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.
(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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (US-20150357679-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Sano’
Regarding Claim 1,
Sano teaches a battery comprising: a battery can made of metal and including a tubular part and a bottom part ( Sano, battery case, 11, Fig. 1) , the tubular part being provided at one end of the battery can with an opening edge part, the bottom part closing another end of the tubular part (Sano, see Fig. 1) ; an electrode body housed inside the tubular part (Sano, electrode assembly, 12, Fig. 1) ; and a sealing member bonded to the opening edge part of the battery can to seal an opening of the opening edge part (Sano, “ a wound-type electrode assembly and a non-aqueous electrolyte housed in the battery case; and a sealing plate for sealing the opening portion. ”, see [0028]), the sealing member including: a gasket part (Sano, gasket, 13, Fig. 1) ; a disk part made of metal (Sano “T and a sealing plate 14 for sealing the opening portion of the battery case 11.”, see [0118]); a ring part with a center part in which the disk part is crimped with the gasket part interposed between the center part and the disk part (Sano, battery case, 11, Fig.1 )(The examiner notes it’s the top part) and an intermediate member bonded to an upper surface of the ring part (Sano, “A toroidal insulating layer 19 formed of an electrical insulating material is disposed so as to cover the outer surface of the bent opening edge portion of the battery case 11”, see [0124])
Regarding Claim 7,
Sano teaches the battery according to claim 1, wherein the intermediate member has an annular shape, and the annular shape has a diameter equal to a diameter of the battery can (Sano, “A toroidal insulating layer 19 formed of an electrical insulating material is disposed so as to cover the outer surface of the bent opening edge portion of the battery case 11 and the surface of the gasket peripheral to the bent opening edge portion”, see [0124])(The examiner notes that its annular as the battery is round. The examiner also measures the diameter from the center of the cell).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20150357679-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Sano’ in view of (US-20180301672-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Aoki’
Regarding Claim 2,
Sano does not teach wherein the intermediate member is made of a metal material having a melting point lower than melting points of the metal of the disk part and the metal of the battery can.
Aoki teaches wherein the intermediate member is made of a metal material having a melting point lower than melting points of the metal of the disk part and the metal of the battery can (Aoki, “When the thickness of the second metal layer has the above-mentioned relationship between the central portion and the collar portion, it is preferable that the second metal has a melting point and/or resistivity lower than those of the first metal. When the melting point of the second metal is lower than that of the first metal, the sealing body is easily formed and the weldability of the lead to the sealing body is further increased. When the resistivity of the second metal is lower than that of the first metal, the resistance of the sealing body is advantageously reduced.”, see [0025]).
Aoki teaches that the lower melting point allows the sealing body to be easily formed.
Sano and Aoki are analogous as they are both of the same field of cylindrical cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the intermediate part as taught in Sano to be a metal with a lower melting point as taught in Aoki in order to allow for easier forming of the cell.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20150357679-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Sano’ in view of (US-20180287124-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kambayashi’
Regarding Claim 3,
Modified Sano does not teach wherein the sealing member includes the ring part and the intermediate member that are bonded to each other by a first melted part.
Kambayashi teaches parts bonded to each other by a first melted part (Kambayashi, “ The welded portion 430 is formed in a state where the welded portion 430 reaches the cover member 700 through the electrode-assembly-side arrangement portion 420”, see [0082]).
Kambayashi teaches that this welding allows for smaller energy and the suppression of damage. (Kambayashi, “a volume of the welded portion 430A can be made small. Accordingly, welding can be performed with small energy and hence, it is possible to suppress the occurrence of sputter and damage applied to the electrode assembly 600 at the time of welding..”, see [0041]).
Sano and Kambayashi are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery construction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ring and intermediate connection with the weld as taught in Kambayashi in order to improve the weld while lessening damage.
Regarding Claim 4,
Modified Sano teaches the battery according to claim 3, wherein the first melted part has a surface in contact with the ring part and the gasket part and has a melted area on the surface that is larger than a melted area on an interface between the ring part and the intermediate member (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
670
609
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5,
Modified Sano teaches the battery according to claim 3, wherein the first melted part protrudes on the surface in contact with the ring part and the gasket part toward the gasket part (see annotated figure above).
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20150357679-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Sano’
Regarding Claim 6,
Modified Sano does not teach wherein the ring part has an upper surface provided with a recess, and the intermediate member is bonded to the ring part while being engaged in the recess.
Sano does teach wherein the ring part has an upper surface provided with a recess, and the plate member is bonded to the ring part while being engaged in the recess. (Sano, “The sealing plate 14 is hat-shaped and has an annular flange (brim) 14 a and columnar terminal portions 14 b and 14 c protruding from the inner circumference of the brim 14 a in the thickness direction.”, see [0120]).
Sano teaches that its design restricts expansion and contraction of the battery case and that the intermediate member (Sano, “That is, excellent high temperature storage characteristics is obtained. Moreover, it is possible to suppress restrictions on expansion and contraction of the electrodes during charge and discharge. Therefore, high capacity can be secured, thereby allowing obtaining of high charge-discharge cycle characteristics.”, see [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the intermediate layer as taught in Sano to have the section in the recess as taught in Sano in order to restrict the expansion of the battery and provide for a better seal.
Regarding Claim 8,
Sano does not teach the battery according to claim 7, wherein the annular shape of the intermediate member has an outer periphery thinner in thickness than an inner periphery.
Sano does teach an annular shape of the plate has an outer periphery thinner in thickness than an inner periphery (Sano, “The sealing plate 14 is hat-shaped and has an annular flange (brim) 14 a and columnar terminal portions 14 b and 14 c protruding from the inner circumference of the brim 14 a in the thickness direction.”, see [0120]).
Sano teaches that its design restricts expansion and contraction of the battery case (Sano, “ That is, excellent high temperature storage characteristics is obtained. Moreover, it is possible to suppress restrictions on expansion and contraction of the electrodes during charge and discharge. Therefore, high capacity can be secured, thereby allowing obtaining of high charge-discharge cycle characteristics.”, see [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the intermediate layer as taught in Sano to have the dimensions of the plate as taught in Sano in order to restrict the expansion of the battery and provide for a better seal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm.
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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights