DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04/15/2024, 04/22/2025, and 09/05/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the electrode assembly of claim 1 and the electrode tab and one electrode of claim 4 must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: cap assembly 200 and vent 110. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 6, line 28, a vent is referred to by the reference number 110, while page 6, line 25 denotes the vent as “vent 210”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (KR 20190131794 A) in view of Kim et al. (KR 100865405 B1).
Regarding claims 1-2, Jung discloses a secondary battery (Annotated Jung Fig. 2, cylindrical secondary battery 2), comprising:
an electrode assembly (Annotated Jung Fig. 2, electrode assembly 13);
a can that accommodates the electrode assembly (Annotated Jung Fig. 2, cylindrical battery can 12);
a cap assembly that includes a vent, a current interrupt device (CID) filter positioned under the vent, and a CID gasket positioned at one end of the current interrupt device filter to close an open upper portion of the can (Annotated Jung Fig. 2 depicts a cap assembly (21) which includes a vent (safety vent 213), a CID filter (115) positioned under the vent, and a CID gasket (114) positioned at one end of the current interrupt device filter to close an open upper portion of the can.); and
a gasket that is compressed while interposed between the cap assembly and the upper portion of the can to maintain insulation and sealing between the cap assembly and the can (Annotated Jung Fig. 2 illustrates and para. [0054] describes a gasket (crimping gasket 116) that is compressed while interposed between cap assembly 21 and the upper portion of the cylindrical battery can 12 and is used to seal the outer surface of said cap assembly.),
wherein an outer surface and upper and lower surfaces of an edge portion of the vent of the cap assembly are in close contact with inner and upper surfaces of the gasket, respectively (Annotated Jung Fig. 2 depicts an outer surface and upper and lower surfaces of an edge portion of safety vent 213 of the cap assembly 21 are in close contact with inner and upper surfaces of the crimping gasket 116.).
Jung fails to disclose wherein a radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent meet is 0.3 mm or less of instant claim 1 and, furthermore, wherein a radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent meet is 0.1 to 0.3 mm of instant claim 2.
However, Kim teaches wherein a radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion of the vent meet is 0.3 mm or less and, furthermore, wherein a radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion of the vent meet is 0.1 to 0.3 mm (Claim 12 states that a radius of curvature of the area where the outer surface and lower surface of the edge portion of a vent 110a meet is 0.1 mm or less.) One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would be obvious to form a radius of curvature of 0.1 mm or less of a portion where the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion meet rather than forming a radius of curvature of 0.1 mm or less of a portion where the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion meet because both structures prevent battery shirt-circuiting, electrolyte leakage and external impurities from entering the interior by insulating the vent from the battery can (para. [0052]).
PNG
media_image1.png
746
997
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jung Fig. 2: A secondary battery (2) comprising of an electrode assembly (13), a can (12), a cap assembly (21), wherein the cap assembly includes a vent (213), a current interrupt device (CID) filter (115), a CID gasket (114), and a gasket (116).
Jung and Kim are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of developing secondary batteries with structures that prevent battery short-circuiting, electrolyte leakage, and improved sealing properties. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of Jung to include a radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent meet is 0.3 mm or less and, furthermore, include a radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent meet is 0.1 to 0.3 mm because Kim teaches that crimping gasket is made of an insulator and surrounds an outer portion of a safety vent to insulate it from a battery can wherein the battery can is electrically connected to a negative electrode tab and the safety vent is electrically connected to a positive electrode lead. The insulation of the safety vent from the battery can prevents short-circuiting of the secondary battery. It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04. IV.
Furthermore, in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 3, Jung, as modified by Kim, discloses the secondary battery as discussed in claim 1 above.
Jung fails to disclose wherein an adhesive layer is formed on at least a part of the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent or a double-sided adhesive tape is attached to the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent
However, Kim teaches wherein an adhesive layer is formed on at least a part of the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion of the vent or a double-sided adhesive tape is attached to the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion of the vent (Claim 13 of Kim states that the secondary battery comprises of an adhesive layer formed on at least part of a portion of the outer surface and lower surface of the edge portion of the safety vent, or a double-sided adhesive tape is attached to the aforementioned sides.) One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would be obvious to form an adhesive layer or attach double-sided adhesive tape on at least a part of the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent rather than forming an adhesive layer or attaching double-sided adhesive tape on at least a part of the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion of the vent because both structures further improve adhesion between the vent and the gasket (page 11, lines 17-19).
Jung and Kim are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of developing secondary batteries with structures that prevent battery short-circuiting, electrolyte leakage, and improved sealing properties. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of Jung to include an adhesive layer is formed on at least a part of the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent or a double-sided adhesive tape is attached to the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the vent because Kim teaches that an adhesive layer formed on at least a portion of the outer surface and the lower surface of the edge portion of the vent, or a double-sided adhesive tape may be attached to further improve the adhesion between the vent and the gasket (page 11, lines 17-19). It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04. IV.
Regarding claim 5, Jung further discloses wherein a metal plate at the edge portion of the vent is overlapped in two stages by being bent upward by 180° (Annotated Jung Fig. 2A illustrates a metal plate at the edge portion of the vent overlapped in two stages by being upward by 180°.).
PNG
media_image2.png
766
910
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jung Fig. 2A: A metal plate at an edge portion of a vent (213) is overlapped in two stages (first stage is a gasket and second stage is a can) by being upward by 180°.
Regarding claim 6, Jung further discloses wherein the can has a cylindrical shape, and the vent has a flat disk shape (Para. [0046] explains that the battery can 12 is cylindrical and that safety vent 113 includes a peripheral portion 1131 that has a disc shape.).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, as modified by Kim, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Park et al. (US 2022/0359962 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Jung, as modified by Kim, discloses the secondary battery as discussed in claim 1.
Jung, as modified by Kim, fails to disclose wherein the current interrupt device (CID) filter is bonded to an electrode tab drawn out upward from one electrode of the electrode assembly.
However, Park teaches wherein the current interrupt device (CID) filter is bonded to an electrode tab drawn out upward from one electrode of the electrode assembly (Fig. 1b depicts and para. [0035] discusses a positive electrode tab 125 which passes through a second hole 127b and is welded to current interrupt device 130.).
Jung, Kim, and Park are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of developing secondary batteries with structures that prevent battery short-circuiting, electrolyte leakage, and improved sealing properties. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of Jung, as modified by Kim, to include wherein the current interrupt device (CID) filter is bonded to an electrode tab drawn out upward from one electrode of the electrode assembly because Park teaches that connecting an electrode tab from an electrode assembly to a current interrupt device and insulating it from the battery can, which acts as a terminal with opposing polarity to the current interrupt device, prevent the secondary battery from short-circuiting (paras. [0054], [0062]) and use of known techniques to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious. See MPEP 2141. III. (C).
PNG
media_image3.png
876
699
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Park Fig. 1B: A current interrupt device (CID) filter (130) is bonded to a positive electrode tab (125) drawn out upward from one positive electrode plate (122) of the electrode assembly (120).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim et al. (US 2010/0119935 A1) discloses a cylindrical secondary battery which has a crimping region wherein the outer and upper surface of the crimping region is in contact with the lower and inner surface of the gasket. The radius of curvature of a portion where the outer surface and the upper surface of the edge portion of the crimping region is 0.3 mm to 2.0 mm.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANTINO M SERVAGNO whose telephone number is (571)270-0847. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:00 am - 5:00 pm, F 8:00 am - 4:00 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, Joshua Allen can be reached at (571) 270-3176. 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.
/SANTINO MICHALE SERVAGNO/Examiner, Art Unit 1713
/JOSHUA L ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights