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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "which surface" in line15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugimoto et al (JP 2022/188536) in view of Atsushi et al (JP2002015764). The citations below regarding Sugimoto are directed towards US 2024/0275002 which is considered to be the English language equivalent. The citations below regarding Atsushi are directed towards the English language translation submitted by applicant on 07/17/2026.
Regarding claim 1, Sugimoto teaches a bipolar power storage device which is a battery (0032-0033) including an electrode stack wherein positive and negative electrodes are stacked with a positive and negative current collectors and positive and negative active material layers provided on a surface of the respective current collectors. A sealing body is provided between the electrodes disposed adjacently. The sealing body 12 and the electrodes disposed side by side define an internal space in which an electrolyte solution is accommodated. Liquid injection ports P are formed in the sealing body and provide communication between the internal space and an outside of the battery (0007; 0063-0066; and figure 3). As shown in figure 3, the positive electrode 16 includes a plurality of divided regions 16a via grooves 16b. The negative electrode 17 also includes a plurality of divided regions via grooves. When the electrolyte solution is injected into the internal space V, gaps formed by the combination of the grooves on the positive electrode 16 and the grooves on the negative electrode 17 serve as passages for the electrolyte solution and include uncoated regions 15d on one surface of 15a and uncoated regions 15d of the other surface 15b of the metal plate 15 which acts as the current collector (0040 and 0064-0066 figures 3 and 7). Figure 3 shows the internal region formed by the sealing body 12 as being polygonal in shape. Figure 3 also shows a surface of the sealing body 12 which is at the internal space V side in which the injection port P is formed, which is considered to meet the instantly claimed injection port side surface. Figure 3 shows grooves 16b extending from a side of the injection port side surface in a direction opposite of the injection port side surface and between the active material layer of the positive electrode 16 (0064-0066).
Sugimoto shows the grooves 16b being uniform in width, and therefore does not explicitly teach a groove A and a groove B having different widths where groove A is wider than groove B, as claimed.
Atsushi teaches a battery comprising positive and negative electrodes having electrode active material layers on both surfaces of a current collector. The electrode layers have a plurality of grooves wherein the width is alternately increased (0009, 0011, figure 3). If the width of the groove is alternately increased, the efficiency of the liquid injection and drying is improved (0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize the alternately increased width of the grooves as in Atsushi with the grooves 16b of Sugimoto, in order to improve injection and drying of the liquid electrolyte injection, as taught by Atsushi.
Regarding claim 2, figures 3 and 7 show the sealing body 12 being quadrangular in shape. The injection port P is shown to only be on one side of the quadrangularly shaped sealing body 12.
Regarding claim 3, Sugimoto and Atsushi teach the battery structure as discussed above.
Neither explicitly teaches the location of the wider groove.
However, it would have been obvious to on ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective date of the claimed invention to place the wider groove closer to the injection side of equidistant from another groove, as claimed, as such would be a rearrangement of parts as an alternately increased groove width is taught and such an orientation would be reasonable as there are limited arrangements possible and as such an ordinarily skilled artisan would have considered such an arrangement obvious to try without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 4, Atsushi teaches the width of the wider groove to be between 1 and 3 times greater (0041). This is considered to overlap the instantly claimed ratio.
Regarding claim 5, Sugimoto and Atsushi teach the battery structure as discussed above.
Neither explicitly teaches the width of groove B.
However, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize any groove width, such as the instantly claimed range, dependent upon the liquid capacity and flow desired.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH A SLIFKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm EST.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/SARAH A. SLIFKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759 September 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights