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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2023-0086567, filed on 07/04/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 05/08/2024 and 01/13/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings received on 05/08/2024 were reviewed and are acceptable.
Specification
The specification filed on 05/08/2024 was reviewed and is acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 14 and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the terminal portion" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the terminal portion" in lines 3 and 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang et al. (US 2011/0151294 A1; hereinafter Kang).
Regarding claim 1, Kang discloses a rechargeable battery (secondary battery; [abstract]), comprising: an electrode assembly [abstract]; a can accommodating the electrode assembly [0008] in an interior space [see Fig.1]; and a cap assembly coupled to the can to seal the can (cap assembly coupled to an upper portion of the can, [0008]), the cap assembly comprising a cap-up configured to contact an external device (including an upper cap that transfers a current of the electrode assembly to an exterior of the can; [0008]), wherein the cap-up comprises a base portion (peripheral part; [0008]), a through-hole at a center of the base portion (having a through hole at a center of the lower cap; [0013]), a terminal portion located farther from the electrode assembly than the base portion (a peripheral part disposed at a periphery of the terminal part and stepped from the terminal part; [0008]), and a plurality of support portions connecting the base portion to the terminal portion (a connection part connecting the terminal part to the peripheral part; [0008]), and wherein the terminal portion comprises a protruding portion extending outward from an edge of the terminal portion between adjacent support portions of the plurality of support portions ([t]he gas exhausting hole may include a first curved portion disposed at a portion where the gas exhausting hole meets the terminal part; [0012]; see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 2, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the terminal portion is circular (the upper cap may be formed from a circular plate, and can include a terminal part protruding at its center; [0030]; wherein the upper cap may be electrically connected to the electrode assembly, and transmit a current generated from the electrode assembly to the outside; [0030]); and the protruding portion extends substantially parallel (when the curved surface primarily formed between the first flat portion 141a and the gas exhausting holes 144 is pressed using a jig to form a planar surface; [0037]; see 1.1. Modified figure 3 of Kang below) to the terminal portion and away from a center point of the terminal portion (terminal part including a first flat portion disposed at a center of the upper cap and a second flat portion extending from a periphery of the first flat portion; [Abstract]).
<1.1. Modified Figure 3. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image1.png
309
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the terminal portion comprises a first circumferential portion in contact with the plurality of support portions and a second circumferential portion between the plurality of support portions; and the protruding portion is substantially at a center of the second circumferential portion (see 1.2. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
<1.2. Modified Figure 4. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image2.png
418
682
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the protruding portion comprises an arc shape having a single curvature; and a curvature center of the protruding portion is in the terminal portion and spaced apart by a distance to the center point of the terminal portion (see 1.3. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
<1.3. Modified Figure 4. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image3.png
374
593
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the protruding portion comprises two oblique portions and a curved portion extending between the two oblique portions (see 1.4. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
Kang discloses that the curved portion comprises an arc shape having a single curvature (see 1.4. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below); and a curvature center of the curved portion substantially coincides with the center of the second circumferential portion (same R1 on both sides of arc, therefore curvature center substantially coincides with the center of the second circumferential portion, see 1.4. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
<1.4. Modified Figure 4. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image4.png
411
477
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that a maximum protruding amount of the protruding portion is smaller than a distance between an inner side surface of the base portion and the second circumferential portion in a planar view (there is a distance between the edge of the protrusion and the inner edge of the base portion, therefore the distance of the protruding amount is smaller than a distance between an inner side surface of the base portion and the second circumferential portion in a planar view, see 1.5. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
<1.5. Modified Figure 4. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image5.png
394
468
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that a rechargeable battery (secondary battery; [abstract]), comprising: an electrode assembly [abstract]; a can accommodating the electrode assembly [0008] in an interior space [see Fig.1]; and a cap assembly coupled to the can to seal the can (cap assembly coupled to an upper portion of the can; [0008]), the cap assembly comprising a cap-up configured to contact an external device (including an upper cap that transfers a current of the electrode assembly to an exterior of the can; [0008]), wherein the cap-up comprises a base portion (peripheral part; [0008]), a through-hole at a center of the base portion (having a through hole at a center of the lower cap; [0013]), a terminal portion located farther from the electrode assembly than the base portion (a peripheral part disposed at a periphery of the terminal part and stepped from the terminal part; [0008]; see 1.1. Modified Figure 3. of Kang), and a plurality of support portions connecting the base portion to the terminal portion (a connection part connecting the terminal part to the peripheral part; [0008]; thee are present in Figure 4), and wherein the terminal portion comprises a plurality of connection portions connected to each of the plurality of support portions (a connection part connecting the terminal part to the peripheral part; [0030]), a circular central portion on an inner side of the plurality of connection portions (a first flat portion disposed at a center of the upper cap; [Abs], see Figure 4.), and a protruding portion extending outward from an edge of the central portion between adjacent connection portions of the plurality of connection portions (see 1.2. Modified figure 4 of Kang above).
Regarding claim 9, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the protruding portion extends substantially parallel to the central portion and away from a center point of the central portion (protrusion is parallel to first flat portion, see 1.6. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
<1.6. Modified Figure 4. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image1.png
309
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the protruding portion comprises an arc shape having a single curvature (see figure 1.3. Modified figure 4 of Kang above).
Regarding claim 11, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that a maximum protruding amount of the protruding portion with respect to the central portion is greater than a width of the connection portion along a radial direction (there is a distance between the edge of the protrusion and the inner edge of the base portion, therefore the distance of the protruding amount is smaller than a distance a width of the connection portion along a radial direction, see 1.5. Modified Figure 4 of Kang above).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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(s) 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (US 2011/0151294 A1; hereinafter “Kang”), in view of Yamaguchi et al. (JP 2020135929 A; hereinafter “Yamaguchi”; see attached machine translation for reference).
Regarding claim 12, Kang discloses a rechargeable battery (secondary battery; [abstract]), comprising: an electrode assembly [abstract]; a can accommodating the electrode assembly [0008] in an interior space [see Fig.1]; and a cap assembly coupled to the can to seal the can (cap assembly coupled to an upper portion of the can, [0008]), the cap assembly comprising a cap-up for contacting an external device (including an upper cap that transfers a current of the electrode assembly to an exterior of the can; [0008]), wherein the cap-up comprises a base portion (peripheral part; [0008]), a through-hole at a center of the base portion (having a through hole at a center of the lower cap; [0013]), a terminal portion located farther from the electrode assembly than the base portion (a peripheral part disposed at a periphery of the terminal part and stepped from the terminal part; [0008]), and a plurality of support portions connecting the base portion to the terminal portion (a connection part connecting the terminal part to the peripheral part; [0008]), and wherein the terminal portion comprises a protruding portion extending outward from an edge of the terminal portion between adjacent support portions of the plurality of support portions ([t]he gas exhausting hole may include a first curved portion disposed at a portion where the gas exhausting hole meets the terminal part; [0012]).
Kang fails to disclose that the terminal portion is non-circular.
Yamaguchi teaches the ventilation hole is positioned to form part of each side of a regular polygon drawn in the center of the cap, [0026], see figure 2.
Kang and Yamaguchi are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely sealing caps in secondary batteries.
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a non-circular terminal portion in the invention of Kang with the reasonable expectation that doing so would more reliably prevent caps from interlocking during the battery manufacturing process without causing problems such as damage to other caps [0009], as suggested by Yamaguchi.
Regarding claim 13, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the terminal portion comprises a structure comprising a recess portion on the edge between the adjacent support portions of the plurality of support portions(see 1.5. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below); and the protruding portion is substantially at a center of the recess portion (same R1 on both sides of arc, therefore curvature center substantially coincides with the center of the second circumferential portion, see 1.6. Modified Figure 4 of Kang below).
<1.6. Modified Figure 4. Kang et al.>
PNG
media_image6.png
351
497
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Kang fails to disclose that the terminal portion is non-circular.
Yamaguchi teaches the ventilation hole is positioned to form part of each side of a regular polygon drawn in the center of the cap, [0026], see figure 2.
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a non-circular terminal portion in the invention of Kang with the reasonable expectation that doing so would more reliably prevent caps from interlocking during the battery manufacturing process without causing problems such as damage to other caps [0009], as suggested by Yamaguchi.
Regarding claim 14, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang further discloses that the recess portion comprises an arc shape having a single curvature (R1, see figure 1.6. Modified figure 4 of Kang above); and a curvature center of the recess portion is on an outer side of the terminal portion (R1 is on an outer side of terminal portion, see figure 1.6. Modified figure 4 of Kang above).
Regarding claim 15, Kang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Kang fails to disclose that the recess portion comprises a straight-line shape that connects two neighboring support portions among the plurality of support portions.
Yamaguchi teaches the boundary line between the flange portion and the ventilation hole is positioned to form part of each side of a square drawn in the center of the cap [0026].
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a straight-line shape that connects two neighboring support portions among the plurality of support portions in the invention of Kang with the reasonable expectation that doing so would more reliably prevent caps from interlocking during the battery manufacturing process without causing problems such as damage to other caps [0009], as suggested by Yamaguchi.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The present invention is related to, inter alia, a rechargeable battery, comprising a non-circular terminal portion, and wherein the non-circular terminal portion comprises a protruding portion extending outward from an edge of the non-circular terminal portion between adjacent support portions of the plurality of support portions, wherein the protruding portion comprises an arc shape having a single curvature; and a distance between a center point of the terminal portion and an outermost point of the protruding portion is greater than a distance between the center point of the terminal portion and each of the plurality of support portions in a planar view.
Kang is considered to be the closest relevant prior art to dependent claim 16. Kang discloses most of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Kang does not disclose, teach, fairly suggest, nor render obvious the above noted limitations. To the contrary, Kang explicitly discloses that the relevance of the radio of the recess R1, and therefore the distance between the center of the terminal and the edge of the protrusion portion is not explicitly disclosed, nor relevant to the invention. Accordingly, there does not appear to be any reasonable basis for the skilled artisan to expect that a distance between a center point of the terminal portion and an outermost point of the protruding portion is greater than a distance between the center point of the terminal portion and each of the plurality of support portions in a planar view, and thus there does not appear to be any reasonable basis for the skilled artisan to abandon the teachings of Kang and be directed towards the claimed distance relation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sugimoto et al. (JP 2020140866 A; see attached machine translation for reference) discloses a sealing cap for cylindrical batteries made of a disc-shaped metal plate, and a roughly circular protrusion with multiple ventilation holes formed in the center of the metal plate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA N LIZARAZU whose telephone number is (571)272-9697. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 5712703879. 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.
/J.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights