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 .
Claims 1-18 are pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 objected to because of the following informalities: “ratio…the housing in a total size of the housing” should be “housing to a total size of the housing”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “ the separation component” in claim 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
Claim 5-6 and 11-12 are 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 5 recites “the battery cells comprise tow covers”, it is unclear if the two covers include the cover recited in claim 1 or the two covers are second and third cover rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claim 5 recites “being connected to the two opening parts”, it is unclear if the two opening parts include the opening part recited in claim 1 or the two opening parts are second and third opening parts rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claim 6 recites “the battery cells comprise two covers”, it is unclear if the two covers include the cover recited in claim 1 or the two covers are second and third cover rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claim 6 recites “jointly form the two opening parts”, it is unclear if the two opening parts include the opening part recited in claim 1 or the two opening parts are second and third opening parts rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claim 11 recites, “ratio of a size of the portion of the arc transition connection”, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 10 on which claim 11 is dependent on recites “arc transition connection” rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claim 12 recites “the battery cells comprise two covers”, it is unclear if the two covers include the cover recited in claim 1 or the two covers are second and third cover rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
Claim 12 recites “connected to the two opening parts”, it is unclear if the two opening parts include the opening part recited in claim 1 or the two opening parts are second and third opening parts rendering the claim vague and indefinite.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishimura (US PG Pub. 2016/0329532 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nishimura discloses a battery cell (para. 0009), comprising: a housing (case body, ref. 100, figure 4, para. 0009), wherein the housing is provided with an opening and a chamber (para. 0022); Nishimura discloses the housing (ref. 10) accommodating an electrode assembly (ref. D, para. 0022) thereby disclosing the housing is provided with a chamber where the electrode assembly is accommodated. Nishimura discloses the housing comprises an opening part (para. 0043, figure 4) and a body part (case body, ref. 100), the opening part surrounding the opening and the body part surrounding the chamber (figure 4); and a cover (ref. 101, figure 4) connected to the opening part and closing the opening (para. 0022, 0043). Nishimura discloses the thick-walled part (ref. 100 e) protrude outward from the thin walled (ref. 100 f, para. 0048, figure 4) thereby meeting the limitation that at least a partial region of the body part is recessed relative to the opening part to form a recessed zone. Nishimura further discloses the thickness of the recessed zone being less than the thickness of the opening part (para. 0022).
Regarding claim 2, Nishimura discloses at least a partial region of the opening part is thickened relative to the body part to form the recessed zone (figure 4, para. 0022, 0047); or at least a partial region of the body part is thinned relative to the opening part to form the recessed zone (figure 4, para. 0022, 0047).
Regarding claim 3, Nishimura discloses the recessed zone is located on an inner side of the body part adjacent to the chamber (figure 4) and the thick-walled part (ref.100 e) protrudes inward from the thin-walled part (ref. 100 f, para. 0120 ) thereby meeting the limitation recessed in a direction facing away from the chamber (figure 11, para. 0120); Nishimura also discloses the recessed zone is located on an outer side of the body part farther away from the chamber and recessed in a direction approaching the chamber (figure 4, para. 0048) as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Nishimura discloses the recessed zone is located on an inner side of the body part adjacent to the chamber and recessed in a direction facing away from the chamber (figure 11, para. 0120); the battery cell further comprising: an electrode assembly (ref. D, figure 4, para. 0074) arranged in the chamber (para. 0022, 0074), wherein part of the electrode assembly is accommodated in the recessed zone (figure 11).
Regarding claim 5, Nishimura discloses the housing is a prismatic structure (plate shape, figure 2, 3, para. 0046) with the opening at one end (figure 3, and 4, para. 0022, 0045); or the housing is a prismatic structure (figure 2, 3) with the openings at two ends (para. 0111), and the battery cell comprises two covers, the two covers being connected to the two opening parts and closing the corresponding openings, respectively (para. 0111).
Regarding claim 6, Nishimura discloses the housing comprises a first side plate (ref. 100 c, figure 3), a second side plate (ref. 100 d, figure 3), a third side plate, and a fourth side plate that are connected head to tail in sequence (para. 0046, figure 3). Nishimura discloses, the body part (ref.100 b. figure 3) includes a pair of first walls (ref. 100 c, figure 3) forming first and third side plate facing each other with an interval and a pair of second walls (ref. 100 d, figure 3) facing each other across the pair of first walls (ref. 100 c, para. 0046) which forms the second side wall and fourth side wall, thereby disclosing wherein the first side plate is parallel to and spaced apart from the third side plate, the second side plate is parallel to and spaced apart from the fourth side plate. Nishimura’s battery cell as shown in figure 3 disclose middle regions of the first side plate, the second side plate, the third side plate, and the fourth side plate jointly form the body part, and figure 4 discloses end regions of the first side plate, the second side plate, the third side plate, and the fourth side plate joints and forms an opening on one side. Nishimura discloses in another embodiment may have the openings at two ends (para. 0111) in which case the end regions of the first side plate, the second side plate, the third side plate, and the fourth side plate jointly form the two opening parts (para. 0111 – 0112, figure 8); and the battery cell comprises the two covers (ref. 101, figure 4, para. 0043, 0111), the two covers being connected to the two opening parts and closing the corresponding openings, respectively (para. 0111). Nishimura discloses the areas of the first side plate and the third side plate are greater than areas of the second side plate and the fourth side plate (para. 0046). Nishimura discloses the thick-walled part (ref. 100 e) is formed in an entire circumference of the at the opening of the body part (ref. 100b) and therefore the regions of the first side plate and the third side plate for forming the body part are integrally recessed relative to the opening part to form one recessed zone, respectively (figure 4, para. 0048, 0050).
Regarding claim 7, Nishimura discloses the thicker opening part (thick-walled part ref. 100 e) is formed in each of the first wall (ref. 100 c) and the second wall (ref. 100 d) of the body part (ref. 100 b, figure 4, para. 0050). Nishimura discloses the thick-walled part (ref. 100 e) is formed in an entire circumference of the first end (an end edge at the opening of the body part 100 b) of the body part (ref. 100 b) in the first direction (para. 0050). Therefore, Nishimura discloses regions of the second side plate and the fourth side plate for forming the body part are integrally recessed relative to the opening part to form one recessed zone, respectively (figure 4).
Regarding claim 8, as discussed for claim 7, Nishimura discloses the thick-walled opening is formed in an entire circumference of the first end (an end edge at the opening of the body part 100 b) of the body part (ref. 100 b) in the first direction (para. 0050, figure 4) and therefore the four recessed zones on the first side plate, the second side plate, the third side plate and the fourth side plate are in communication. Nishimura further discloses the thick-walled part protrude inward from the thin-walled part which includes the first side plate, the second side plate, the third side plate, and the fourth side plate as discussed with respect to claim 6 and therefore the four recessed zones on the first side plate, the second side plate, the third side plate, and the fourth side plate are all located on outer sides of the body part farther away from the chamber relative to the opening part (figure 11, para. 0120).
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US PG Pub. 2016/0329532 A1) in view of Sheng (CN 202772201U for prior art discussion see the cited machine translation).
Nishimura is relied upon as discussed above.
Regarding claim 9, Nishimura fails to disclose a ratio of the thickness of the opening part to the thickness of the recessed zone is (65–100):1; and/or a ratio of a size of the opening part in a length direction of the housing in a total size of the housing in the length direction is 1:(50–100).
Sheng discloses a cylindrical battery shell comprises of a bottom wall (ref. 1, figure 1) and a side wall, a first anti-explosion portion (ref. 2, figure 1). Sheng further discloses the wall thickness of the first anti-explosion portion (ref. 2, figure 1) and the wall thickness of the second anti-explosion portion (ref. 3, figure 1) are larger than that of a middle side wall (ref. 4, figure 1) between the first anti-explosion portion (ref. 2, figure 1) and the second anti-explosion portion (ref. 3, figure 1, para. 0017). Sheng discloses the first and second explosion proof wall is 0.02-0.05 mm thicker than the middle side wall (para. 0018).
Sheng further discloses the first anti-explosion portion (ref. 2) is formed upwards from the bottom wall to a 5-8 mm height of the side wall and the second anti-explosion portion (ref. 3) is formed downwards from a cylinder ring port to a 5-8mm height of the side wall (para. 0017). Though Sheng doesn’t disclose the total size of the housing Sheng further discloses such a utlity model satisfy the market capacity requirement and compared with a shell which completely adopts a thick side wall, the raw material is saved, completely meets the requirements of safety tests such as impact, free falling, needling and the like safety performance is stable (para. 0010-0012) by avoiding liquid leakage and bursting (para. 0019). Therefore, Sheng establishes the extent of thickened wall region in the length direction as a result effective variable for improving and meeting the impact, bump, the safety test requirements, the market capacity requirement to economize raw materials and safety performance. One of ordinary skill in art would have been motivated to control ratio of the size of opening part to a total size of the housing in the length direction in the claimed range for improving and meeting the impact, bump, the safety test requirements, the market capacity requirement to economize raw materials and safety performance as disclosed by Sheng. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to have arrived at the claimed ranges of ratio of the size of opening part to a total size of the housing in the length direction by routine optimization to achieve battery cell with suitable characteristics. (MPEP 2144.05 (II).
One of ordinary skill in art would have been motivated to modify the housing of Nishimura to have the ratio of the size of opening part to a total size of the housing in the length direction as taught by Sheng for the impact, bump, the safety test requirements, the market capacity requirement to economize raw materials and safety performance.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US PG Pub. 2016/0329532 A1) in view of Deng (CN212907865U, for prior art discussion see the cited machine translation).
Nishimura is relied upon as discussed above.
Regarding claim 10, modified Nishimura fails to disclose the recessed zone is in arc transition connection with a region adjacent to the recessed zone.
Deng discloses a battery with a housing (ref. 100, figure 1) around a chamber and cover to connected to the housing to seal the chamber using a connecting portion (ref. 11, figure 1) which seals and holds the chamber (para. 0007). Deng discloses the connecting portion includes a first connecting portion and a second connecting portion, the first connecting portion (ref. 111, figure 1) and the second connecting portion (ref. 112, figure 1) are connected to two opposite ends of the main body portion (ref. 12, figure 1), the thickness of the first connecting portion and the thickness of the second connecting portion are both greater than the thickness of the main body portion (para. 0008). Deng further discloses the first surface (ref. 1103, figure 4) and the second end surface (ref. 1102, figure 4) are transitionally connected by a fillet or chamfer (para. 0036) there by disclosing an arc transition connection. Deng discloses through setting up first surface and second terminal surface and pass through fillet or chamfer transitional coupling, adopt fillet or chamfer structure at connecting portion (ref. 11) and main part (ref. 12) junction for stress distribution tends to be even, thereby avoids stress concentration, reduces because stress concentration causes the position fracture's that first surface and second terminal surface link up risk (para. 0036).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the battery cell of Nishimura as taught by Deng. The modified battery cell of Nishimura would have a recessed zone which is in arc transition connection with a region adjacent to the recessed zone. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion to battery cell of Nishimura for stress distribution to be even.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US PG Pub. 2016/0329532 A1) in view of Deng (CN212907865U, for prior art discussion see the cited machine translation) as applied to claim 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Kawase (US PG Pub. 2014/0370370 A1).
Nishimura and Deng are relied upon as discussed above.
Regarding claim 11, Nishimura discloses a recessed zone (thin-walled part) formed between first and second end of the body part (para. 0022), so the recessed zone (thin-walled part) is confined by the thick-walled part at one end and the second end of the body part such that size of the recessed part (thin walled part) in the length direction is determined by overall length of the case body and the size of the length of the thick walled part.
Nishimura fails to disclose a ratio of a size of the portion of the arc transition connection in the length direction of the housing to a size of the recessed zone in the length direction of the housing is (0.5–5):100.
As discussed above with respect to claim 10 Deng further discloses an arc transition connection with a region adjacent to the recessed zone. Deng discloses the first surface (ref.1103, figure 4) is parallel to the second surface (ref. 1201, figure 4) and the angle of the fillet formed by the second surface (ref. 1201, figure 4) and the second end surface (ref. 1102, figure 4) is greater than or equal to 90 °(para. 0037). It is understood that the angle of the fillet is the corresponding degree of the arc. The fillet formed by the second surface (ref. 1201) and the second end surface (ref. 1102) has an angle greater than or equal to 90 degrees, so that the stress is distributed more uniformly on the fillet, and the risk of cracking at the joint of the second end surface (ref. 1102) and the second surface (ref. 1201) caused by stress concentration is further reduced. Moreover, since the first surface (ref. 1103) and the second surface (ref. 1201) are parallel, according to the principle of stagger angle, the angle of the fillet formed by the first surface (ref. 1103) and the second end surface (ref. 1102) is also greater than or equal to 90 °, to further reduce the risk of stress concentration causing cracking at the joint of the first surface and the second end surface (para. 0037).
Combination of Nishimura and Deng fails to disclose a ratio of a size of the portion of the arc transition connection in the length direction of the housing to a size of the recessed zone in the length direction of the housing is (0.5–5):100.
Kawase discloses a battery housing (ref. 10) which includes whose one side is opened and a closing member (ref. 2) for closing an opening section (ref. 11, para. 0035, figure 1). Kawase discloses the battery housing having a thick-walled section adjacent opening section and a normal wall plate (ref. 1, para. 0038). The thick-wall section includes a thickness gradually changing section (ref. 121) whose thickness changes between the normal wall plate and constant thickness section (ref. 122, para. 0038). Thus, the thickness gradually increasing portion (ref. 121) is a transition connection between the thickened region adjacent to the opening and the thinner normal wall plate corresponding to the claimed transition portion between the recessed zone and the region adjacent to the recessed zone (figure 4). Kawasse discloses the size of the transition connection in the length direction as L4 (figure 4) and it is preferable that the value expressed as “(thick-wall section height L3) −(thickness gradually-changing section L4)” be equal to or less than the fusion depth A of the welding section (ref. 13, figure 4 and 8, para. 0039) (L3−L4≦A). Kawase further discloses when (L3−L4≦A) the bottom side of the welding section (ref. 13) is confined within the range of the thick-wall section (ref. 12) of the case member (para. 0052, figure 8).
Therefore, Deng and Kawase establish the size of the arc transition connection is a result effective variable to reduce the risk of stress concentration causing cracking at the joint and for proper welding of case member to the closing member respectively.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to control size of the arc transition connection as disclose by combination of Deng and Kawase and the size of the recesses zone as disclosed by Nishimura. Therefore by controlling the ratio between them for the battery cell of Nishimura to reduce the risk of stress concentration causing cracking at the joint and for proper welding of case member to the closing member respectively as disclosed by Deng and Kawase. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to have arrived at the claimed ratio to control size of the arc transition connection and the size of the recesses zone by routine optimization to achieve a battery cell with suitable characteristics (MPEP 2144.05 (II)).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US PG Pub. 2016/0329532 A1) in view of Shishido (US PG Pub. 2013/0270981 A1)
Nishimura is relied upon as discussed above.
Regarding claim 12, Nishimura discloses the battery cell having two openings are formed at two ends of the housing, and the battery cell comprises two covers, the two covers being connected to the two opening parts and closing the corresponding openings, respectively by disclosing in an embodiment the housing may have two openings at both end and in which case the opening of the housing need to be closed by separate lid (ref. 101, para. 0111). Nishimura discloses the cover (lid, ref. 101) welded to the housing (para. 0056). Nishimura discloses battery housing (case body ref. 100) is a bottomed cylinder (para. 0045) i.e. one of the two covers is integrally formed with the housing. Nishimura discloses an electrode assembly (ref. D) arranged in the chamber (figure 4) and further discloses a part of external terminals (ref. 11, figure 4) disposed on the lid or a case (para. 0043, 0055).
Nishimura fails to disclose, a positive electrode tab of the electrode assembly is electrically connected to the positive electrode terminal, and a negative electrode tab of the electrode assembly is electrically connected to the negative electrode terminal,
one of the two covers is provided with a positive electrode terminal, and the other of the two covers is provided with a negative electrode terminal; or either one of the two covers is welded to the housing and provided with a positive electrode terminal and a negative electrode terminal, and the other one of the two covers is integrally formed with the housing; and the battery cell further comprising: an electrode assembly arranged in the chamber.
Shishido discloses a battery housing with a case body (ref. 1) comprising a side wall and an opening; a lid plate for closing the opening (ref. 2, para. 0007). Shishido further discloses an electrode assembly (power generating element ref. 3) comprising of positive and negative electrode plates (para. 0028) and the electrode assembly is connected to positive electrode terminal (ref. 5) and a negative electrode terminal (ref. 7, para. 0025). Shishito further discloses the positive and negative electrode tabs (unapplied portions ref. 3a and ref. 3b) are respectively welded to connecting portions ref. 4a and ref. 6a of positive and negative current collectors 4 and 6 (para. 0039). Therefore, the positive terminal (ref. 5) is electrically connected to positive current collector (ref. 4) while negative terminal (ref. 7) is electrically connected to negative current collector (ref. 6). Shishido discloses a battery cell with a lid plate for closing the opening, an end portion of the lid plate being projected from an outer surface of the side wall; and a welded portion that joins the lid plate with the side wall. (para. 0007)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the battery cell to provide the pair of external terminals of Nishimura as a positive and negative electrode terminal connected respectively to positive and electrode plates as taught by Shishido. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to form a conventional sealed battery having externally accessible positive and negative terminals electrically connected to the respective electrodes in the electrode assembly.
Claims 13- 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US PG Pub. 2016/0329532 A1) in view of Mori (US PG Pub. 2014/0295220A1).
Nishimura is relied upon as discussed above.
Regarding claim 13, Nishimura discloses a battery (energy storage apparatus) comprising the battery cell (energy storage device, figure 1)
Nishimura fails to disclose a battery comprising of a box.
Mori discloses a battery (energy storage apparatus) comprising the battery cell (energy storage device, figure 1). Mori further discloses a battery comprising of a box (ref. 110, figure 9, para. 0156). Mori discloses the frame (ref. 110) securely holds the plurality of stacked (aligned) battery cells (para. 0156).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the battery of Nishimura to as taught by Mori. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the battery to comprise of a box to securely hold the plurality of stacked battery cells.
Regarding claim 14, Nishimura discloses a separation component (outer spacer, ref. 2B and inner spacer ref. 2A). Nishimura further discloses the outer spacer (ref. 2B) is disposed between the battery cell and an end member (para. 0061, 0078) thereby meeting the limitation the separation component is configured to separate the battery cell from other members adjacent to the battery cell, (para. 0078, figure 5) and at least part of the separation component is accommodated in the recessed zone (para. 0077, figure 5).
Regarding claim 15, Nishimura discloses the battery (energy storage apparatus) comprises a plurality of battery cells (para. 0058, 0076, figure 1). The limitation “arranged sequentially in the box” is a product-by-process limitation (MPEP 2113). The implied structure is simply a battery comprising of plurality of battery cells which the combination of Nishimura and Mori discloses as discussed with respect to claim 13 as set forth above. Nishimura further discloses as discussed above with respect to claim 1, the recessed zone of the battery cell is located on an outer side of the body part farther away from the chamber and is recessed in a direction approaching the chamber (figure 4, para. 0048); and the recessed zone of one of two adjacent battery cells faces the other of the battery cells (figure 4). Nishimura discloses the inner spacer (ref. 2A) is disposed of between two adjacent battery cells (para. 0061, figure 4), and at least part of the separation component for separating the two battery cells is accommodated in the recessed zone (figure 4, para. 0064).
Regarding claim 16, Nishimura discloses the recessed thin-walled portions (ref. 100 c) of the two adjacent battery cells face one another with inner spacing (ref. 2A) positioned in between (figure 4) thereby meeting the limitation the recessed zones of any two adjacent battery cells communicate with each other to form an accommodating chamber (para. 0048) and the separation component (ref. 2A) is accommodated in the accommodating chamber (figure 4).
Regarding claim 17, Nishimura discloses the separation component (inner spacer, ref. 2A) comprises of restricting parts for preventing a displacement of two battery cells (para. 0062) thereby meeting the limitation of a reinforcing member.
Regarding claim 18, Nishimura fails to disclose an electric device comprising of a battery cell.
Mori discloses battery cells adopted as power sources of vehicles (e.g., automobiles, two-wheeled motor vehicles and the like) and various equipment (mobile terminals, notebook-size personal computers and the like) (para. 0003). The use of a battery cell as a power source for an electric device is well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the battery cell of Nishimura in an electric device as taught by Mori. One of ordinary skill in art would have been motivated to include battery cells in an electric device to power the device as is well known in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISWARYA MATHEW whose telephone number is (571)272-9515. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/I.M./
Iswarya MathewExaminer, Art Unit 1788
08/27/2026
/ALEXANDRE F FERRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights