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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadokoro et al. (JP2009272161) in view of Kodama (US20090035654).
As to claim 1, Tadokoro et al. discloses a battery cell (figure 8) comprising: a pouch (81) that accommodates electrodes (10); a plurality of current collectors (51), each of which is connected to a corresponding one of the electrodes (10) in the pouch (81), the current collectors (51) being stacked in a stacking direction, the current collectors projecting outside of the pouch through an opening of the pouch; a first resin that seals the opening of the pouch (81), the first resin (92) being welded to the current collectors at a position between the stacked current collectors; and a second resin (92) that seals the opening of the pouch, the second resin being welded to the current collectors at a position between the stacked current collectors, being located closer to a center in the stacking direction than the first resin is to the center.
Tadokoro et al. fail to disclose the second resin being thinner than the first resin in the stacking direction for the purpose of providing bending rigidity (paragraph 0100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Tadokoro et al. with the second resin being thinner than the first resin in the stacking direction for the purpose of providing bending rigidity (paragraph 0100).
As to claim 2, Tadokoro et al. discloses further comprising: a third resin that seals the opening of the pouch, the third resin being welded to the current collectors at a position between the stacked current collectors, being located between the first resin and the second resin in the stacking direction (figure 9 number 92).
Tadokoro et al. fail to disclose the third resin being thinner than the first resin in the stacking direction and being thicker than the second resin in the stacking direction.
Kodama teaches the third resin being thinner than the first resin in the stacking direction and being thicker than the second resin in the stacking direction for the purpose of providing bending rigidity (paragraph 0100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Tadokoro et al. with the third resin being thinner than the first resin in the stacking direction and being thicker than the second resin in the stacking direction for the purpose of providing bending rigidity (paragraph 0100).
As to claim 3, Tadokoro et al. discloses wherein portions of the current collectors to which the first resin and the second resin are welded are thicker than other portions of the current collectors in the stacking direction (figure 8 number 51,92).
As to claim 4, Tadokoro et al. fail to disclose wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin.
Kodama teaches wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin for the purpose of providing optimal bending rigidity (paragraph 0016).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Tadokoro et al with wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin for the purpose of providing optimal bending rigidity (paragraph 0016).
As to claim 5, Tadokoro et al. discloses a battery cell (figure 8) comprising: a pouch (81) that accommodates electrodes (10); a plurality of current collectors (51), each of which is connected to a corresponding one of the electrodes (10) in the pouch, the current collectors (51) being stacked in a stacking direction, the current collectors projecting outside of the pouch through an opening of the pouch; a first resin (92) that seals the opening of the pouch, the first resin being welded to the current collectors (51) at a position between the stacked current collectors; and a second resin (92) that seals the opening of the pouch, the second resin (92) being welded to the current collectors at a position between the stacked current collectors, being located closer to a center in the stacking direction than the first resin is to the center.
Tadokoro et al. fails to disclose the second resin having a lower melting point than the first resin.
Kodama teaches wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin for the purpose of providing optimal bending rigidity (paragraph 0016).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Tadokoro et al with wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin for the purpose of providing optimal bending rigidity (paragraph 0016).
As to claim 7, Tadokoro et al. discloses a method for manufacturing a battery cell, the method comprising: stacking electrode sheets (figure 8 number 10) in a stacking direction in a pouch (81), each of the electrode sheets having: an electrode located in the pouch; and a current collector (51) connected to the electrode in the pouch and projecting outside the pouch from an opening of the pouch (81), such that the current collectors (51) are stacked; pressurizing and heating (paragraph 0025) a first resin and a second resin from an outer side toward a center in the stacking direction, the first resin (92) being located between the stacked current collectors, the second resin (92) being located between the current collectors and closer to the center in the stacking direction than the first resin is to the center, and at positions between the current collectors, welding the first resin and welding the second resin to seal the opening of the pouch.
Tadokoro et al. fail to disclose the second resin being thinner than the first resin in the stacking direction and/or having a lower melting point than the first resin.
Kodama teaches wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin for the purpose of providing optimal bending rigidity (paragraph 0016).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Tadokoro et al with wherein the second resin has a lower melting point than the first resin for the purpose of providing optimal bending rigidity (paragraph 0016).
As to claim 8, Tadokoro et al. discloses further comprising: further heating the second resin through the current collector that is in contact with the second resin during pressurizing and heating of the first resin and the second resin (paragraph 0025).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadokoro et al. in view of Kodama and in further view of Ohsawa et al. (US20190067680).
Tadokoro et al. and Kodama discloses the battery cell described above. Tadokoro et al. fail to disclose wherein the second resin includes an additive to lower the melting point. Ohsawa et al. teaches wherein the second resin includes an additive to lower the melting point for the purpose of providing an optimal resin (paragraph 0081).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Tadokoro et al. with wherein the second resin includes an additive to lower the melting point for the purpose of providing an optimal resin (paragraph 0081).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANE J RHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1499. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (10-6:30).
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/JANE J RHEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights