformation of the electrode was observed m battery a in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 8.1 % and an elongation rate at full charge of 2.8% was used; however, electrode buckling was confirmed in battery b in which an electrode (negative electrode) having a minimum linear voidage of 7 .8% and an elongation rate at full charge of 4.2% was used, indicative of electrode deformation," paragraph [0208]).
Reference Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US Patent Publication 2019 0109309 A1 to Kim et al. discloses that with regard to each of the porous films of Example 2 and Comparative Examples 1 and 2, the X-ray diffraction data, obtained by using a X-ray computed tomography analyzer, was set to the threshold level in which a thickness of 200 nm or greater could be observed.
Non Patent Publication “Resolving Li-Ion Battery Electrode Particles Using Rapid Lab-Based X-Ray Nano-Computed Tomography for High-Throughput Quantification” to Heenan et al. discloses 3D characterization of powder samples in minutes using nano-CT by full-filed transmission X-ray microscopy with zone-plate focusing optics. This is demonstrated on various particle morphologies from two next-generation lithium-ion battery cathodes: LiNi0.8Mn0.1Co0.1O2 and LiNi0.6Mn0.2Co0.2O2; namely, NMC811 and NMC622. Internal voids are detected which limit energy density and promote degradation, potentially impacting commercial application.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEATH E WELLS whose telephone number is (703)756-4696. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, Ms. Jennifer Mehmood can be reached on 571-272-2976. 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.
/H.E.W/Examiner, Art Unit 2664
Date: 17 March 2026
/JENNIFER MEHMOOD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2664