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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following, the word “conner” in paragraphs [0006] and [0019] is assumed to be misspelling of the word “corner”. In paragraphs [0017] and [0064] “silicon” is being interpreted as “silicone” given the evidence in paragraph [0064] that this is a “synthetic resin”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following, “silicon” is being interpreted as “silicone” given the evidence in paragraph [0064] of the specification that this is a “synthetic resin”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al (US20140011070A1, hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a degassing device (Kim, Fig.8, 150) for degassing of a pouch type secondary battery provided with an accommodation part (Kim, Fig.8, 116) in which an electrode assembly is accommodated, the degassing device comprising: a pressing part (Element A in figure below) provided to face one surface of the accommodation part and configured to press the accommodation part in a direction of the electrode assembly; and a fixing part (Element B in figure below) provided to surround an edge of the accommodation part and configured to apply negative pressure to a corner of the accommodation part and adsorb and fix the corner.
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the degassing device of claim 1, wherein the fixing part (Element B in figure below) forms a vacuum between a region provided to face the corner of the accommodation part and the accommodation part. As shown above the fixing part comes into firm contact with the accommodation part inherently forming a vacuum.
PNG
media_image1.png
587
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the degassing device of claim 1, wherein the fixing part comprises: a body part (Element C in figure below) disposed along the edge of the accommodation part; and an air passage part (Element D in figure below) provided in at least one region of the body part and configured to suction air around the corer of the accommodation part.
PNG
media_image2.png
587
592
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the degassing device of claim 3, wherein, in the body part, one surface facing the accommodation part sf formed stepped to correspond to a shape of the accommodation part (See Element C in figure above).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the degassing device of claim 3, wherein the air passage part comprises: an air suction part (Element E in figure below) formed in a region provided to face the corner of the accommodation part and configured to suction the air around the corner of the accommodation part; and an air discharge part (Element F in figure below) communicated with the air suction part to form an air passage and configured to discharge the air introduced from the air suction part to the outside.
PNG
media_image3.png
587
592
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses the degassing deice of claim 1, wherein the degassing device is disposed at at least one of an upper side or a lower side of the pouch type secondary battery (Kim, Fig.8, 150).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US20140011070A1, hereinafter Kim) in view of Grau et al (US20210336304A1, hereinafter Grau).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses all of claim 5 as shown above. However, Kim does not disclose the air suction part comprising a plurality of air suction holes. Grau discloses suction ducts which can be subjected to negative pressure from a vacuum pump in order to draw a pouch foil of a battery into a recess (Grau, [0054]). Grau discloses that this may serve two purposes, firstly to support the structure of the pouch foil and secondly to firmly fix the pouch foil (Grau, [0054]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to use the degassing device of Kim and combine it with the suction fixing method of Grau to support the structure of the accommodation part of the Kim and to further firmly fix the accommodation part of Kim.
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim discloses all of claim 6 as shown above. However, modified Kim does not disclose the air suction holes having a diameter of 0.1 mm to 1 mm. However, the instant application does not disclose that 0.1 mm to 1 mm is a critical range of the invention. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) see also Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382 ("The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to find optimal ranges for the diameter of the suction holes, including the claimed range, disclosed by modified Kim.
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US20140011070A1, hereinafter Kim) in view of Ringk (US20190341583A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses all of claim 1 as shown above. However, Kim does not disclose a pad provided between the battery and the fixing part. Ringk discloses a diffusion barrier layer applied on a partial region of a battery that may be made out of a polymer material, particularly silicone (Ringk, [0039]). Ringk discloses that this barrier layer can be used to protect the layers below (Ringk, [0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to take the degassing device of Kim and protect the battery being degassed by using the silicone partial layer disclosed by Ringk.
Regarding claim 9, modified Kim discloses all of claim 8 as shown above. Modified Kim also discloses a through hole in the pad part as this is equivalent to the diffusion barrier layer only covering a partial region (Ringk, [0039]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Kim discloses all of claim 8 as shown above. Modified Kim also discloses the material of the pad part comprising silicone (Ringk, [0039]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA P BISTANY-RIEBMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9591. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5pm.
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, Nicholas A Smith can be reached at 5712728760. 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.
/JOSHUA P BISTANY-RIEBMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights