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 .
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 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR’177 (KR 10-2020-0039177).
Regarding claim 14-15, FIG. 1 of KR’177 teaches a battery cell comprising: an electrode assembly comprising electrodes and an electrode tab stacking portion 210; and an electrode lead comprising a lead coupling portion surrounding at least a portion of the electrode tab stacking portion, wherein the lead coupling portion exposes at least one of an upper surface of the electrode tab stacking portion, a first side surface, a second side surface, a lower surface, and a back surface (claim 14) and the lead coupling portion contacts the upper surface, the back surface, and the lower surface, and exposes the first side surface and the second side surface of the electrode tab stacking portion (claim 15).
Claim 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR’697 (KR 10-2008-0007697).
Regarding claim 14, FIG. 4 of KR’697 teaches a battery cell comprising: an electrode assembly comprising electrodes and an electrode tab stacking portion; and an electrode lead comprising a lead coupling portion surrounding at least a portion of the electrode tab stacking portion, wherein the lead coupling portion exposes at least one of an upper surface of the electrode tab stacking portion, a first side surface, a second side surface, a lower surface, and a back surface.
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR’702 (KR 10-2014-0069702).
Regarding claims 14 and 16, FIG. 4 of KR’702 teaches a battery cell comprising: an electrode assembly (200) comprising electrodes and an electrode tab stacking portion (210 of FIG. 5). FIG. 8 teaches an electrode lead comprising a lead coupling portion surrounding at least a portion of the electrode tab stacking portion, wherein the lead coupling portion exposes at least one of an upper surface of the electrode tab stacking portion, a first side surface, a second side surface, a lower surface, and a back surface (claim 14) and the lead coupling portion contacts the upper surface, the first side surface, the second side surface, and the lower surface, and exposes the back surface of the electrode tab stacking portion (FIG. 9) (claim 16).
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR’418 (KR 10-2022-0111418).
Regarding clam 1, KR’418 teaches a battery cell comprising an electrode assembly comprising electrodes and an electrode tab stacking portion 30 and an electrode lead comprising a lead coupling portion 10, 40 surrounding at least a portion of the electrode tab stacking portion. The lead coupling portion continuously surrounds and contacts three of an upper surface of the electrode tab, a first side surface, a second side surface, and a lower surface and one of the second side surface and a lower surface is exposed (FIG. 1- FIG. 5). The claimed invention fails to exclude the lead coupling portion continuously surrounding and contacting the upper surface, first side surface, second side surface, and lower surface of the electrode tab stacking portion wherein the lead coupling portion does not entirely cover the first side, second side, and lower surfaces of the electrode tab as shown by FIG. 4 and FIG. 5. The electrode lead necessarily contacts 3 surfaces of the electrode tab in a continuously manner and necessarily has exposed portions as required by the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, the back surface of the electrode tab stacking portion is exposed as shown by FIG. 4-FIG. 5.
Regarding claims 3-5 and 7-8, see FIG. 4 - FIG. 7.
Regarding claims 14 and 16, see FIG. 4-FIG. 5.
Regarding claim 18, the battery cell has a pouch exterior material.
Claims 1-6, 8, 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Daidoji (US 9,786,896).
Regarding claim 1, Daidoji teaches a battery cell comprising an electrode assembly comprising electrodes and an electrode tab stacking portion and an electrode lead comprising a lead coupling portion (120,115) which continuously surrounds and contacts three of an upper surface of the electrode tab stacking portion (105), a first side surface, a second side surface, and a lower surface such that one of the second side surface and the lower surface is exposed (FIG. 2A, FIG. 2C).
Regarding claim 2, the lead coupling portion exposes the back surface of the electrode tab stacking portion.
Regarding claims 3-4, FIG. 2C teaches a width of the lead coupling portion in a direction perpendicular to the protruding direction of the electrode tabs is greater than a width of the electrode stacking portion in a direction perpendicular to the protruding direction of the electrode tabs.
Regarding claim 5, see FIG. 2A.
Regarding claims 6 and 8, see FIG. 2C.
Regarding claim 14, FIG. 2C teaches the lead coupling portion exposes a first side surface and a back surface.
Regarding claim 18, FIG. 1A teaches an film-like outer covering 500 which corresponds to the claimed “module case”.
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 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR’418 (KR 10-2022-0111418) in view of Lilley et al. (US 2015/0056506).
Regarding claims 9-11, KR’418 is silent to the material of the electrode tabs. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the battery module with the claimed materials and rigidity relationship between the electrode tab and lead coupling portion because (1) KR’418 teaches materials for the lead coupling portion that are the same material disclosed by the instant application (page 4 of the machine translation), (2) Lilley et al. teaches the electrode tab material is made of lithium metal which is particularly useful as a anode material (negative tab) because the material soft, malleable, which allows good connection between the tab and lead during welding [0015], [0063], and (3) the rigidity relationship considered satisfies because they require the same materials for the same features of the battery as the claimed invention. It has been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or are produced by identical or a substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness will be considered to have been established over functional limitations that stem from the claimed structure. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 ( Fed. Cir. 1990). The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR’418 (KR 10-2022-0111418) in view of Hong et al. (US 2005/0069763).
Regarding claim 19, while KR’418 does not recite a battery pack, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the skill in the art to provide at least one battery module in a pouch case of KR’418 in a pack case to form a battery pack because Hong et al. teaches a secondary battery module in a pouch package ([0041], FIG. 5) wherein the battery module along with additional battery modules 200 are placed in a pack case 40 to form a battery pack 300 (FIG. 7A-FIG. 7D) to arrive at an operable battery [0048].
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daidoji (US 9,786,896) in view of Lilley et al. (US 2015/0056506).
Regarding claim 12, Daidoji teaches the battery cell includes negative electrodes 200 and positive electrodes 100 with a separator 300 disposed between each of the negative electrodes and a positive electrode (FIG. 1B).
FIG. 2A teaches negative electrode tabs (negative electrode tab stacking portion) 205 and positive electrode tabs (positive electrode tab staking portion) 105.
Daidoji teaches the positive electrode tab is made of aluminum and the negative electrode tab is made of nickel, a nickel plated copper plate or a nickel copper cladding covered with nickel (col. 6, lines 35-45). The metal materials between the positive and negative electrode tabs are different.
Daidoji is silent to the negative electrode tab made lithium metal. However, Lilley et al. teaches the electrode tab material is made of lithium metal which is particularly useful as a anode material (negative) because the material soft, malleable, which allows good connection to be made with the end portion of the contact lead when the welding step is performed [0015], [0063]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the battery cell of Daidoji with an negative electrode tab made of lithium metal because Lilley et al. gives ample motivation to use lithium metal material for the negative electrode tab material for the benefits of good material properties that allows a good connection [0015], [0063].
FIG. 2A teaches the negative electrode tab stacking portion and the positive electrode tab stacking portion formed parallel to each other on one side of the electrode assembly. And providing the last two lines of claim 12 in the battery module of Daidoji would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because FIG. 4C shows the lead coupling portion exposing the outer side surface of an electrode tab stacking portion such that the outer side surface cannot face/faces away the other electrode tab stacking portion.
Regarding claim 13, Daidoji is expected to satisfy the claimed limitation because FIG. 4c of Daidoji teaches the same structure as the instant application’s structure to obtain the claimed limitation (FIG. 13, page 22 of the original specification of the instant application).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR’697 (KR 10-2008-0007697) in view of KR’619 (KR 10-2021-0061619).
Regarding claim 17, KR’697 has a claimed center surface. KR’697 does not illustrate the lead coupling portion contacting the center surface. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the lead coupling portion contacting the center surface of KR’697 because KR’619 teaches a battery comprising multiple metal tabs and multiple metal sheets individually combined, including a center region of an electrode tab stacking portion to prevent welding defects and prevent disconnection between to the tab and lead (abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENDRA LY whose telephone number is (571)270-7060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00-5:00PM.
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, Katelyn B Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
/KENDRA LY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749