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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 6 and 7, in the reply filed on August 12th, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-5 and 8-11 are withdrawn.
Drawings
Figures 1, 2A, and 2B should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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 Objections
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to because of the following informality: claim 6 requires that the length of a width is less than a range (0.1% to 4%) of length of a length of a pouch. In order for the value of a parameter to be less than the values contained within a range, the value must be smaller than the lower limit of the range. Even though instant specification contains identical language to the claim (see paragraphs [0021] and [0058]), paragraphs [0054] – [0057] provide justification as to why the length of the width of the pressing part should be in a certain range. Therefore, the claims will be interpreted as if it reads “a width of the pressing part in a longitudinal direction of the secondary battery is a range of 0.1% to 4% of a length of the pouch in the longitudinal direction. Claim 7 is objected to due to its dependence on claim 6. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (CN 113044272A, citations will be drawn to the translation submitted by the examiner).
Regarding claim 6, Chang discloses a packaging device for sealing the pouch of a battery [0008] comprising a heating part configured to heat and melt a sealing area of the pouches of the battery [0061]. The pressing part comprises two rollers configured to press and seal the sealing area [0028] and the pressing part contains the heating part [0061]. The pressing part presses and seals the pouch while the sealing area is heated by the heating part [0063].
Chang does not explicitly teach that the width of the pressing part in a longitudinal direction of the secondary battery is in a range of 0.1% - 4% of the length of the pouch in the longitudinal direction.
Chang does teach that the diameter of the pressing roller is between 5 mm and 100 mm [0019]. The diameter of the roller 100 or 200 in the figure below corresponds with the width of the pressing part in a longitudinal direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
258
756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chang continues to teach that the size of the pressure roller is small such that the temperature fluctuation of the contact part of the pressure roller and the area to be sealed will be small and ensure that the roller has an excellent temperature consistency. This will increase the “packaging uniformity of the packing film” and flatten wrinkles on the pouch [0028]. In other words, designing an upper limit on the size of the pressure roller (the pressure part) helps to prevent wrinkles in the pouch. Also, as mentioned above, the lower limit of the width of the pressing part is so low that anything smaller would likely not be able to perform the required function of sealing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to optimize the size of the pressing roller within the range taught by Chang such that the pressure rollers effectively prevent wrinkles in the pouch battery. Furthermore, arbitrarily connecting that optimal range of size to the length of the pouch battery is still optimizing that range but describing it with different language. Objective evidence demonstrating that the apparatus’s effectiveness is diminished if that proportional relationship is not satisfied would overcome this rejection.
Regarding claim 7, Chang’s pressure roller is configured to move horizontally (allowing movement from the central portion towards the outer portion of the pouch) while vertically pressing the sealing area [0064]. This occurs between 150 °C and 210 °C [0020] which is well above room temperature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi (US 2019/0207171 A1) teaches a method of sealing a pouch casing of a pouch-type secondary battery where pressure is applied from the inner part of the pouch to a direction towards the outside (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN K BLACKWELL-RUDASILL whose telephone number is (571)270-0563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
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.
/R.B.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights