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. JP 2023-097626, filed on June 14, 2023.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsumasa (JP 2014-059954) in view of Lee (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0273415).
Regarding Claim 1, Tetsumasa teaches a power storage cell comprising: an electrode assembly ([0030] teaches an electrode group); and a case housing the electrode assembly ([0030] teaches battery can C), the case including: a bottom portion ([0022] and Figure 4e teach bottom portion 11); a first side surface portion extending upright from the bottom portion ([0027] and Figures 3c & 4d teach face 31a); a second side surface portion extending upright from the bottom portion and facing the first side surface portion ([0027] and Figures 3c & 4d teach face 31b); a first end face portion extending from the first side surface portion in a direction in which the first side surface portion faces the second side surface portion ([0022] and Figures 4d & e teach side wall portion 13); a second end face portion extending from the second side surface portion in a direction in which the second side surface portion faces the first side surface portion (Figures 4d & e teach a second end face portion protruding from the second side surface portion towards the first side surface portion); a welding portion connecting the first end face portion and the second end face portion to each other ([0022] and Figures 4e & 5 teach joint portions 22 and 23, joined by laser beam welder LB).
Tetsumasa does not teach a rib located along a corner edge formed by the first side surface portion and the first end face portion.
Lee does teach a rib located along a corner edge formed by the first side surface portion and the first end face portion ([0045]-[0049] and Figures 3 & 4 teach support portion 38 disposed on the corner edges of the cell case 30).
Tetsumasa and Lee are both analogous to the instant invention as they both relate to the formation of a case for a power storage cell. To solve the same problem of providing structural support to a prismatic battery cell, Lee teaches the introduction of support ribs at the corner edges of the cell casing to make a more rigid case less susceptible to deformation ([0049]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Tetsumasa to include support ribs as taught by Lee.
Regarding Claim 2, Modified Tetsumasa teaches the limitations of Claim 1, as described above.
Modified Tetsumasa does not teach the welding portion extends in a height direction that is a direction in which the first side surface portion extends upright, and the rib extends in the height direction.
Tetsumasa goes on to teach the welding portion extends in a height direction that is a direction in which the first side surface portion extends upright (Figures 4e & 5 teach joint portions 22 and 23 extending upright).
Lee goes on to teach the rib extends in the height direction (Figure 3 teaches the support portion 38 extending upright).
To solve the same problem of providing a robust cell casing, Tetsumasa teaches welding the joint portions 22 and 23 over the entire height of the battery can, while Lee teaches extending the support portion 38 in the height direction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to take modified Tetsumasa and extend the welding portion and rib portion in the height direction, as taught by Tetsumasa and Lee.
Regarding Claim 3, Modified Tetsumasa teaches the limitations of Claim 1, as described above.
Modified Tetsumasa does not teach the rib protrudes inward of the case from the corner edge.
Lee goes on to teach the rib protrudes inward of the case from the corner edge ([0045]-[0049] and Figures 3 & 4 teach support portion 38 disposed on the inner edge corners of the cell case 30).
To solve the same problem of creating a more rigid battery cell, Lee teaches disposing the support portion 38 on the interior edges of the battery cell. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to take modified Tetsumasa and incorporate the rib portions on the inside of the battery cell, as taught by Lee.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tetsumasa in view of Lee, further in view of Masayuki (JP 2000-030671).
Regarding Claim 4, Modified Tetsumasa teaches the limitations of Claim 1 as well as the rib protrudes from the corner edge, as described above.
Modified Tetsumasa does not teach the rib protrudes outward of the case.
Masayuki does teach the rib protrudes outward of the case ([0010] and Figure 2e teach rib 15 protruding outward of the charge storage case).
Masayuki is analogous to the instant invention as it relates to the construction of a mechanically robust casing for a power storage cell. Masayuki teaches the addition of a rib on the outer surface of the cell case enhances the rigidity and strength of the cell case ([0008]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to take modified Tetsumasa and incorporate ribs on the outer portion of the cell case, as taught by Masayuki.
Regarding Claim 5, Modified Tetsumasa teaches the limitations of Claim 1, as described above.
Modified Tetsumasa does not teach the welding portion extends in a height direction that is a direction in which the first side surface portion extends upright, the rib extends in the height direction, and the rib protrudes both inward and outward of the case from the corner edge.
Tetsumasa goes on to teach the welding portion extends in a height direction that is a direction in which the first side surface portion extends upright (Figures 4e & 5 teach joint portions 22 and 23 extending upright).
Lee goes on to teach the rib extends in the height direction, and the rib protrudes inward of the case from the corner edge ([0045]-[0049] and Figures 3 & 4 teach support portion 38 disposed on the inner edges of the cell case 30).
Masayuki teaches the rib protrudes outward of the case ([0010] and Figure 2e teach rib 15 protruding outward of the charge storage case).
To solve the same problem of providing mechanical strength to a battery cell, Tetsumasa teaches welding the joint portions 22 and 23 over the entire height of the battery can. Lee teaches placing the support portions on the inner edge corners of the cell. Masayuki teaches placing ribs on the exterior of the cell. While Masayuki does not specifically teach the rib be positioned at the corner edge, Lee does teach to position the rib at the corner edge. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to take modified Tetsumasa and extend the welding portion, as taught by Tetsumasa, extend the rib in the height direction and dispose the rib on the inner edge corner of the cell case, as taught by Lee, and dispose the rib on the outer surface of the case, as taught by Masayuki.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kogure (US 2011/0250486) teaches the use of retainer walls position along the inner edge corners of a prismatic battery cell.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN G. DIAMOND whose telephone number is (571)270-5888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5 pm.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at (571) 270-5343. 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.
/B.G.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/SADIE WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights