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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: reference number “415” in figure 4B and reference number “610b” in figure 6B. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Qiu et al. (US-20190198909-A1), hereinafter Qiu.
Regarding claim 1, Qiu teaches a container configured to enclose a battery cell, the container comprising (fig. 4; [0039] packaging bag 2): a sealed region extending from a first side wall of the container (fig. 4, side seal 23 on the side wall of the packaging bag ([0038]); and a terrace region extending from a second side wall of the container (fig. 4, terrace region interpreted to be where the top seal 22 is located in fig. 4; [0038]), wherein conductive tabs are configured to extend from the battery cell through the terrace region to provide external terminals for the battery cell (fig. 4; tabs 3 extend from the side that is interpreted as the terrace region; [0038]), wherein the sealed region and the terrace region intersect in a sealed corner region located proximate to a first corner of the container (fig. 4 notch 24 formed at the intersection of the side seal and top seal visually proximate the corner of the container; [0038]), wherein the sealed corner region is formed at an angle such that the sealed region is configured to be folded upwards along a fold line (fig. 4 seal 23 is folded upwards; fig. 5 fold line 232; [0060]) and attached to the first side wall of the container ([0060] side seal 23 is attached to the outer side surface of the packaging) without the fold line extending into the terrace region (fig. 5 the folding line 232 is only within side seal 23 and terminates at the edge 241 of the notched structure where the top seal, interpreted as the terrace region, and side seal meet; [0039]; therefore, since the notch designates the intersection of the two regions, and the folding line terminates at the first edge of the notch, the folding line is not considered to extend into the terrace region, only to reach the intersection region from the side seal region; alternatively, the terrace region can be interpreted as the region only wherein the conductive tabs extend through the casing given the wording of the claim, rather than the entire length of the second side wall of the container; alternatively, see the embodiment of fig. 8 wherein the folding portion 25 is separate from the folding portion of the side seal, therefore the fold line of the side seal does not extend into the top region of the case at all), and wherein the first corner of the container is shaped such that the sealed region extends at least a threshold distance from the first side wall along an entire length of the sealed region (fig. 5; the folding line 232 designates the heat seal zone with W1, [0009], and W designates the entire width of the side seal; based on the depiction of the threshold distance in the instant specification and drawings, the threshold distance is interpreted as the width of the seal).
Regarding claim 2, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Qiu also teaches the first corner of the container is shaped into a rounded corner or a diagonal chamfer corner (figs. 2-9 show a rounded corner).
Regarding claim 3, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 2. Qiu also teaches wherein the diagonal chamfer corner is formed at the angle such that the diagonal chamfer corner is positioned parallel to the sealed corner region (the diagonal chamfer corner was not required in claim 2, upon which claim 3 depends; since the read on embodiment for claim 2 has the rounded corner rather than the diagonal chamfer corner, this claim is not limiting).
Regarding claim 4, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Qiu also teaches wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter ([0009]; a width of the heat-seal zone satisfies ⅕W≤W1≤⅘W; [0049] W1 can be from 0.7 mm to 1.3 mm, meaning the range of the threshold distance would overlap the claimed 1.0 mm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 8, Qiu teaches a battery pack comprising: a battery cell ([0039] cell 1); and a container enclosing the battery cell ([0039] packaging bag 2), the container comprising: a sealed region extending from a first side wall of the container (fig. 4, side seal 23 on the side wall of the packaging bag; [0038]); and a terrace region extending from a second side wall of the container (fig. 4, terrace region interpreted to be where the top seal 22 is located in fig. 4; [0038]), wherein conductive tabs are configured to extend from the battery cell through the terrace region to provide external terminals for the battery cell (fig. 4; tabs 3 extend from the side that is interpreted as the terrace region; [0038]), wherein the sealed region and the terrace region intersect in a sealed corner region located proximate to a first corner of the container (fig. 4 notch 24 formed at the intersection of the side seal and top seal visually proximate the corner of the container; [0038]), wherein the sealed corner region is formed at an angle such that the sealed region is configured to be folded upwards along a fold line (fig. 4 seal 23 is folded upwards; fig. 5 fold line 232; [0060]) and attached to the first side wall of the container ([0060] side seal 23 is attached to the outer side surface of the packaging) without the fold line extending into the terrace region (fig. 5 the folding line 232 is only within side seal 23 and terminates at the edge 241 of the notched structure where the top seal, interpreted as the terrace region, and side seal meet; [0039]; therefore, since the notch designates the intersection of the two regions, and the folding line terminates at the first edge of the notch, the folding line is not considered to extend into the terrace region, only to reach the intersection region from the side seal region; alternatively, the terrace region can be interpreted as the region only wherein the conductive tabs extend through the casing given the wording of the claim, rather than the entire length of the second side wall of the container; alternatively, see the embodiment of fig. 8 wherein the folding portion 25 is separate from the folding portion of the side seal, therefore the fold line of the side seal does not extend into the top region of the case at all), and wherein the first corner of the container is shaped such that the sealed region extends at least a threshold distance from the first side wall along an entire length of the sealed region (fig. 5; the folding line 232 designates the heat seal zone with W1, [0009], and W designates the entire width of the side seal; based on the depiction of the threshold distance in the instant specification and drawings, the threshold distance is interpreted as the width of the seal).
Regarding claim 9, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Qiu also teaches wherein the first corner of the container is shaped into a rounded corner or a diagonal chamfer corner (figs. 2-9 show a rounded corner).
Regarding claim 10, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 9. Qiu also teaches wherein the diagonal chamfer corner is formed at the angle such that the diagonal chamfer corner is positioned parallel to the sealed corner region (the diagonal chamfer corner was not required in claim 2, upon which claim 3 depends; since the read on embodiment for claim 2 has the rounded corner rather than the diagonal chamfer corner, this claim is not limiting).
Regarding claim 11, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Qiu also teaches wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter ([0009]; a width of the heat-seal zone satisfies ⅕W≤W1≤⅘W; [0049] W1 can be from 0.7 mm to 1.3 mm, meaning the range of the threshold distance would overlap the claimed 1.0 mm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 1-3 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gross et al. (US-20040048149-A1), hereinafter Gross.
Regarding claim 1, Gross teaches a container configured to enclose a battery cell, the container comprising (figs. 6-11; [0028] flexible package 18): a sealed region extending from a first side wall of the container (figs. 6-11 sealing flange 12 on the long sides of the case); and a terrace region extending from a second side wall of the container, wherein conductive tabs are configured to extend from the battery cell through the terrace region to provide external terminals for the battery cell (figs. 6-11 flange on the short side of the case wherein the tabs protrude), wherein the sealed region and the terrace region intersect in a sealed corner region located proximate to a first corner of the container (figs. 6-11 chamfer 22 wherein the short side with the tabs intersects the long side is the first corner of the container at corner point 23 in fig. 6; [0030]), wherein the sealed corner region is formed at an angle such that the sealed region is configured to be folded upwards along a fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container (figs. 6 and 8, sealing flange 12 is folded upwards) without the fold line extending into the terrace region (figs. 6 and 8 the folding line of side sealing flange 12 on the long side of the container does not extend past the top of the corner of the container 22; [0030]), and wherein the first corner of the container is shaped such that the sealed region extends at least a threshold distance from the first side wall along an entire length of the sealed region (figs. 6 and 8; while not directly defined, a threshold distance must inherently exist; [0011] the chamfer cut is at a depth equal to the width of the sealing flange; [0030] sealing flange has a width of sufficient size to insure the integrity of the seal).
Regarding claim 2, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Gross also teaches the first corner of the container is shaped into a rounded corner or a diagonal chamfer corner (figs. 6 and 8 show a diagonal chamfer corner; figs. 9-10 show rounded corners; [0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 2. Gross also teaches wherein the diagonal chamfer corner is formed at the angle such that the diagonal chamfer corner is positioned parallel to the sealed corner region (figs. 6 and 8 show that the two are parallel).
Regarding claim 8, Gross teaches a battery pack comprising: a battery cell ([0023] cells); and a container enclosing the battery cell, the container (figs. 6-11; [0028] flexible package 18) comprising: a sealed region extending from a first side wall of the container (figs. 6-11 sealing flange 12 on the long sides of the case); and a terrace region extending from a second side wall of the container, wherein conductive tabs are configured to extend from the battery cell through the terrace region to provide external terminals for the battery cell (figs. 6-11 flange on the short side of the case wherein the tabs protrude), wherein the sealed region and the terrace region intersect in a sealed corner region located proximate to a first corner of the container (figs. 6-11 chamfer 22 wherein the short side with the tabs intersects the long side is the first corner of the container at corner point 23 in fig. 6; [0030]), wherein the sealed corner region is formed at an angle such that the sealed region is configured to be folded upwards along a fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container (figs. 6 and 8, sealing flange 12 is folded upwards) without the fold line extending into the terrace region (figs. 6 and 8 the folding line of side sealing flange 12 on the long side of the container does not extend past the top of the corner of the container 22; [0030]), and wherein the first corner of the container is shaped such that the sealed region extends at least a threshold distance from the first side wall along an entire length of the sealed region (figs. 6 and 8; while not directly defined, a threshold distance must inherently exist; 0011] the chamfer cut is at a depth equal to the width of the sealing flange; [0030] sealing flange has a width of sufficient size to insure the integrity of the seal).
Regarding claim 9, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Gross also teaches wherein the first corner of the container is shaped into a rounded corner or a diagonal chamfer corner (figs. 6 and 8 show a diagonal chamfer corner; figs. 9-10 show rounded corners; [0032]).
Regarding claim 10, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 9. Gross also teaches wherein the diagonal chamfer corner is formed at the angle such that the diagonal chamfer corner is positioned parallel to the sealed corner region (figs. 6 and 8 show that the two are parallel).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu.
Regarding claim 15, Qiu teaches a portable electronic device comprising: the battery pack comprising: a battery cell ([0039] cell 1); and a container enclosing the battery cell ([0039] packaging bag 2), the container comprising: a sealed region extending from a first side wall of the container (fig. 4, side seal 23 on the side wall of the packaging bag; [0038]); and a terrace region extending from a second side wall of the container (fig. 4, terrace region interpreted to be where the top seal 22 is located in fig. 4; [0038]), wherein conductive tabs are configured to extend from the battery cell through the terrace region to provide external terminals for the battery cell (fig. 4; tabs 3 extend from the side that is interpreted as the terrace region; [0038]), wherein the sealed region and the terrace region intersect in a sealed corner region located proximate to a first corner of the container (fig. 4 notch 24 formed at the intersection of the side seal and top seal visually proximate the corner of the container; [0038]), wherein the sealed corner region is formed at an angle such that the sealed region is configured to be folded upwards along a fold line (fig. 4 seal 23 is folded upwards; fig. 5 fold line 232; [0060]) and attached to the first side wall of the container ([0060] side seal 23 is attached to the outer side surface of the packaging) without the fold line extending into the terrace region (fig. 5 the folding line 232 is only within side seal 23 and terminates at the edge 241 of the notched structure where the top seal, interpreted as the terrace region, and side seal meet; [0039]; therefore, since the notch designates the intersection of the two regions, and the folding line terminates at the first edge of the notch, the folding line is not considered to extend into the terrace region, only to reach the intersection region from the side seal region; alternatively, the terrace region can be interpreted as the region only wherein the conductive tabs extend through the casing given the wording of the claim, rather than the entire length of the second side wall of the container; alternatively, see the embodiment of fig. 8 wherein the folding portion 25 is separate from the folding portion of the side seal, therefore the fold line of the side seal does not extend into the top region of the case at all), and wherein the first corner of the container is shaped such that the sealed region extends at least a threshold distance from the first side wall along an entire length of the sealed region (fig. 5; the folding line 232 designates the heat seal zone with W1, [0009], and W designates the entire width of the side seal; based on the depiction of the threshold distance in the instant specification and drawings, the threshold distance is interpreted as the width of the seal).
Qiu does not explicitly teach a set of components powered by a battery pack; and a device enclosure configured to receive the battery pack. However, Qiu does teach the use of batteries in electronic devices (Qiu [0003]). It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art that, when used in an electronic device, the battery pack would power the device components and be accommodated in the casing/enclosure of the device.
Regarding claim 16, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Qiu also teaches wherein the first corner of the container is shaped into a rounded corner or a diagonal chamfer corner (figs. 2-9 show a rounded corner).
Regarding claim 17, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 16. Qiu also teaches wherein the diagonal chamfer corner is formed at the angle such that the diagonal chamfer corner is positioned parallel to the sealed corner region (the diagonal chamfer corner was not required in claim 2, upon which claim 3 depends; since the read on embodiment for claim 2 has the rounded corner rather than the diagonal chamfer corner, this claim is not limiting).
Regarding claim 18, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Qiu also teaches wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter ([0009]; a width of the heat-seal zone satisfies ⅕W≤W1≤⅘W; [0049] W1 can be from 0.7 mm to 1.3 mm, meaning the range of the threshold distance would overlap the claimed 1.0 mm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 5, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu as applied to claim 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of Oh et al. (US-20220320635-A1), hereinafter Oh.
Regarding claim 5, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Qiu fails to teach wherein the container is a hydrophobic polymer material.
Oh is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0103]). Oh teaches that the container material can include polypropylene ([0106] polypropylene, which is inherently hydrophobic as evidenced by “Drug Delivery Biomaterials” cited in the NPL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiu and provide a hydrophobic polymer material for the container. Doing so allows for excellent mechanical properties such as tensile strength, rigidity, surface hardness, wear resistance, and thermal resistance as well as corrosion resistance (Oh [0106]).
Regarding claim 12, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Qiu fails to teach wherein the container is a hydrophobic polymer material.
Oh is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0103]). Oh teaches that the container material can include polypropylene ([0106] polypropylene, which is inherently hydrophobic as evidenced by “Drug Delivery Biomaterials” cited in the NPL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiu and provide a hydrophobic polymer material for the container. Doing so allows for excellent mechanical properties such as tensile strength, rigidity, surface hardness, wear resistance, and thermal resistance as well as corrosion resistance (Oh [0106]).
Regarding claim 19, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Qiu fails to teach wherein the container is a hydrophobic polymer material.
Oh is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0103]). Oh teaches that the container material can include polypropylene ([0106] polypropylene, which is inherently hydrophobic as evidenced by “Drug Delivery Biomaterials” cited in the NPL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiu and provide a hydrophobic polymer material for the container. Doing so allows for excellent mechanical properties such as tensile strength, rigidity, surface hardness, wear resistance, and thermal resistance as well as corrosion resistance (Oh [0106]).
Claims 6-7, 13-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu as applied to claim 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US-20130149563-A1), hereinafter Lee and Hwang et al. (KR-101479306-B1), hereinafter Hwang.
Regarding claim 6, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Qiu fails to teach wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) extending from the first side wall of the container via a connector.
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings (figs. 1-2). Lee teaches wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a connector extending from the first side wall of the container (figs. 1-2; [0042] protecting circuit module 30 including flexible circuit board 33 is interpreted as the battery management unit; the flexible circuit board extends along the first side to connector 34 that protrudes from the first side wall for external connection).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a battery management unit connected to the second side wall of the container such as in Lee. Doing so is well known in the art and allows for the battery to be managed when utilized in electronic devices. Further, it allows for external terminal connection (Lee [0014]).
Modified Qiu fails to teach wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB). However, doing so is common in the art.
For example, Hwang teaches wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) ([0095] the terminal is directly connected to a main board at the endo f flexible circuit board 400).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Qiu and connect the BMU to a main logic board. Doing so allows the battery to receive power (Hwang [0095]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 6. Modified Qiu also teaches wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region (Lee figs. 1-2 the connector is outside the case, and therefore outside the sealed region).
Regarding claim 13, Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Qiu fails to teach wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) extending from the first side wall of the container via a connector.
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings (figs. 1-2). Lee teaches wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a connector extending from the first side wall of the container (figs. 1-2; [0042] protecting circuit module 30 including flexible circuit board 33 is interpreted as the battery management unit; the flexible circuit board extends along the first side to connector 34 that protrudes from the first side wall for external connection).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a battery management unit connected to the second side wall of the container such as in Lee. Doing so is well known in the art and allows for the battery to be managed when utilized in electronic devices. Further, it allows for external terminal connection (Lee [0014]).
Modified Qiu fails to teach wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB). However, doing so is common in the art.
For example, Hwang teaches wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) ([0095] the terminal is directly connected to a main board at the endo f flexible circuit board 400).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Qiu and connect the BMU to a main logic board. Doing so allows the battery to receive power (Hwang [0095]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 13. Modified Qiu also teaches wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region (Lee figs. 1-2 the connector is outside the case, and therefore outside the sealed region).
Regarding claim 20, modified Qiu teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Qiu fails to teach wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) extending from the first side wall of the container via a connector, and wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region.
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings (figs. 1-2). Lee teaches wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a connector extending from the first side wall of the container (figs. 1-2; [0042] protecting circuit module 30 including flexible circuit board 33 is interpreted as the battery management unit; the flexible circuit board extends along the first side to connector 34 that protrudes from the first side wall for external connection), and wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region (Lee figs. 1-2 the connector is outside the case, and therefore outside the sealed region).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a battery management unit connected to the second side wall of the container such as in Lee. Doing so is well known in the art and allows for the battery to be managed when utilized in electronic devices. Further, it allows for external terminal connection (Lee [0014]).
Modified Qiu fails to teach wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB). However, doing so is common in the art.
For example, Hwang teaches wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) ([0095] the terminal is directly connected to a main board at the endo f flexible circuit board 400).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Qiu and connect the BMU to a main logic board. Doing so allows the battery to receive power (Hwang [0095]).
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross, as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Qiu et al. (US-20190198909-A1), hereinafter Qiu.
Regarding claim 4, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Gross fails to teach wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter.
Qiu is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0007]). Qiu teaches wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter
([0009]; a width of the heat-seal zone satisfies ⅕W≤W1≤⅘W, and the threshold distance is interpreted as the difference between W and W1; [0049] W1 can be from 0.7 mm to 1.3 mm, meaning the range of the threshold distance would overlap the claimed 1.0 mm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gross such that the threshold distance is 1 millimeter. Doing so helps reduce the damage of the packaging bag due to folding and improve the safety performance of the packaging bag (Qiu [0061]).
Regarding claim 11, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Gross fails to teach wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter.
Qiu is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0007]). Qiu teaches wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter
([0009]; a width of the heat-seal zone satisfies ⅕W≤W1≤⅘W, and the threshold distance is interpreted as the difference between W and W1; [0049] W1 can be from 0.7 mm to 1.3 mm, meaning the range of the threshold distance would overlap the claimed 1.0 mm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gross such that the threshold distance is 1 millimeter. Doing so helps reduce the damage of the packaging bag due to folding and improve the safety performance of the packaging bag (Qiu [0061]).
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross, as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Oh et al. (US-20220320635-A1), hereinafter Oh.
Regarding claim 5, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Gross fails to teach wherein the container is a hydrophobic polymer material, only teaching that the pouch is typically a laminate, but that any sealable package material may be used (Gross [0025]).
Oh is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0103]). Oh teaches that the container material can include polypropylene ([0106] polypropylene, which is inherently hydrophobic as evidenced by “Drug Delivery Biomaterials” cited in the NPL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gross and provide a hydrophobic polymer material for the container. Doing so allows for excellent mechanical properties such as tensile strength, rigidity, surface hardness, wear resistance, and thermal resistance as well as corrosion resistance (Oh [0106]).
Regarding claim 12, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Gross fails to teach wherein the container is a hydrophobic polymer material.
Oh is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0103]). Oh teaches that the container material can include polypropylene ([0106] polypropylene, which is inherently hydrophobic as evidenced by “Drug Delivery Biomaterials” cited in the NPL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gross and provide a hydrophobic polymer material for the container. Doing so allows for excellent mechanical properties such as tensile strength, rigidity, surface hardness, wear resistance, and thermal resistance as well as corrosion resistance (Oh [0106]).
Claims 6-7 and 13-14, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross, as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US-20130149563-A1), hereinafter Lee and Hwang et al. (KR-101479306-B1), hereinafter Hwang.
Regarding claim 6, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Gross fails to teach wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) extending from the first side wall of the container via a connector.
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings (figs. 1-2). Lee teaches wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a connector extending from the first side wall of the container (figs. 1-2; [0042] protecting circuit module 30 including flexible circuit board 33 is interpreted as the battery management unit; the flexible circuit board extends along the first side to connector 34 that protrudes from the first side wall for external connection).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a battery management unit connected to the second side wall of the container such as in Lee. Doing so is well known in the art and allows for the battery to be managed when utilized in electronic devices. Further, it allows for external terminal connection (Lee [0014]).
Modified Gross fails to teach wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB). However, doing so is common in the art.
For example, Hwang teaches wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) ([0095] the terminal is directly connected to a main board at the endo f flexible circuit board 400).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Gross and connect the BMU to a main logic board. Doing so allows the battery to receive power (Hwang [0095]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 6. Modified Gross also teaches wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region (Lee figs. 1-2 the connector is outside the case, and therefore outside the sealed region).
Regarding claim 13, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 8. Gross fails to teach wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) extending from the first side wall of the container via a connector.
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings (figs. 1-2). Lee teaches wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a connector extending from the first side wall of the container (figs. 1-2; [0042] protecting circuit module 30 including flexible circuit board 33 is interpreted as the battery management unit; the flexible circuit board extends along the first side to connector 34 that protrudes from the first side wall for external connection).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a battery management unit connected to the second side wall of the container such as in Lee. Doing so is well known in the art and allows for the battery to be managed when utilized in electronic devices. Further, it allows for external terminal connection (Lee [0014]).
Modified Gross fails to teach wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB). However, doing so is common in the art.
For example, Hwang teaches wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) ([0095] the terminal is directly connected to a main board at the endo f flexible circuit board 400).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Gross and connect the BMU to a main logic board. Doing so allows the battery to receive power (Hwang [0095]).
Regarding claim 14, Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 13. Modified Gross also teaches wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region (Lee figs. 1-2 the connector is outside the case, and therefore outside the sealed region).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross et al. (US-20040048149-A1), hereinafter Gross, in view of Lee et al. (US-20130149563-A1), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 15, Gross teaches a portable electronic device comprising: the battery pack comprising: a battery cell ([0023] cells); and a container enclosing the battery cell (figs. 6-11; [0028] flexible package 18), the container comprising: a sealed region extending from a first side wall of the container (figs. 6-11 sealing flange 12 on the long sides of the case); and a terrace region extending from a second side wall of the container, wherein conductive tabs are configured to extend from the battery cell through the terrace region to provide external terminals for the battery cell (figs. 6-11 flange on the short side of the case wherein the tabs protrude), wherein the sealed region and the terrace region intersect in a sealed corner region located proximate to a first corner of the container (figs. 6-11 chamfer 22 wherein the short side with the tabs intersects the long side is the first corner of the container at corner point 23 in fig. 6; [0030]), wherein the sealed corner region is formed at an angle such that the sealed region is configured to be folded upwards along a fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container (figs. 6 and 8, sealing flange 12 is folded upwards) without the fold line extending into the terrace region (figs. 6 and 8 the folding line of side sealing flange 12 on the long side of the container does not extend past the top of the corner of the container 22; [0030]), and wherein the first corner of the container is shaped such that the sealed region extends at least a threshold distance from the first side wall along an entire length of the sealed region (figs. 6 and 8; while not directly defined, a threshold distance must inherently exist; [0011] the chamfer cut is at a depth equal to the width of the sealing flange; [0030] sealing flange has a width of sufficient size to insure the integrity of the seal).
Gross fails to teach a set of components powered by a battery pack; and a device enclosure configured to receive the battery pack. However, such configurations are common in the art.
For example, Lee teaches that batteries are widely used in electronic devices such as cellular phones. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art that the battery of Gross could be utilized in a portable device such as in Lee, and by extension inherently contain a set of components powered by a battery pack; and a device enclosure configured to receive the battery pack (in this example, a cellular phone and its casing). Doing so is commonly known in the art and would be a simple substitution with predictable results.
Regarding claim 16, modified Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Gross also teaches wherein the first corner of the container is shaped into a rounded corner or a diagonal chamfer corner (figs. 6 and 8 show a diagonal chamfer corner; figs. 9-10 show rounded corners; [0032]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 16. Gross also teaches wherein the diagonal chamfer corner is formed at the angle such that the diagonal chamfer corner is positioned parallel to the sealed corner region (figs. 6 and 8 show that the two are parallel).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Lee, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Qiu et al. (US-20190198909-A1), hereinafter Qiu.
Regarding claim 18, modified Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Gross fails to teach wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter
Qiu is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0007]). Qiu teaches wherein the threshold distance is 1 millimeter
([0009]; a width of the heat-seal zone satisfies ⅕W≤W1≤⅘W, and the threshold distance is interpreted as the difference between W and W1; [0049] W1 can be from 0.7 mm to 1.3 mm, meaning the range of the threshold distance would overlap the claimed 1.0 mm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gross such that the threshold distance is 1 millimeter. Doing so helps reduce the damage of the packaging bag due to folding and improve the safety performance of the packaging bag (Qiu [0061]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Lee, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Oh et al. (US-20220320635-A1), hereinafter Oh.
Regarding claim 19, modified Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Gross fails to teach wherein the container is a hydrophobic polymer material.
Oh is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings ([0103]). Oh teaches that the container material can include polypropylene ([0106] polypropylene, which is inherently hydrophobic as evidenced by “Drug Delivery Biomaterials” cited in the NPL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gross and provide a hydrophobic polymer material for the container. Doing so allows for excellent mechanical properties such as tensile strength, rigidity, surface hardness, wear resistance, and thermal resistance as well as corrosion resistance (Oh [0106]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross in view of Lee, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Hwang et al. (KR-101479306-B1), hereinafter Hwang.
Regarding claim 20, modified Gross teaches all of the limitations of claim 15. Gross fails to teach wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) extending from the first side wall of the container via a connector, and wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region.
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery casings (figs. 1-2). Lee teaches wherein a battery management unit (BMU) is connected to the second side wall of the container, and wherein the BMU is connected to a connector extending from the first side wall of the container (figs. 1-2; [0042] protecting circuit module 30 including flexible circuit board 33 is interpreted as the battery management unit; the flexible circuit board extends along the first side to connector 34 that protrudes from the first side wall for external connection), and wherein the sealed region is further configured to be folded upwards along the fold line and attached to the first side wall of the container without the connector overlapping with the sealed region in the sealed corner region (Lee figs. 1-2 the connector is outside the case, and therefore outside the sealed region).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a battery management unit connected to the second side wall of the container such as in Lee. Doing so is well known in the art and allows for the battery to be managed when utilized in electronic devices. Further, it allows for external terminal connection (Lee [0014]).
Modified Gross fails to teach wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB). However, doing so is common in the art.
For example, Hwang teaches wherein the BMU is connected to a main logic board (MLB) ([0095] the terminal is directly connected to a main board at the end of flexible circuit board 400).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Gross and connect the BMU to a main logic board. Doing so allows the battery to receive power (Hwang [0095]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON L KYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0164. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 PM ET.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/M.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights