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 .
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by Kato et al. (US 20160126583 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Kato teaches a battery cell (Figure 5), comprising:
an electrode body (110), in which is stacked a plurality of laminated structures, each of the laminated structures including a cathode, an anode, and a separator interposed between the cathode and the anode (para. [0009]); and
a tape (160) that is wound one round around an outer perimeter of the electrode body (110) (as illustrated) and applied, wherein
the tape (160) includes an overlapping portion (as illustrated) at which one end side and another end side in an outer perimeter direction overlap (as illustrated), and
with a direction in which the laminated structures are stacked in the electrode body (110) as a stacking direction, and an end face in the stacking direction in the electrode body (110) as a stacking face (as illustrated), the overlapping portion is disposed on a face/(side face) of the electrode body (110) other than the stacking face (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 2, Kato teaches a plurality of pieces of the tape (Figure 6, 270 & 271) is wound and applied to the outer perimeter of the electrode body (210), and
the overlapping portions of all of the pieces of tape (270 & 271) are disposed on a face of the electrode body (210) other than the stacking face (as illustrated).
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 Kato et al. (US 20160126583 A1), as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of KR 20060092429 A (to Hwang et al.) – translation attached and relied upon below.
With respect to claim 3, Kato discloses all claim limitations as set forth above but fails to teach wherein the overlapping portions of all of the pieces of tape are disposed on a same one face of the faces of the electrode body, other than the stacking face. Hwang teaches an electrode assembly (Figure 1, 300) comprising a first fixing tape (Figure 5, 600) and a second fixing tape (610) positioned similarly to tape pieces of Figure 5 of Kato; Hwang also teaches positioning the tape pieces in an alternative arrangement as illustrated in Figure 4 in which tape pieces (600, 601, 602) are side-by-side in order to apply uniform pressure across the electrode assembly.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to arrange the tape pieces in Kato side-by-side, as taught by Hwang, in order to apply uniform pressure across the electrode assembly. Consequently, arranging the tape pieces in Kato side-by-side would provide that the overlapping portions of all of the pieces of tape are disposed on a same one face of the faces of the electrode body, other than the stacking face.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. (US 20160126583 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KR 20140114688 A (to Hyun) – translation attached and relied upon below.
With respect to claim 4, Kato discloses all claim limitations as set forth above but fails to teach a battery cell stack, comprising a plurality of the battery cells according to claim 1, stacked in the stacking direction. Hyun teaches a battery cell stack (Figure 5, 20), comprising a plurality of the battery cells (14) according to claim 1 (as illustrated in Figure 4), stacked in the stacking direction (as illustrated) in order to provide the energy needed for driving electric vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to provide a battery cell stack, comprising a plurality of the battery cells according to claim 1, and as in Kato, stacked in the stacking direction, as taught by Hyun, in order to provide the energy needed for driving electric vehicles.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITY V CHANDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/KAITY V CHANDLER/ 8/21/2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights