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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 only states how the gas generated by welding will be worked on by the invention without further defining the apparatus itself. Since the gas generated is not a component of the invention, claim 15 fails to further define the independent claim (or the claim to which it depends). Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by You et al. (US-20140147736-A1), hereafter referred to as You.
Regarding Claim 1, You teaches a battery cell comprising: an electrode assembly (“a rechargeable battery including an electrode assembly,” paragraph 6); a case accommodating the electrode assembly (“a case 15 in which the electrode assembly 10 is embedded,” paragraph 44); a cap plate sealing an opening in the case (“a cap plate 20 coupled to an opening of the case 15,” paragraph 44); and a terminal part connected to the cap plate (“The negative and positive electrode terminals 21 and 22 include plate terminals 21c and 22c disposed outside the cap plate 20,” paragraph 54) and having a guide part along which a gas generated when a busbar is welded to the terminal part is discharged to the outside (“The first groove G1 may be formed at a center of the plate terminal 21c to allow water entering from an upper surface of the plate terminal 21c to be rapidly collected in the first groove G1, and the second groove G2 may discharge the water collected in the first groove G1 to the outside of the plate terminal 21c,” paragraph 71; G1 and G2 in Fig. 3). While You teaches a different intended purpose, the disclosed structure could serve as a guide part to discharge gas generated when a busbar is welded to the terminal part and meets the limitations of instant Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 1, wherein the terminal part comprises: a terminal rivet in the cap plate and connected to the terminal part; and a terminal plate electrically connected to the terminal rivet [“rivet terminals 21a and 22a electrically connected to the electrode assembly 10 and fastened (for example, riveted or welded) to the plate terminals 21c and 22c,” paragraph 54; 21a and 22a in Fig. 1 are shown to be in the cap plate 20] and having with an area that is in contact with the busbar and an area that is spaced apart from the busbar (Fig. 3 shows one embodiment of a terminal part, where G1 and G2 are spaced apart from a busbar, and 21c is in contact with the busbar, when a busbar is welded to the terminal).
Regarding Claim 3, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 2, wherein the terminal plate comprises: a plate body outside the cap plate and electrically connected to the terminal rivet [“rivet terminals 21a and 22a electrically connected to the electrode assembly 10 and fastened (for example, riveted or welded) to the plate terminals 21c and 22c,” paragraph 54; 21c and 22c in Fig. 1 are shown to be above the cap plate 20]; a connection hole extending in a vertical direction through the plate body to accommodate the terminal rivet therein (“The plate terminals 21c and 22c may have through-holes H3 and H4, and upper ends of the rivet terminals 21a and 22a may be inserted in the through-holes H3 and H4 by passing through the terminal holes H1 and H2,” paragraph 55); a first guide part defining a groove outside the connection hole (G1 in Fig. 3); and a second guide part defining a groove that connects the first guide part to the outside of the plate body (G2 in Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 4, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 3, wherein the groove of the first guide part extends in a ring shape along an outer circumference of the connection hole (G1 in Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 6, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 3, wherein the second guide part defines a plurality of grooves (G2 in Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 7, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 3, wherein the second guide part extends radially from the connection hole (G2 in Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 9, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 3, wherein the terminal plate has a terminal top surface protruding from the plate body toward the busbar to be in surface contact with and electrically connected to the busbar (21c in Fig. 3 is protruding upward to be in surface contact with and electrically connected to a busbar, when a busbar is welded to the terminal).
Regarding Claim 10, You further teaches the battery cell of claim 9, wherein the terminal top surface is above the first guide part (Fig. 3 shows the top of the terminal 21c is above the first guide part G1).
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.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You.
Regarding Claim 5, You teaches the battery cell of claim 3, does not specifically teach wherein the distance between the first guide part and the busbar is in a range of 0.1 mm to 0.4 mm. However, You teaches that the depth of the first guide part needs to be optimized such that water does not get trapped in the first guide part (paragraph 74; Fig. 4).
Considering the distance of the first guide part and the busbar affects the ability of trapped water to escape, as taught by You, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to optimize the height of the first guidepost such that minimal water gets trapped. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II).
Regarding Claim 8, You teaches the battery cell of claim 3 but does not teach wherein the second guide part has a cross shape with the connection hole as its center. However, You teaches a second guide part that forms one linear groove with the connection hole at its center (e.g., G2 in Fig. 3).
Considering You has taught that the second guide part’s purpose is to discharge trapped water, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add a duplicated linear groove perpendicular to the disclosed one to form a cross shape in order to better discharge trapped water. Please see MPEP § 2144.04(VI) and re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960): “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.”
Claims 11-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wook (KR-20150070521-A, see machine translation), hereafter referred to as Wook, in view of You.
Regarding Claim 11, Wook teaches a battery module (“the present invention relates to a battery module,” paragraph 1) comprising: a battery cell comprising a terminal part electrically connected to an electrode assembly (“a plurality of battery cells (110) are arranged in one direction and have a terminal portion (111) on the upper surface,” paragraph 26); a busbar electrically connected to the terminal part; and a welding fixing part fixing the busbar to the terminal part (“the terminal portion (111) of the battery cell (110) and the bus bar (130) are joined by welding,” paragraph 27). Wook does not teach that gas generated when the welding fixing part is formed can be discharged to the outside of the terminal part through a space defined between the terminal part and the busbar. However, You teaches a battery cell where the terminal part has a space such that fluid can be discharged from the terminal when a busbar is welded to it (“The first groove G1 may be formed at a center of the plate terminal 21c to allow water entering from an upper surface of the plate terminal 21c to be rapidly collected in the first groove G1, and the second groove G2 may discharge the water collected in the first groove G1 to the outside of the plate terminal 21c,” paragraph 71; G1 and G2 in Fig. 3). You teaches that the benefit of such spacing is that “a fastening portion (for example, a riveted portion or a welded portion) of the plate terminal 21c and the rivet terminal 21a may be substantially prevented from being corroded. Water may be generated by a condensation phenomenon around the negative electrode terminal 21.” (paragraph 72).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the battery module taught by Wook and modify the terminal part to include a space between the terminal and the busbar where fluid can discharge, as taught by You. Doing so would prevent water from accumulating, such as from condensation, and thus reduce corrosion over time, as taught by You.
Regarding Claim 12, Wook in view of You teaches the battery module of claim 11, wherein the busbar comprises: a first connection plate that is in contact with and electrically connected to the terminal part; a second connection plate spaced apart from the first connection plate and in contact with and electrically connected to a terminal part of an adjacent battery cell; and a curved connection part connecting the first connection plate to the second connection plate and having a curved surface (Figs. 4-6, where the curved surface is labelled as 130b).
Regarding Claim 13, You further teaches wherein the terminal part comprises: a terminal rivet in a cap plate of the battery cell and connected to the terminal part [“rivet terminals 21a and 22a electrically connected to the electrode assembly 10 and fastened (for example, riveted or welded) to the plate terminals 21c and 22c,” paragraph 54; 21a and 22a in Fig. 1 are shown to be in the cap plate 20]; and a terminal plate electrically connected to the terminal rivet and having an area in contact with the busbar and an area spaced apart from the busbar (Fig. 3 shows one embodiment of a terminal part, where G1 and G2 are spaced apart from a busbar, and 21c is in contact with the busbar, when a busbar is welded to the terminal).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the battery module taught by Wook, with the terminal part modified by You, and further modify the terminal part to include the configuration taught by You where a portion of the area is spaced apart from the busbar. Doing so would better prevent water from accumulating, such as from condensation, and thus reduce corrosion over time, as taught by You.
Regarding Claim 14, You further teaches that the terminal plate comprises: a plate body outside the cap plate and electrically connected to the terminal rivet [“rivet terminals 21a and 22a electrically connected to the electrode assembly 10 and fastened (for example, riveted or welded) to the plate terminals 21c and 22c,” paragraph 54; 21c and 22c in Fig. 1 are shown to be above the cap plate 20]; a connection hole extending in a vertical direction through the plate body with the terminal rivet accommodated therein (“The plate terminals 21c and 22c may have through-holes H3 and H4, and upper ends of the rivet terminals 21a and 22a may be inserted in the through-holes H3 and H4 by passing through the terminal holes H1 and H2,” paragraph 55); a first guide part defining a groove part outside the connection hole at where the welding fixing part is formed (G1 in Fig. 3); and a second guide part defining a groove part connecting the groove of the first guide part to the outside of the plate body (G2 in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the battery module taught by Wook and modified by You, and further modify to include the two guide parts that ultimately connect to outside the plate body, as taught by You. Doing so would better prevent water from accumulating, such as from condensation, and thus reduce corrosion over time, as taught by You.
Regarding Claim 15, You teaches that trapped water, rather than gas generated when the welding fixing part is formed, moves along the first guide part and is discharged to the outside of the terminal plate along the second guide part. While You teaches a different intended purpose, the disclosed structures, previously discussed, could serve to move gas generated along the same route and meets the limitations of instant Claim 15.
Regarding Claim 16, You further teaches that the groove of the first guide part extends in a ring shape along an outer circumference of the connection hole (G1 in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the battery module taught by Wook and modified by You, and further modify the first guide part, as taught by You. Doing so would better prevent water from accumulating, such as from condensation, and thus reduce corrosion over time, as taught by You.
Regarding Claim 18, You further teaches that the terminal plate has a terminal top surface protruding from the plate body toward the busbar to be in surface contact with and electrically connected to the busbar (21c in Fig. 3 is protruding upward to be in surface contact with and electrically connected to a busbar, when a busbar is welded to the terminal).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the battery module taught by Wook and modified by You, and further modify the terminal top surface to protrude toward the busbar in order to create a thickness in the plate body in which recesses could be formed to serve as the first and second guide parts, as taught by You. Doing so would better prevent water from accumulating, such as from condensation, and thus reduce corrosion over time, as taught by You.
Regarding Claim 19, You further teaches that the first guide part and the busbar are spaced apart from each other (Fig. 3 shows one embodiment of a terminal part, where the first guide part G1 is spaced apart from a busbar, when a busbar is welded to the terminal).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the battery module taught by Wook and modified by You, and further modify the first guide part, as taught by You. Doing so would better prevent water from accumulating, such as from condensation, and thus reduce corrosion over time, as taught by You.
Regarding Claim 20, You does not specifically teach that a distance between the first guide part and the busbar is in a range of 0.1 mm to 0.4 mm. However, You teaches that the depth of the first guide part needs to be optimized such that water does not get trapped in the first guide part (paragraph 74; Fig. 4).
Considering the distance of the first guide part and the busbar affects the ability of trapped water to escape, as taught by You, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to take the battery module taught by Wook and modified by You, and optimize the height of the first guidepost such that minimal water gets trapped, as taught by You. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wook, in view of You and in further view of Suzuki et al. (US-20220085469-A1), hereafter referred to as Suzuki.
Regarding Claim 17, Wook as modified by You does not teach that the welding fixing part is a welding seam formed by welding for fixing the busbar to the terminal plate, and wherein the welding fixing part has a protrusion extending from the busbar and fixed to the first guide part. However, Suzuki teaches a terminal for secondary battery, wherein the welding fixing part is a welding seam formed by welding for fixing the busbar (14) to the terminal plate (“busbar welding portion 14a,” paragraph 83; 14a, 14, and 70 in Fig. 7), and wherein the welding fixing part has a protrusion extending from the busbar and fixed to the first guide part (Fig. 7 shows that welding fixing part 14a extends from the busbar and is fixed to a central recess 74, which is structurally the same as the first guide part). Suzuki teaches that doing so allows the busbar to be more easily welded to the terminal (paragraph 83).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to take the battery module taught by Wook as modified by You, further modified to include the configuration of the welding fixing part taught by Suzuki, in order to more easily weld the busbar to the terminal.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN P WILKERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
/JORDAN P WILKERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights