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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph [0047], line 3, “SUS” should read --stainless use steel (SUS)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibutani et al. (US 20180241026 A1), hereinafter “Shibutani”, in view of Hamano et al. (JP 200013220 A), hereinafter “Hamano”, as cited in the IDS dated 6/30/2026, wherein an English machine translation of Hamano is cited.
Regarding claim 1, Shibutani teaches a secondary battery (corresponding to the claimed battery) (Shibutani, [0026], lines 1-6) comprising:
A laminated electrode body (corresponding to the claimed electrode body) (Shibutani, [0026], lines 1-6)
An exterior member (corresponding to the claimed laminate outer encasement) (Shibutani, [0054], lines 9-17)
The exterior member comprising a fused layer (corresponding to the claimed battery includes a first buffer member) (Shibutani, [0104], lines 1-15)
Annotated Fig. 6A from Shibutani below shows the laminated electrode body 20 covered by the exterior member 300 (corresponding to the claimed laminate outer encasement that covers the electrode body) (Shibutani, [0102], lines 1-2; Fig. 5). Annotated Fig. 6A from Shibutani below also denotes a first surface of the electrode body 20, and a second surface of the electrode body that faces the first surface in a thickness direction (corresponding to the claimed electrode body includes a first surface and a second surface that faces the first surface in a thickness direction) (Shibutani, [0102], lines 1-2).
PNG
media_image1.png
434
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shibutani also teaches that the exterior member 300 is a laminated film, comprising the fused layer on the bottom of the laminated film (Shibutani, [0104], lines 1-15). Shibutani further teaches that the fused layers face each other through the laminated electrode body 20 (corresponding to the claimed first buffer member between the first surface and the laminate outer encasement that faces the first surface in the thickness direction) (Shibutani, [0104], lines 1-15; See annotated Fig. 6A above).
Shibutani does not teach the fused layer containing a polyurea resin. However, Hamano teaches a lithium ion secondary battery comprising a resin film between an electrode body and an outer packaging bag (Hamano, [0014], lines 1-3), wherein the resin film may comprise a polyurea-based resin (corresponding to the claimed first buffer member containing a polyurea resin) (Hamano, [0025], lines 1-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute Hamano's polyurea based resin film for the fused layer material of Shibutani in order to obtain a liquid resin at room temperature for easy application to the outer portion of the electrode body (Hamano, [0025], lines 1-3 & 6-8).
Regarding claim 2, annotated Fig. 6A from Shibutani above shows the exterior member 300 comprising a lower portion in the Y-direction. As stated in the rejection of claim 1 above, Shibutani teaches the exterior member 300 comprising fused layers that face each other through the laminated electrode body 20 (Shibutani, [0104], lines 1-15). Therefore, Shibutani’s lower portion of the exterior member 300 also comprises a fused layer (corresponding to the claimed second buffer member between the second surface and the laminate outer encasement that faces the second surface in the thickness direction) (See annotated Fig. 6A above).
Shibutani does not teach the fused layer containing a polyurea resin. As stated in the rejection of claim 1, Hamano teaches the resin film may comprise a polyurea-based resin (corresponding to the claimed second buffer member containing a polyurea resin) (Hamano, [0025], lines 1-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute Hamano's polyurea based resin film for the fused layer material of Shibutani in order to obtain a liquid resin at room temperature for easy application to the outer portion of the electrode body (Hamano, [0025], lines 1-3 & 6-8).
Regarding claim 3, annotated Fig. 6 from Shibutani above shows the exterior member 300 comprising a fused layer facing towards a side surface of the electrode body 20 in the Z-direction (corresponding to the claimed third buffer member disposed on a side surface of the electrode body) (Shibutani, [0104], lines 1-15). Shibutani does not teach the fused layer containing a polyurea resin. As stated in the rejection of claim 1, Hamano teaches the resin film may comprise a polyurea-based resin (corresponding to the claimed third buffer member containing a polyurea resin) (Hamano, [0025], lines 1-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute Hamano's polyurea based resin film for the fused layer material of Shibutani in order to obtain a liquid resin at room temperature for easy application to the outer portion of the electrode body (Hamano, [0025], lines 1-3 & 6-8).
Further regarding claim 3, Shibutani teaches fusing the circumferential edge portions of the fused layer (corresponding to the claimed first buffer member, the second buffer member, and the third buffer member are integrated together) (Shibutani, [0104], lines 7-12).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Shibutani teaches the electrode body 20 comprising:
A positive electrode member 22 comprising a positive electrode active material layer 22B (corresponding to the claimed electrode body includes a cathode active material layer) (Shibutani, [0067], lines 7-10)
a negative electrode member 24 comprising a negative electrode active material layer 24B (corresponding to the claimed anode active material layer) (Shibutani, [0067], lines 12-14)
the positive electrode member 22 and the negative electrode member 24 laminated through an electrolyte layer 28 (Shibutani, [0102], lines 1-8)
Fig. 6B from Shibutani further shows the electrolyte layer 28 disposed between the positive electrode active material layer 22B and the negative electrode active material layer 24B (corresponding to the claimed electrolyte layer disposed between the cathode active material layer and the anode active material layer).
Further regarding claim 4, Shibutani also teaches that the negative electrode active material layer may comprise silicon (corresponding to the claimed anode active material layer contains a Si active material as an anode active material) (Shibutani, [0173], lines 1-6).
Further regarding claim 5, the instant specification provides a gel electrolyte as an example of the solid electrolyte (Instant specification, [0038], lines 1-2). Shibutani teaches that the electrolyte layer solution may be gel-like or of solid form (corresponding to the claimed electrolyte layer is a solid electrolyte layer containing a solid electrolyte) (Shibutani, [0120], lines 1-10).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 5 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2 and 6 of copending Application No. 18/746,483, hereinafter “the ‘483 application. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding the instant claim 1, claim 2 of the ‘483 application teaches a battery comprising:
An electrode body (corresponding to the claimed electrode body including a first surface and a second surface that faces the first surface in a thickness direction)
A laminate outer encasement that covers the electrode body (corresponding to the claimed laminate outer encasement that covers the electrode body)
A resin member that is interposed between the electrode body and the laminate outer encasement, covering an entire face of the electrode body, and also containing a polyurea resin (corresponding to the claimed first buffer member containing a polyurea resin between the first surface and the laminate outer encasement that faces the first surface in the thickness direction).
Regarding the instant claim 5, claim 6 of the ‘483 application teaches the electrode body includes a cathode active material layer, an anode active material layer, and an electrolyte layer disposed between the cathode active material layer and the anode active material layer; and the electrolyte layer is a solid electrolyte layer containing a solid electrolyte
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 4 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/746,483, hereinafter “the ‘483 application” in view of Shibutani (US 20180241026 A1).
Regarding the instant claim 4, claim 6 of the ‘483 application teaches the electrode body including a cathode active material layer, an anode active material layer, and an electrolyte layer disposed between the cathode active material layer and the anode active material layer. The ‘483 application does not teach the anode active material layer containing a silicon active material as an anode active material. Shibutani teaches that the negative electrode active material layer may comprise silicon (corresponding to the claimed anode active material layer contains a Si active material as an anode active material) (Shibutani, [0173], lines 1-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Shibutani's silicon active material to the anode active material of the ‘483 application in order to occlude or release lithium for higher energy density (Shibutani, [0163], lines 4-12).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rachel Avina whose telephone number is (571)270-0429. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1177. 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.
/R.M.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights