Claim 22
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 .
Response to Amendment
This is a final Office action in response to Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed on 04/24/2026. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 3 and 15 – 16 are canceled. Claims 11 and 14 remain withdrawn. Claims 21 – 22 are new. Claims 1 – 2, 4 – 13, and 17 – 22 are pending in the current Office action.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections established in the previous Office action are maintained. A new grounds of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment is presented below {i.e. the amended range for “a” is narrower in scope than the range previously considered and thus changes the scope of the claimed invention in a manner that was not previously considered}.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Specifically, the examiner relies on Lin (CN216389567U) to render obvious the limitation regarding the thicknesses of the end covers.
In response to applicant’s arguments that no prima facie case of obviousness has been established with respect to claim 1, the examiner respectfully reminds applicant that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In the instant case, each cited prior art, as noted by the examiner in the non-final rejection and further below, are in the same field of endeavor {i.e. pertain to cylindrical battery cell structures} and provide motivations with respect to controlling the thicknesses of cylindrical cell cover plates, battery shells, insulators, etc. {e.g. optimizing energy density vs. meeting mechanical requirements for larger diameter cylindrical batteries and insulating plate strength}; selecting electrode assembly diameters; selecting particular battery shell compositions; positioning terminals; and controlling battery cell case volume vs. cell volume, that appear generic to cylindrical battery cell structure/ battery pack optimization and thus would be relevant to a cylindrical battery cell as taught by Qiu or a battery pack incorporating the battery cells taught by Qiu [MPEP 2123(I)]. Therefore, the rejections made in view of the prior art: Qiu, Lenz, Hwangbo, Enomoto, Zhang, Okuda, Nono, Lee, Nakanishi, and He seem to properly support prima facie obviousness. The examiner further respectfully reminds applicant that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
The examiner further notes that the cited prior art, and more specifically the prior art teaching dimensions for cylindrical battery cell components, teach dimensions that are within/overlap the claimed ranges {i.e. specifically heights, thicknesses and diameters} claimed by the applicant and thus, when considered together, would reasonably be expected to provide a cylindrical cells capable of satisfying (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) and (H1-a)/Ha ≥ 96%, and per MPEP 2144.05(I), where recited range(s) overlap or lie inside prior art range(s),a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
Additionally, the examiner respectfully submits, as established in the non-final Office action, per MPEP 2144.05(II) and absent demonstrated criticality, a skilled artisan would be motivated to select, in combination with the taught heights and diameters Qiu, thicknesses that provide that satisfy the claimed relationships based on the teachings of prior art {e.g. maximizing the energy capacity of the battery vs. ensuring that the mechanical requirements of the larger diameter batter are met} and notes that in [0007] and [0014] of the instant specification, optimizing battery cell energy density in view of meeting structural requirements appears to be relevant to the dimensional relationship required by amended claim 1.
Therefore, in light of the above discussion, applicant’s argument that no prima facie case of obviousness has been established is unpersuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 4, 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026) in view of Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1, foreign priority date of 12/17/2021, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026), Lin (CN216389567U, Machine translation provided) and Hwangbo (KR20220105118A, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claims 1 – 2, Qiu discloses a battery cell (toroidal unit cell, Fig. 1, 1; [0010];[0047 – 0048]) comprising a housing (Refer to housing formed by cover plate 7, cover plate 8 and shell 4, Figs. 1 and 2b; [0047];[0050 – 0051]) and an electrode assembly accommodated in the housing (cell core 6, Fig. 2a and 2b; [0048 – 0049]), wherein the housing is cylindrical (Refer to cylindrical shape of housing shown in Fig. 1 and 2b) and comprises a first end wall (top cover plate 7, Fig. 2b; [0051]), a second end wall (bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0051]) and a side wall (shell 4, Fib. 2b; [0051]); the first end wall and the second end wall are oppositely disposed along a height direction of the housing (Refer to upper and lower positions of top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8 in Figs. 1 and 2b); and the side wall connects the first end wall and the second end wall (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8 are included on the ends of shell 4 to enclose the electrode assembly in Fig. 1 and 2b).
Qiu does not explicitly disclose a height, H1, of the housing, a radius, R1, of the housing, a sum, a, of thicknesses of the first end wall and the second end wall, and a thickness, b, of the side wall satisfying: (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96%; however, Qiu does explicitly disclose example unit cells having a radius and height within the ranges claimed/disclosed by the applicant to be capable of satisfying the claimed equation (Refer to claims 2 – 3 and instant specification: [0090 – 0100]).
Specifically Qiu discloses Unit Cells 1B and 1C (Refer to Fig. 3a) which have a height of 180 mm ([0056]), which is within the claimed range of 100 mm ≤ H1 ≤ 400 mm (Claim 3), and radii of 107.5 mm and 152.5 mm, respectively ([0056]), which are both within the claimed range of 100 mm ≤ R1 ≤ 400 mm (Claim 2) {Examiner Note: The corresponding radii of the disclosed examples are determined from the outer unit cell diameters disclosed by Qiu as the outer diameter of the unit cell corresponds to diameter of the unit cell housing and thus correspond to the claimed radius}.
Qiu does not explicitly disclose the thicknesses of the cover plates and shells of the unit cell examples; however, and therefore does not particularly disclose thicknesses that satisfy the claimed equations: (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96%, 2.5 mm ≤ a ≤ 7 mm, and (H1-a)/H1 ≥ 96% ; wherein ((R1-b)/R1 ≥ 99% and a sum of thicknesses of the first end wall and second end wall being 0.2 mm ≤ b ≤ 2 mm (Claim 2).
Lentz, directed to cylindrical battery cell structures having an outer diameter of preferably more than 22 mm, teaches that greater wall thicknesses for the cylindrical cell casing are necessary because larger diameter cells have higher mechanical requirements ([0002];[0082]). Lentz further teaches that such battery cell housings will preferably have a wall thickness between 0.5 mm – 2.5mm which and that wall thicknesses above and below the taught range are conceivable depending on the cell diameter due to the radius and wall thickness having a direct effect on the allowable stress of the housing in the circumferential direction (Refer to Equation (1) and [0083];[0100]). Increases in wall thickness are also taught by Lentz to reduce the energy capacity of the cell housing ([00082]).
Since the unit cell examples of Qiu are large diameter cylindrical-shaped cells and since Qiu is also concerned with maximizing cell capacity/energy density (Qiu: Fig. 1, [0010];[0056]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the shell thickness of the unit cell examples be within the range taught by Lentz, and thus overlapping the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success in having a suitable thickness for the diameter sizes disclosed by Qiu.
Lin, directed to battery cell housing structures including end caps for closing the opening of the housing structures, teaches having the total thickness of the cover body be within the range of 2.5 mm to 1.5 mm to ensure that the strength of the cover body and also ensure that the cover body has sufficient width to be welded to the housing (Figs. 4 – 10;[0112];[0116];[0149]). While the figures of Lin depict prismatic battery cells, Lin further teaches that the housing of the battery is not limited to such a shape and further includes cylindrical shaped cells within their taught scope ([0111 – 0112]), as such the cover body thickness range taught by Lin is also applicable to cylindrical battery cells.
Therefore, since Qiu teaches welding the cover plates to the shell, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the thicknesses of the cover plates in the unit cell examples be within the range taught by Lin, and thus obtain thicknesses that would provide a sum within the claimed range {i.e. 3 – 5 mm}, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining cover plates with a thickness suitable for welding.
Modified Qui as established above, has a sum, a, of thicknesses of the first end wall and second end wall satisfying: 3 ≤ a ≤ 5, which is within the claimed range of 2.5 ≤ a ≤ 7. Furthermore, the height of modified Qiu cell is 180 mm (Qiu: [0056]), as such modified Qiu provides an H1 and “a” satisfying (H1-a)/H1 ≥ 97%, which is within the claimed range of (H1-a)/H1 ≥ 96% (Claim 1 cont.).
To further render obvious selection of dimensions satisfying the claimed the dimensional relationships: (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96% and (R1-b)/R1 ≥ 99% and 0.2 mm ≤ b ≤ 2 mm, the examiner relies upon the following additional teaching:
Hwangbo, also directed to cylindrical battery cell structures and enhancing spatial utilization of such battery cell cans (Refer to abstract), teaches, in addition to affecting the strength of cover, that the thickness of a closure part of a cylindrical battery cell can also affect the energy density of the battery cell ([0169]). Specifically, reducing the thickness is indicated by Hwangbo to increase risk of battery deformation during pressure increase/welding while increasing the thickness decreases energy density ([0169]).
Selection of shell thickness within the overlapping portion of the claimed range and taught range, and further selection of shell thicknesses and cover plate thicknesses that would allow the unit cells of Qiu to satisfy the claimed equations of (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96% and (R1-b)/R1 ≥ 99%, would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of maximizing the energy capacity of the battery, as desired by Qiu, while ensuring that the mechanical requirements of the larger diameter batter are met, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 4, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu further discloses wherein the housing comprises a housing body (shell 4, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]) and two end covers (Top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]), wherein the housing body has two opposite disposed openings (Refer to top and bottom openings of shell 4 in Fig. 2b; [0051]), and the two end covers respectively cover the corresponding openings (Refer to Figs. 1 and 2b; [0051]); and the housing body serves as the side wall (Refer to how the shell makes up the outermost side surfaces of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b) and the two end covers serve as the first wall and the second end wall, respectively (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8 make up the top and bottom of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu exemplifies Unit Cells 1B and 1C (Refer to Fig. 3a) which have a height of 180 mm and radii of 107.5 mm and 152.5 mm, respectively ([0056]); therefore, Qiu further discloses unit cells that provide a volume {i.e. π*R12*H1} of ≈ 0.007 mm3 {i.e. π*(107.5)2*180} and 0.013 mm3 {i.e. π*(152.5)2*180} respectively, which are within the claimed range of 0.001 mm3 ≤ π*R12*H1 ≤ 0.015 mm3.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu further discloses a battery (Refer to lithium-ion assembled power battery in Fig. 3a which includes the unit cells 1A, 1B, and 1C; [0056] and the rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U) and Hwangbo (KR20220105118A), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Enomoto (US PG Pub. 2020/0020897 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. The electrode assembly of Qiu’s unit cell is a wound electrode assembly ([0048]).
Qiu does not explicitly disclose a first insulating member and a second insulating member, wherein the first insulating member is disposed between the first end wall and the electrode assembly and abuts against the first end wall, and the second insulating member is disposed between the second end wall and the electrode assembly and abuts against the second end wall.
Enomoto, directed toward cylindrical battery cell structures, teaches including an insulating plate above and below the electrode assembly in the cylindrical cell housing (Refer to 20 and 19 in Fig. 7)
, and further teaches that a high strength insulating plate reduces inhibition of discharge through the discharge valve of the sealing body (Fig. 7; [0031];[0033 – 0034];[0077 – 0078]). Enomoto further teaches controlling the strength of the insulating plate by controlling the thickness of the insulating plate, and particularly teaches using insulating plates with a thickness of 0.1 mm or more ([0006];[0008]).
Since Qiu appears to include a gas discharge structure on the top cover plate 7 of the unit cell (Refer to the small hole shown on top cover plate 7 in Figs. 1 and 2b) and further is concerned with achieving a high safety battery, It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include insulating plates, as taught by Enomoto, and thus obtain the claimed first and second insulating member disposed between the electrode assembly and first and second end wall, respectively, with a reasonable expectation of success in maintaining insulation between the electrode groups and leads extending from the electrode groups and also reducing inhibition of discharge from the battery (Enomoto: [0002];[0033 – 0034]).
As established above, modified Qiu’s unit cells include a first and second insulating member having a thickness of 0.1 mm or more, which encompasses the claimed ranges of 2 mm ≤d1≤ 6mm and 2 mm ≤d2≤ 6mm. The unit cells also have a height of 180 mm (Refer to Qiu: Unit Cells 1B and 1C in Fig. 3a; [0056]).
Modified Qiu does not disclose a maximum dimension, d1, of the first insulating member in the height direction and a maximum dimension of the of the second insulating member in the height direction satisfying (H1-a-d1-d2)/H1 ≥ 90%,
Enomoto further teaches that when the battery has a large outer diameter the insulating plate is large so as to be sized to the outer diameter ([0006]). Enomoto teaches having the ratio of the thickness to a diameter of the insulating plate (T/D) be 0.016 of less to ensure the strength of the insulating plate ([0035]). Smaller thicknesses are taught by Enomoto to result in lower strengths and larger thicknesses, since the insulating plates do not contribute to capacity of the battery, are taught to reduce battery capacity ([0033];[0085]).
As established above, Lin teaches having the total thickness of a cover body for a battery cell housing be within the range of 2.5 mm to 1.5 mm to ensure that the strength of the cover body and also ensure that the cover body has sufficient width to be welded to the housing (Figs. 4 – 10;[0112];[0116];[0149]). While the figures of Lin depict prismatic battery cells, Lin further teaches that the housing of the battery is not limited to such a shape and further includes cylindrical shaped cells within their taught scope ([0111 – 0112]), as such the cover body thickness range taught by Lin is also applicable to cylindrical battery cells.
Additionally, Hwangbo, also directed to cylindrical battery cell structures and enhancing spatial utilization of such battery cell cans (Refer to abstract), teaches, in addition to affecting the strength, the thickness of a closure part of a cylindrical battery cell can also affect the energy density of the battery cell ([0169]). Specifically, reducing the thickness is indicated by Hwangbo to increase risk of battery deformation during pressure increase/welding while increasing the thickness decreases energy density ([0169]).
Therefore, selection of insulating member thicknesses within the overlapping portion of the claimed range and taught range and further selection of insulating member thicknesses and end wall thicknesses that would allow the example unit cells of Qiu to satisfy the claimed equation of (H1-a-d1-d2)/H1 ≥ 90%, would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of maximizing the energy capacity of the battery, as desired by Qiu, while also ensuring that thicknesses are suitable for the large diameter unit cells of Qui and for welding, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Claim(s) 6 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U) and Hwangbo (KR20220105118A), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN114937808A, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026) and Enomoto (US PG Pub. 2020/0020897 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claims 6 – 7, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu further discloses wherein the housing comprises a housing body (shell 4, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]) and an end cover (Refer to top cover plate 7 or bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]), wherein the housing body has an opening (Refer to top or bottom opening of shell 4 in Fig. 2b; [0051]), and the end cover covers the opening (Refer to Figs. 1 and 2b; [0051]); and the housing body serves as the side wall (Refer to how the shell makes up the outermost side surfaces of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b) (Claim 6).
Furthermore, since Qiu discloses the unit cell including a top cover plate, Qiu further discloses wherein the end cover serves as a first end wall (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 makes up the top of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b) (Claim 6 cont.)
The unit cells of Qiu includes a second end wall {i.e. bottom cover plate 8}, but the cover plate is not integrally formed with the unit cell shell; therefore modified Qiu does not explicitly disclose the housing body comprising the second end wall and the side wall that are integrally formed (Claim 6 cont.).
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bottom cover plate of Qiu’s unit cells integral to the shell, and thus obtain the claimed structure, because the use of one end cover and an integral bottom wall would be a matter of obvious engineering choice that, as shown by Zhang, directed to large cylindrical battery cells housed in a casing formed from an iron alloy, is known in the art for cylindrical type batteries and would have a reasonable expectation of success in providing the desired end wall for housing with greater processing/manufacturing efficiency (Zhang: Fig. 1, [0002];[0080]) [See MPEP 2144.04(V)].
Qiu does not explicitly disclose a third insulating member, wherein the third insulating member is disposed between the first end wall and the electrode assembly and abuts against the first end wall; or the third insulating member is disposed between the second end wall and the electrode assembly and abuts against the second end wall (Claim 7)
Enomoto, directed toward cylindrical battery cell structures, teaches including an insulating plate above and below the electrode assembly in the cylindrical cell housing (Refer to 20 and 19 in Fig. 7)
, and further teaches that a high strength insulating plate reduces inhibition of discharge through the discharge valve of the sealing body (Fig. 7; [0031];[0033 – 0034];[0077 – 0078]). Enomoto further teaches controlling the strength of the insulating plate by controlling the thickness of the insulating plate, and particularly teaches using insulating plates with a thickness of 0.1 mm or more ([0006];[0008]).
Since Qiu appears to include a gas discharge structure on the top cover plate 7 of the unit cell (Refer to the small hole shown on top cover plate 7 in Figs. 1 and 2b) and further is concerned with achieving a high safety battery, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include an insulating plate at least between the top cover plate and electrode assembly, as taught by Enomoto, and thus obtain the claimed third insulating member structure, with a reasonable expectation of success in maintaining insulation between the electrode assembly and leads extending from the electrode assembly and also reducing inhibition of discharge from the battery (Enomoto: [0002];[0033 – 0034]).
As established above, modified Qiu’s unit cells includes a third insulating member having a thickness of 0.1 mm or more, which encompasses the claimed ranges of 2 mm ≤d3≤ 6mm (Claim 7 cont.). The unit cells also have a height of 180 mm (Refer to Qiu: Unit Cells 1B and 1C in Fig. 3a; [0056]).
Modified Qiu does not disclose a maximum dimension, d3, of the third insulating member in the height direction satisfying (H1-a-d3)/H1 ≥ 92% (Claim 7 cont.).
Enomoto further teaches that when the battery has a large outer diameter the insulating plate is large so as to be sized to the outer diameter ([0006]). Enomoto teaches having the ratio of the thickness to a diameter of the insulating plate (T/D) be 0.016 of less to ensure the strength of the insulating plate ([0035]). Smaller thicknesses are taught by Enomoto to result in lower strengths and larger thicknesses, since the insulating plates do not contribute to capacity of the battery, are taught to reduce battery capacity ([0033];[0085]).
As established above Hwangbo teaches, in the area forming the closed portion of the battery cell can {i.e. would correspond to end cover} having the thickness be within the range of 0.4 – 1.2 and more preferably 0.6 – 1.0 mm ([0169]). Hwangbo further teaches that if the closure part is too thin there is greater risk for battery deformation during pressure increase/welding and if the closure part is too thick a loss in energy density can occur ([0169]).
Selection of an insulating member thickness within the overlapping portion of the claimed range and taught range and further selection of insulating member thickness and end wall thicknesses that would allow the example unit cells of Qiu to satisfy the claimed equation of (H1-a-d3)/H1 ≥ 92%, would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of maximizing the energy capacity of the battery, as desired by Qiu, while also ensuring that thicknesses are suitable for the large diameter unit cells of Qui, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Claim(s) 9 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U) and Hwangbo (KR20220105118A), as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Okuda (US PG Pub. 2021/0376391 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claims 9 – 10, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu further discloses wherein the electrode assembly is a wound structure and wherein the electrode assembly is cylindrical (Refer to cell core 6 shown in Figs. 2a – 2b; [0048 – 0050]) (Claim 9).
Qiu teaches controlling the maximum thickness of the cell core to better facilitate heat dissipation via the thermal conductive surface of side wall that forms parts of the cell shell ([0023]). Qiu exemplifies Unit Cells 1B and 1C (Refer to Fig. 3a) which have a height of 180 mm and radii of 107.5 mm and 152.5 mm, respectively ([0056]). Qiu further teaches assembling the shell and cell core so that the cell core is abut against the shell tightly with more uniform stress distribution when the core expands after absorbing electrolyte ([0027]).
As such, since Qiu suggests that the cell core is assembled such that the core abuts against the shell tight and further since the cell core is shown to be enclosed entirely in the shell, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the unit cells of Qiu to have a diameter and height that is relatively close to the shell diameter and height, and thus capable of providing ratios within/at least overlapping (R22*H2)/(R12*H1) ≥ 85% (Claim 9 cont.) and wherein R2/(R1-b) ≥ 85% and H2/(H1-a) ≥ 92.5% (Claim 10).
Okuda, directed to fitting wound electrode assemblies into cylindrical cell case bodies, teaches having the ratio of the of the diameter of the electrode assembly (L1) to the inner diameter of the case body (L2) be most preferably in the range of 0.97 to 1.03 to achieve high energy density and reduce stress on the electrode assembly in the case (Fig. 2; [0014 – 0016];[0027]).
As established above, Lin teaches having the total thickness of a cover body for a battery cell housing be within the range of 2.5 mm to 1.5 mm to ensure that the strength of the cover body and also ensure that the cover body has sufficient width to be welded to the housing (Figs. 4 – 10;[0112];[0116];[0149]). While the figures of Lin depict prismatic battery cells, Lin further teaches that the housing of the battery is not limited to such a shape and further includes cylindrical shaped cells within their taught scope ([0111 – 0112]), as such the cover body thickness range taught by Lin is also applicable to cylindrical battery cells.
Hwangbo, also directed to cylindrical battery cell structures and enhancing spatial utilization of such battery cell cans (Refer to abstract), teaches, in addition to affecting the strength, the thickness of a closure part of a cylindrical battery cell can also affect the energy density of the battery cell ([0169]). Specifically, reducing the thickness is indicated by Hwangbo to increase risk of battery deformation during pressure increase/welding while increasing the thickness decreases energy density ([0169]).
And Lentz teaches that greater wall thicknesses for the cylindrical cell casing are necessary because larger diameter cells have higher mechanical requirements ([0002];[0082]). Lentz further teaches that such battery cell housings will preferably have a wall thickness between 0.5 mm – 2.5mm which and that wall thicknesses above and below the taught range are conceivable depending on the cell diameter due to the radius and wall thickness having a direct effect on the allowable stress of the housing in the circumferential direction (Refer to Equation (1) and [0083];[0100]). Increases in wall thickness are also taught by Lentz to reduce the energy capacity of the cell housing ([00082]).
Therefore, selection of electrode assembly dimensions, end wall thicknesses {i.e. “a”}, and a side wall thickness {i.e. “b”} that would allow the example unit cells of Qiu to satisfy the claimed equations would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of maximizing the energy capacity of the battery, as desired by Qiu, while also ensuring that cell core dimensions and thicknesses are suitable for the large diameter unit cells of Qui {i.e. meet desired mechanical requirements and heat dissipation capability}, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U), Hwangbo (KR20220105118A) and Okuda (US PG Pub. 2021/0376391 A1), as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Nono (JP6037084B2, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu teaches using aluminum or stainless steel for the unit cell shells ([0050]). One with ordinary skill in the art would recognize that stainless steel is an iron-based alloy.
Modified Qiu does not disclose an embodiment; however, wherein materials of the first end wall, the second end wall, and the side wall all comprise an iron alloy particularly comprising: iron≥98%, and 0.15%≤carbon≤2%; and the iron alloy further containing manganese, silicon, sulfur, phosphorus, and the like, with each individual element component≤0.05% and total components≤0.2%.
Nono, directed toward steel sheets battery cans, teaches using a steel sheet having a chemical compositions, in mass, C: more than 0.150 to 0.250%; Sol. Al: 0.005 to 0.100%, B: 0.0005 to 0.02%, Si: 0.50% or less, Mn: 0.70% or less, P: 0.070% or less, S: 0.05% or less, N: 0.0080% or less, Nb: 0.003% or less, Ti: 0.003% or less, with the balance consisting of Fe and impurities ([0001 – 002];[0015];[0016]). As such, Nono teaches an iron-based alloy comprising carbon that overlaps in compositional scope with the claimed iron alloy. By using the such material, Nono teaches obtaining a cold-rolled steel sheet for can drawing which has high strength, excellent press formability, excellent non-St-St properties {i.e. absence of stretcher strain after drawing}, and excellent shape fixability ([0006];[0015];[0115]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the steel taught by Nono for the end walls and side walls of Qiu’s example unit cells, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a suitable battery housing with high strength.
By including the iron-based alloy taught by Nono, modified Qiu’s includes an iron alloy comprising, by mass 0.150 to 0.250% of carbon, which is within the claimed range of 0.15%≤carbon≤2%, and an amount of iron and manganese, silicon, sulfur, phosphorous, and the like in amount overlapping/encompassing the claimed range.
The silicon, manganese, phosphorous, sulfur and nitrogen contained in the steel are impurities that are taught by Nono to preferably be set as low as possible ([0046 – 0049];[0051]). Silicon reduces plating adhesion, manganese reduces press-formability, sulfur causes brittle cracks during hot rolling, and nitrogen reduces press-formability and causes stretcher strain ([0046 – 0047];[0049];[0051]). Phosphorous, while capable of increasing the strength of the steel, reduces the press-formability and can cause embrittlement cracking when the content is too high ([0048]). The sol. aluminum deoxidizes the steel and improve the surface quality of the steel during casting, but, at higher concentrations the effects of the aluminum saturate and manufacturing cost increases ([0050]). The boron is included in the steel to reduce the amount of nitrogen and improves the earring properties of the steel, but at concentrations exceeding 0.02% the earring properties are reduced ([0052]).
Selection of mass percentages for the iron and the other individual element component {i.e. manganese, silicon, sulfur, phosphorous, and the like} within the overlapping portion of the claimed range and taught range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to minimize the content of impurities while also optimizing the effects of the aluminum, boron, and carbon, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Claim(s) 13 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U), Hwangbo (KR20220105118A) and Okuda (US PG Pub. 2021/0376391 A1), as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN114937808A, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026) and Lee (KR20170072525A, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu further discloses wherein the housing comprises a housing body (shell 4, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]) and an end cover (Refer to top cover plate 7 or bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]), wherein the housing body has an opening (Refer to top or bottom opening of shell 4 in Fig. 2b; [0051]), and the end cover covers the opening (Refer to Figs. 1 and 2b; [0051]); and the end cover is connected to the housing body through welding ([0051]).
Furthermore, since Qiu discloses the unit cell including a top cover plate, Qiu further discloses wherein the end cover serves as a first end wall (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 makes up the top of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b) (Claim 6 cont.)
The unit cells of Qiu includes a second end wall {i.e. bottom cover plate 8 }, but the cover plate is not integrally formed with the unit cell shell; therefore modified Qiu does not explicitly disclose the housing body comprising the second end wall and the side wall that are integrally formed (Claim 6 cont.).
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bottom cover plate of Qiu’s unit cells integral to the shell, and thus obtain the claimed structure, because the use of one end cover and an integral bottom wall would be a matter of obvious engineering choice that, as shown by Zhang {i.e. directed to large cylindrical battery cells housed in a casing formed from an iron alloy}, is known in the art for cylindrical type batteries and would have a reasonable expectation of success in providing the desired end wall for housing with greater processing/manufacturing efficiency (Zhang: Fig. 1, [0002];[0080]) [See MPEP 2144.04(V)].
Qiu further discloses the electrode assembly comprising a positive tab and negative tab (Fig. 2a and 2b; [0048]),
Qiu further appears to teach/show a negative terminal post and positive terminal post included on top cover plate 7 ([0056]), but does not disclose the particulars of the tab and terminal structure. Therefore, modified Qiu does not explicitly disclose the battery cell comprising a positive electrode terminal that is insulatively disposed on the second end wall, the positive tab being electrically connected to the positive electrode terminal, and the negative tab is electrically connected to the second end wall.
Zhang further teaches forming cylindrical battery cells having full-tab structures at both ends of the battery cell core, where one full tab structure is electrically connected to the cap of cell and the other full tab is electrically connected to the casing, to allow for rapid heat dissipation and reduced internal resistance (Fig. 2, [0061];[0134]). Zhang further teaches insulatively connecting the positive tab structure to the cap to prevent short circuiting ([0093]).
Since Qiu is concerned with achieving efficient heat dissipation (Qiu: [0010]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the tab and terminal structure of Qiu’s example unit cells by implementing the tab connection structure taught by Zhang, and thus obtaining the claimed structure of a positive tab electrically connected to the positive electrode terminal and a negative tab is electrically connected to the second end wall, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a tab configuration that allows for rapid heat dissipation and reduced internal resistance.
It would have been further obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the positive electrode terminal disposed on the second end wall {i.e. integrally formed bottom cover plate} of modified Qiu, and thus obtain the claimed structure of a positive electrode terminal disposed on the second end wall, because such a modification would be an obvious rearrangement of parts with respect to the terminal position, that, as shown by Lee, is known in art to be a viable position for a positive electrode terminal included on cylindrical battery cell that has an negative electrode electrically connected to the battery cell can, that is in Figs. 6 – 8 and 13 Lee shows including a terminal 40 on the end wall of the battery cell housing and opposite to the welded cap plate of the housing ([0178];[0200];[0268];[0341 – 0342]) [See MPEP 2144.04(VI)].
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U), Hwangbo (KR20220105118A) and Okuda (US PG Pub. 2021/0376391 A1), as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Nakanishi (US6521374B1, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026) and Zhang (CN114937808A, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. Qiu further discloses wherein the housing comprises a housing body (shell 4, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]) and two end covers (Top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]), wherein the housing body has two oppositely disposed openings (Refer to top and bottom openings of shell 4 in Fig. 2b; [0051]), and the two end covers respectively cover the corresponding openings (Refer to Figs. 1 and 2b; [0051]); and the housing body serves as the side wall (Refer to how the shell makes up the outermost side surfaces of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b); the two end covers serve as the first wall and the second end wall, respectively (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8 make up the top and bottom of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b); and the two end covers are connected to the housing body through welding ([0051]).
Qiu further discloses the electrode assembly comprising a positive tab and negative tab (Fig. 2a and 2b; [0048]).
Qiu further appears to teach/show a negative terminal post and positive terminal post included on top cover plate 7 (Refer to post structures that correspond to the position of the electrode tabs in Figs. 2a – 2b; [0056]), and thus further discloses the battery cell further comprising a positive electrode terminal and negative electrode terminal.
Even though not explicitly disclosed, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect positive electrode tab and negative electrode tab of Qiu’s example unit cells to be electrically connected to the positive electrode and negative electrode terminal respectively, because in Figs. 2a – 2b, the terminals are shown to correspond to the position of the electrode tabs, and Nakanashi, which teaches a similar tab and terminal structure for a cylindrical battery, explicitly teaches the electrode assembly being electrically connected to the terminal by the tabs (Fig. 1; Col, 4, lines 50 – 61).
The terminals in Qiu are shown to be included on the same cover plate; therefore, modified Qiu does not explicitly disclose the positive electrode terminal disposed on the first end wall and the negative electrode terminal disposed on the second end wall.
Zhang further teaches forming cylindrical battery cells having full-tab structures at both ends of the battery cell core and that the presence of full-tab structures at both ends reduce the internal resistance of the battery cell core (Fig. 2; [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the unit cell examples of Qiu by having the negative electrode tabs and negative electrode terminal disposed on a bottom end of the cell, and thus obtain the claimed terminal structure of a positive electrode terminal disposed on the first end wall and a negative electrode terminal disposed on the second end wall, because such a modification would be a rearrangement of parts with respect to the tab and terminal, that, as taught by Zhang, would allow for reduced internal resistance and, as shown by Nakanashi, would be a suitable and known position for negative electrode terminals and tabs in the cylindrical battery art (Refer to Figs. 1 – 2; Col. 4, lines 62 – 67; Col. 5, lines 1 – 8; Col. 5, lines 28 – 31) [See MPEP 2144.04(VI)].
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U) and Hwangbo (KR20220105118A), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of He (US PG Pub. 2022/0102787 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claims 19 – 20, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above. The power batteries formed from Qiu’s unit cells are taught to have application in an electric vehicle ([0001]).
Modified Qiu does not disclose an energy storage apparatus comprising an energy storage box, wherein the energy storage box has battery compartment; and a plurality of battery cells according to claim 1 disposed within the battery compartment (Claim 19) or further wherein a sum, V1, of volumes of the housings of the plurality of battery cells and a volume, V2, of the battery compartment satisfying: 0.5 ≤ V1/V2 ≤ 0.95.
He, teaches with respect to electric vehicle power battery packs, teaches, when implementing the battery cells in a vehicle, mounting the battery cells inside of a housing that can accommodate and protect the cells as well as support the cells to improve the overall load-bearing capacity of the power battery pack (Figs. 1 and 7 – 8; [0003];[0049 – 0050];[0083]).
Since Qiu teaches that battery cells having application in an electric vehicle , it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the power batteries comprising the unit cells of claim 1 in vehicle, and further to house the batteries is a housing, as taught by He, with a reasonable expectation of success in applying the batteries in a vehicle and ensuring that the batteries are protected.
He further teaches having the sum V1 of the volumes of the plurality of cells and the volume V2 of the power battery pack satisfy 55% ≤ V1/V2 ≤ 80 % in order to improve the space utilization of the battery pack ([0051 – 0052]).
It would have been further obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to house the battery cells such that a sum V1 of the volumes of the plurality of cells and the volume V2 of the power battery pack satisfies 55% ≤ V1/V2 ≤ 80 %, as taught by He, and thus obtain a V1/V2 ratio within the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a battery pack with a maximized amount of energy supply structures arranged in the unit space, and thus increased energy density and battery life (He: [0052]).
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U) and Hwangbo (KR20220105118A), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN114937808A, cited in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Qiu discloses all limitations as set forth above Qiu further discloses wherein the housing comprises a housing body (shell 4, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]) and an end cover (Refer to top cover plate 7 or bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]), wherein the housing body has an opening (Refer to top or bottom opening of shell 4 in Fig. 2b; [0051]), and the end cover covers the opening (Refer to Figs. 1 and 2b; [0051]).
Furthermore, since Qiu discloses the unit cell including a top cover plate, Qiu further discloses wherein the end cover serves as a first end wall (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 makes up the top of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b).
The unit cells of Qiu includes a second end wall {i.e. bottom cover plate 8 }, but the cover plate is not integrally formed with the unit cell shell; therefore modified Qiu does not explicitly disclose the housing body comprising the second end wall and the side wall that are integrally formed (Claim 6 cont.). However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bottom cover plate of Qiu’s unit cells integral to the shell, and thus obtain the claimed structure, because the use of one end cover and an integral bottom wall would be a matter of obvious engineering choice that, as shown by Zhang {i.e. directed to large cylindrical battery cells housed in a casing formed from an iron alloy}, is known in the art for cylindrical type batteries and would have a reasonable expectation of success in providing the desired end wall for housing with greater processing/manufacturing efficiency (Zhang: Fig. 1, [0002];[0080]) [See MPEP 2144.04(V)].
As established above, the end walls modified Qiu are taught to have a thickness of within the range of: 2.5 ≤ a ≤ 1.5 (Lin: [0149]) and the shell casing is taught to have a wall thicknesses of 0.5 mm – 2.5 mm (Lentz: [0100]). One with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate/recognize, that forming the second end wall {i.e. bottom end cover} to be integral to unit cell shell, the second end wall of modified Qiu, would necessarily and inherently have the same thickness as the shell.
Modified does not explicitly disclose however, where a maximum thickness a1 of the first end wall and a maximum thickness a2 of the second end wall satisfy: a1 > a2 .
As noted above, with respect to shell thickness, Lentz teaches that greater wall thicknesses for the cylindrical cell casing are necessary because larger diameter cells have higher mechanical requirements ([0002];[0082]). Lentz further teaches that such battery cell housings will preferably have a wall thickness between 0.5 mm – 2.5mm which and that wall thicknesses above and below the taught range are conceivable depending on the cell diameter due to the radius and wall thickness having a direct effect on the allowable stress of the housing in the circumferential direction (Refer to Equation (1) and [0083];[0100]). Increases in wall thickness are also taught by Lentz to reduce the energy capacity of the cell housing ([00082]).
Lin, with respect to end covers, teaches having the total thickness of a cover body for a battery cell housing be within the range of 2.5 mm to 1.5 mm to ensure that the strength of the cover body and also ensure that the cover body has sufficient width to be welded to the housing (Figs. 4 – 10;[0112];[0116];[0149]). While the figures of Lin depict prismatic battery cells, Lin further teaches that the housing of the battery is not limited to such a shape and further includes cylindrical shaped cells within their taught scope ([0111 – 0112]), as such the cover body thickness range taught by Lin is also applicable to cylindrical battery cells.
Additionally, Hwangbo, also directed to cylindrical battery cell structures and enhancing spatial utilization of such battery cell cans (Refer to abstract), teaches, in addition to affecting the strength, the thickness of a closure part of a cylindrical battery cell can also affect the energy density of the battery cell ([0169]). Specifically, reducing the thickness is indicated by Hwangbo to increase risk of battery deformation during pressure increase/welding while increasing the thickness decreases energy density ([0169]).
Selection of a maximum thickness of the first end wall {i.e. a1} that is larger than a maximum thicknesses of the second end wall {i.e. a2}, and thus within the claimed scope, would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, because such a selection of thicknesses are within the scope of thicknesses taught to provide a suitable end cover thickness for welding and shell thickness for large diameter cells, and further such a selection of thicknesses would have had a reasonable expectation of success in arriving at a cell with an end cover of sufficient strength and thickness for welding and further optimized/maximized energy density by minimizing the thickness of the shell which, as established above, the second end cover is a part of.
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US PG Pub. 2012/0114995 A1), Zhang (CN114937808A), Lentz (US PG Pub. 2024/0332679 A1), Lin (CN216389567U), Hwangbo (KR20220105118A). {Examiner note: All prior art except Lin was cited in in previous Office action mailed 02/04/2026}
Regarding Claim 22, Qiu discloses a battery cell (toroidal unit cell, Fig. 1, 1; [0010];[0047 – 0048]) comprising a housing (Refer to housing formed by cover plate 7, cover plate 8 and shell 4, Figs. 1 and 2b; [0047];[0050 – 0051]) and an electrode assembly accommodated in the housing (cell core 6, Fig. 2a and 2b; [0048 – 0049]), wherein the housing is cylindrical (Refer to cylindrical shape of housing shown in Fig. 1 and 2b) and comprises a first end wall (top cover plate 7, Fig. 2b; [0051]), a second end wall (bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0051]) and a side wall (shell 4, Fib. 2b; [0051]); the first end wall and the second end wall are oppositely disposed along a height direction of the housing (Refer to upper and lower positions of top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8 in Figs. 1 and 2b); and the side wall connects the first end wall and the second end wall (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 and bottom cover plate 8 are included on the ends of shell 4 to enclose the electrode assembly in Fig. 1 and 2b).
Qiu further discloses wherein the housing comprises a housing body (shell 4, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]) and an end cover (Refer to top cover plate 7 or bottom cover plate 8, Fig. 2b; [0050 – 0051]); the housing body having an opening (Refer to top or bottom opening of shell 4 in Fig. 2b; [0051]); and the end cover covering the opening (Refer to Figs. 1 and 2b; [0051]);
Furthermore, since Qiu discloses the unit cell including a top cover plate, Qiu further discloses wherein the end cover serves as a first end wall (Refer to how the top cover plate 7 makes up the top of the unit cell in Fig. 1 and 2b).
The unit cells of Qiu includes a second end wall {i.e. bottom cover plate 8}, but the cover plate is not integrally formed with the unit cell shell; therefore Qiu does not explicitly disclose the housing body comprising the second end wall and the side wall that are integrally formed.
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the bottom cover plate of Qiu’s unit cells integral to the shell, and thus obtain the claimed structure, because the use of one end cover and an integral bottom wall would be a matter of obvious engineering choice that, as shown by Zhang, directed to large cylindrical battery cells housed in a casing formed from an iron alloy, is known in the art for cylindrical type batteries and would have a reasonable expectation of success in providing the desired end wall for housing with greater processing/manufacturing efficiency (Zhang: Fig. 1, [0002];[0080]) [See MPEP 2144.04(V)].
Qiu does not explicitly disclose a height, H1, of the housing, a radius, R1, of the housing, a sum, a, of thicknesses of the first end wall and the second end wall, and a thickness, b, of the side wall satisfying: (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96% ; however, Qiu does explicitly disclose example unit cells having a radius and height within the ranges taught by the applicant to be capable of satisfying the claimed equation (Instant specification: [0090 – 0100]).
Specifically Qiu discloses Unit Cells 1B and 1C (Refer to Fig. 3a) which have a height of 180 mm ([0056]), which is within the taught range of 100 mm ≤ H1 ≤ 400 mm (Instant Specification: [0099]), and radii of 107.5 mm and 152.5 mm, respectively ([0056]), which are both within the taught range of 100 mm ≤ R1 ≤ 400 mm (Instant Specification: [0094]) {Examiner Note: The corresponding radii of the disclosed examples are determined from the outer unit cell diameters disclosed by Qiu as the outer diameter of the unit cell corresponds to diameter of the unit cell housing and thus correspond to the claimed radius}.
Qiu does not particularly disclose the thicknesses of the cover plates and shells of the unit cell examples; however, and therefore does not particularly disclose thicknesses satisfying: (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96% and where a maximum thickness a1 of the first end wall and a maximum thickness a2 of the second end wall satisfy: a1 > a2 .
Lentz, directed to cylindrical battery cell structures having an outer diameter of preferably more than 22 mm, teaches that greater wall thicknesses for the cylindrical cell casing are necessary because larger diameter cells have higher mechanical requirements ([0002];[0082]). Lentz further teaches that such battery cell housings will preferably have a wall thickness between 0.5 mm – 2.5mm which and that wall thicknesses above and below the taught range are conceivable depending on the cell diameter due to the radius and wall thickness having a direct effect on the allowable stress of the housing in the circumferential direction (Refer to Equation (1) and [0083];[0100]). Increases in wall thickness are also taught by Lentz to reduce the energy capacity of the cell housing ([00082]).
Since the unit cell examples of Qiu are large diameter cylindrical-shaped cells and since Qiu is also concerned with maximizing cell capacity/energy density (Qiu: Fig. 1, [0010];[0056]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the shell thickness of the unit cell examples be within the range taught by Lentz, with a reasonable expectation of success in having a suitable thickness for the diameter sizes disclosed by Qiu. The thicknesses taught by Lentz overlap the range of side wall thicknesses taught by the applicant in [0095] of the instant specification.
Lin, directed to battery cell housing structures including end caps for closing the opening of the housing structures, teaches having the total thickness of the cover body be within the range of 2.5 mm to 1.5 mm to ensure that the strength of the cover body and also ensure that the cover body has sufficient width to be welded to the housing (Figs. 4 – 10;[0112];[0116];[0149]). While the figures of Lin depict prismatic battery cells, Lin further teaches that the housing of the battery is not limited to such a shape and further includes cylindrical shaped cells within their taught scope ([0111 – 0112]), as such the cover body thickness range taught by Lin is also applicable to cylindrical battery cells.
Therefore, since Qiu teaches welding the cover plates to the shell ([0051]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the thickness of the cover plate of the modified unit cell be within the range taught by Lin, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining cover plates with a thickness suitable for welding.
As established above, the end cover of modified Qiu {i.e. corresponds to first end wall} is taught to have a thickness within the range of: 2.5 ≥ a ≥ 1.5 (Lin: [0149]) and the shell casing is taught to have a wall thicknesses of 0.5 mm – 2.5 mm (Lentz: [0100]). One with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate/recognize, that since the modified cell of Qiu has second end wall that integrally formed with the side wall, the second end wall of modified Qiu, would necessarily and inherently have the same thickness as the shell. Therefore, the sum of the end wall thicknesses in modified Qiu as established above, is 2 ≤ a ≤ 5 mm, which overlaps the sum taught by the applicant in [0100] of the instant specification and further includes within its scope thicknesses that satisfy the claimed relationship of a1 > a2.
To further render obvious selection of dimensions satisfying the claimed the dimensional relationships: (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96% and a1 > a2, the examiner relies upon the following additional teaching:
Hwangbo, also directed to cylindrical battery cell structures and enhancing spatial utilization of such battery cell cans (Refer to abstract), teaches, in addition to affecting the strength of cover, that the thickness of a closure part of a cylindrical battery cell can also affect the energy density of the battery cell ([0169]). Specifically, reducing the thickness is indicated by Hwangbo to increase risk of battery deformation during pressure increase/welding while increasing the thickness decreases energy density ([0169]).
Therefore, selection of shell thicknesses and cover plate thicknesses that would allow the unit cells of Qiu to satisfy the claimed equations of (R1-b)2*(H1-a)/R12*H1) ≥ 96% and a1 > a2, would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention, for the purpose of maximizing the energy capacity of the battery by minimizing the thickness of the shell while also ensuring that (1) the mechanical requirements of the larger diameter battery are met and (2) the end cover is of a sufficient thickness for welding, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/A.Y.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 5/21/2026
Prosecution Insights