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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1c in the reply filed on 01/06/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 7-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/06/2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the People’s Republic of China on 09/12/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202322470098.4 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The reference numbers and symbols in Figs. 5-15 and 17 are small and blurry. Accordingly, it is difficult to distinguish the claimed subject matter. The Examiner notes that the reference numbers provided in Fig. 16 are appropriately scaled for the size of the drawings, and suggests changes to Figs. 5-15 and 17 to reflect a similar size.
As best understood, it appears that Ref #123 in Fig. 9 (reproduced below) is used to denote two distinct portions of the first insulting member. Based on Fig. 8, the lower reference number should read 121.
PNG
media_image1.png
468
839
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “bending Portion” should read “bending portion” to match previous recitations. Appropriate correction is required.
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 4 and 9 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 4 recites, “wherein the ratio of the maximum thickness of the bending portion to the minimum thickness of the bearing portion is within a range of 0.3 to 0.7” (emphasis added). The Examiner notes that Claim 3 (which also depends from Claim 1) contains a similar limitation, but recites “a ratio”. Therefore, it is unclear whether Claim 4 should recite “a ratio” as indicated in Claim 3, whether a specific ratio is recited in Claim 4 (in which case Claim 3 may contains issues), or whether Claim 4 should depend from Claim 3. As such, Claim 4 is rejected as being indefinite. For the sake of compact prosecution, the first interpretation will be applied.
Claim 9 recites the following:
“The battery cell according to claim 1, wherein
the pole assembly further comprises a first insulating member surrounding an outer side of the pole body, and the first insulating member comprises a first portion and a second portion, wherein
the first portion is inserted into the mounting hole of the first wall, the second portion is connected to the first portion, and the second portion is sandwiched between the bending portion and the first wall, wherein
an inner peripheral dimension of the second portion is greater than an inner peripheral dimension of the first portion;
the bending portion and the bearing portion are connected at a connection surface, the bending portion abuts against an abutting surface of the second portion, and in the central axis direction, a distance between the connection surface and the abutting surface is within a range of -5 mm to +5 mm;
the bending portion and the bearing portion are connected at a connection surface, the bending portion abuts against an abutting surface of the second portion, and in the central axis direction, a distance between the connection surface and the abutting surface is within a range of -2 mm to +2 mm; and/or
the second portion is formed with a protruding portion, and the protruding portion surrounds the bending portion.” (emphasis added).
Although it is understood from the recitation of “and/or” that certain limitations of Claim 9 are recited in the alternative, it is unclear exactly which limitations are required, and which limitations are optional. For instance, under a first interpretation, it could be interpreted that the claim requires either the first three underlined limitations (see added emphasis, above) and/or the last underlined limitation (see added emphasis, above) since the last limitation immediately follows the recitation of “and/or”. However, if this interpretation is applied to the claims, the Examiner notes that the claim then recites a broad range (i.e. “-5 mm to +5 mm”) followed by a narrow range (i.e. “-2 mm to +2 mm”). A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Under a second interpretation, it could be interpreted that each of the underlined limitations is recited in the alternative. Such an interpretation is supported by the recitation of “a connection surface” and “an abutting surface” in both the second and third underlined limitations (see emphasis added, above), which supports an interpretation wherein the third underlined limitation does not derive antecedent basis from the second underlined limitation. Although, under this interpretation, it is not clear whether the “and/or” applies to the first underlined limitation, the phrasing of the claim is reasonably interpreted as indicating that this first underlined limitation is also recited in the alternative, since each of the underlined limitations follows the last recitation of “wherein”.
Therefore, as laid out above, Claim 9 is rejected as being indefinite. For the sake of compact prosecution, the second interpretation will be applied to the claims, as supported by the claim language of the second and third underlined limitations. Accordingly if the prior art teaches any one of the underlined limitations (see emphasis added, above), the prior art will be interpreted as reading on the last twelve lines of Claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 9-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo et al. (CN-114175371-A; cited in IDS filed 08/29/2025; see English equivalent US-20240014525-A1 for citations).
Regarding Claim 1, Guo discloses a battery cell (Figs. 1-2) having
a battery housing (corresponds to the combination of the housing 1 and cover 2, see Fig. 2; [0011, 0047, 0052-0053])
wherein a pole assembly (pole 4, Figs. 2, 4-5) is disposed on a first wall (sidewall) of the battery housing [0055-0056],
the pole assembly (pole 4) comprises a pole body (corresponds to a combination of substrate 41 and lead out-portion 42; [0060]), and the pole body comprises:
a bearing portion (first portion 421; [0061-0063]), the bearing portion being inserted through a mounting hole (rivet hole; [0011, 0056]) of the first wall (see Fig. 3; [0060-0065, 0070]); and
a bending portion (second portion 422), the bending portion being connected to one end of the bearing portion in a central axis direction [0062-0064, 0079], bent relative to the bearing portion (see Figs. 3-5; [0011, 0059, 0068, 0070-0072]), and disposed on one side of the first wall (outside of the housing; [0011, 0067]; see Fig. 3).
Guo discloses that the bearing portion (first portion 421) has a greater minimum cross-sectional area than the maximum cross-sectional area of the bending portion (second portion 422), such that the bending portion (second portion) can be more easily riveted [0005-0006, 0030, 0047-0048, 0079, 0092]. Therefore, it is understood that “a bending resistance strength of the bending portion” is “less than a bending resistance strength of the bearing portion” as evidenced by the instant specification [instant specification: 0008-0009, 00123, 00165-00167] since the bearing portion (first portion) has a larger thickness than the bending portion (second portion).
Regarding Claim 2, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above, including that a minimum thickness of the bearing portion (first portion 421) is greater than a minimum thickness of the bending portion (second portion 422) [0005-0006, 0030, 0047-0048, 0079, 0092].
Regarding Claim 9, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the pole assembly further comprises a first insulating member (sealing member 5, Fig. 3) surrounding an outer side of the pole body, and the first insulating member comprises a first portion and a second portion (see annotation of Fig. 3, below), wherein the first portion is inserted into the mounting hole of the first wall, the second portion is connected to the first portion [0019-0022, 0088], and the second portion is sandwiched between the bending portion (second portion 422) and the first wall (sidewall 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
559
1105
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Guo Fig. 3.
Guo further discloses that an inner peripheral dimension of the second portion is greater than an inner peripheral dimension of the first portion (see annotation of Guo Fig. 2, below). By disclosing this limitation, the prior art is interpreted as reading on the recited limitations of Claim 9 (see 112(b) interpretation, above). Here the phrase “an inner peripheral dimension” is broadly and reasonably interpreted as referring to the inner diameter of each region, as supported by the instant specification [instant specification: 00130].
PNG
media_image3.png
500
1491
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Guo Fig. 3.
Regarding Claim 10, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the pole body is provided with a holding portion (substrate 41; [0060]) at the other end of the bearing portion (first portion 421) in the central axis direction (see Figs. 3-5), and the holding portion and the bending portion (second portion 422) secure the first wall from two sides (see annotation of Guo Fig. 3, below; [0067, 0085-0086, 0088]).
PNG
media_image4.png
473
969
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Guo Fig. 3.
Regarding Claim 11, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the pole assembly further comprises a sealing member (5, Figs. 3-5; [0019-0020, 0069, 0071, 0073, 0084]). The sealing member is disposed between the holding portion and the first wall, sealing the bearing portion and the first wall (see annotation of Guo Fig. 3, above; [0011-0012, 0019-0020, 0069, 0071, 0073, 0084]).
Regarding Claim 12, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the holding portion (substrate 41) is located inside the battery housing of the battery cell (see Figs. 2-5; [0011, 0019, 0067]).
Regarding Claim 13, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth in Claim 10, above. Guo further discloses that the pole assembly comprises a second insulating member (sealing member 5), wherein the second insulating member is disposed between the holding portion and the first wall , see annotation of Guo Fig. 3, below.
PNG
media_image5.png
473
986
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Guo Fig. 3.
Regarding Claim 14, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the battery cell further comprises an adapter (electrode tab 31, Fig. 2; [0057), the pole body is fixed to the adapter [0057], and the adapter electrically connects the pole body and an electrode assembly (cell 3, Fig. 2) of the battery cell [0011, 0027, 0056-0058].
Regarding Claim 15, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the battery housing comprises a shell (housing 1, Fig. 2) and an end cover (cover 2, Fig. 2) [0051-0053]. The first wall is the shell (see Figs. 1-2; [0055]).
Regarding Claim 16, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. A “battery” is broadly and reasonably interpreted as an object that provides electricity, as evidenced by the Cambridge Dictionary. Since Guo discloses that the battery cell according to claim 1 is electrically connected to an electrode assembly (cell 3) to provide electricity [0029, 0047, 0056-0058], the prior art is reasonably interpreted as disclosing a “battery comprising the battery cell according to claim 1”, absent a special definition of “battery” provided in the instant specification.
Regarding Claim 17, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo further discloses an electric device (electronic device) comprising the battery according to claim 16, wherein the battery is configured to supply power to the electric device [0004, 0047, 0050].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN-114175371-A; see English equivalent US-20240014525-A1 for citations).
Regarding Claims 3-4, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above, including that the cross-sectional area of the bending portion (second portion 422) is smaller than the cross-sectional area of the bearing portion (first portion 421) (see rejection of Claim 1, above, [0004-0009, 0030, 0079-0082]). Although Guo does not explicitly teach that “a ratio of the maximum thickness of the bending portion to the minimum thickness of the bearing portion is within a range of 0 to 0.85” or that “the ratio of the maximum thickness of the bending portion to the minimum thickness of the bearing portion is within a range of 0.3 to 0.7” as required by Claims 3 and 4, Guo discloses that the bearing portion (first portion 421) is designed such that it provides positioning and support functions during riveting of the bending portion (second portion 422) [0005, 0010], and that the bending portion (second portion 422) is designed such that it can be easily bent during riveting, thereby achieving a secure seal with a sealing member without the use of excessive force, which can damage the sealing member [0003, 0006, 0012, 0014, 0016, 0020, 0030, 0071]. Guo also discloses that reducing the thickness of the riveting end increases the energy density of the battery [0082]
In seeking to make the bending portion as thin as possible to increase energy density while retaining sufficient thickness to achieve a secure seal with the sealing member, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the thickness of the bending portion in relation to the thickness of the bearing portion, including selecting a ratio of the maximum thickness of the bending portion to the minimum thickness of the bearing portion to be within a range of 0.3 to 0.7 (MPEP 2144.05, II). A range of 0.3 to 0.7 is within the range of 0 to 0.85 recited in Claim 3, and corresponds to the range recited in Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 5, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses an embodiment (Fig. 4) wherein a thinning groove (stepped structure) is provided on an outer wall of the bending portion, and an embodiment (Fig. 5) wherein a thinning groove (stepped structure) is provided on an inner wall of the bending portion [0079]. Such configurations exemplify structures wherein the cross-sectional area of the bending portion (second portion 422) is smaller than the cross-sectional area of the bearing portion (first portion 421) [0079], which enables the bending portion to be easily bent without damaging the sealing member [0030, 0048, 0071]. Guo discloses that the embodiments are not limiting, and that changes can be made within the spirit of the application [0044, 0093].
Although Guo does not teach an embodiment wherein a thinning groove is disposed on both an inner wall and an outer wall of the bending portion, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the embodiments (i.e. Figs. 4 and 5; [0079]) taught by the prior art such that a thinning groove (stepped structure) is provided on both the inner and the outer wall of the bending portion in a direction substantially perpendicular to the central axis direction. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of forming a successful bending portion capable of being easily bent during riveting, since such a configuration results in a structure wherein the cross-sectional area of the bending portion is smaller than the cross-sectional area of the bearing portion, as desired by Guo. Furthermore, combining prior art elements is normally within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143, A; MPEP 2144.06, I).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN-114175371-A; see English equivalent US-20240014525-A1 for citations) as applied to Claim 1, above, and in view of Sun et al. (CN-219553837-U; cited in IDS filed 08/29/2025; see also attached English translation for citations).
Regarding Claim 6, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the energy density of the cell can be increased by reducing the thickness of the riveting end of the battery terminal [0082, 0092]. Guo also discloses that the bearing portion (first portion 421) is designed to provide a positioning and support function during riveting of the bending portion (second portion 422) [0005, 0010]. Guo does not teach a bending resistance reinforcement portion disposed on the bearing portion.
Sun teaches a battery terminal (Fig. 3) comprising a groove structure [0023, 0030-0032, 0053]. Specifically, the terminal comprises four conical grooves (first groove 111, second groove 121, third groove 122 and fourth groove 112) which function to reduce the weight of the terminal structure, thereby increasing energy density of a battery cell [0031, 0035-0038, 0044, 0053]. Each of the grooves is formed in a conical shape, [0036, 0038, 0045-0046], thereby improving structural strength, optimizing force transmission, and ensuring uniform force distribution on the groove walls [0032, 0034, 0053].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the groove structure taught by Sun in the terminal of Guo with a reasonable expectation that the addition of grooves would result in a successful battery terminal with reduced weight and increased structural strength. By providing a groove structure, the resulting terminal has a flange structure (see annotation of Sun Fig. 3, below), which reads on a battery cell wherein “a bending resistance reinforcement portion is disposed on the bearing portion, wherein the bending resistance reinforcement portion comprises a flange portion extending from an inner surface of the bearing portion toward a center of the bearing portion, wherein the flange portion is disposed on the inner surface of the bearing portion in a manner of surrounding an entire circumference, in the central axis direction”.
PNG
media_image6.png
429
961
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Sun Fig. 3.
The flange portion rendered obvious by modified Guo is near the middle of the bearing portion (see annotation of Sun Fig. 3, above), and therefore is “at a certain distance from an end of the bearing portion away from the bending portion” as required. Furthermore, “at least a part of the flange portion is located within the mounting hole”, since the middle of the bearing portion is within the mounting hole (see Guo Fig. 3). Therefore, the structure of modified Guo is, under broadest reasonable interpretation, understood to meet the limitations of Claim 6, since the last three lines of the claim follow the recitation of “and/or”, and are therefore recited in the alternative.
However, for the sake of compact prosecution, the last three lines of the claim are mapped to the prior art. Guo further discloses that “the pole body further comprises a holding portion connected to the bearing portion, the holding portion and the bending portion are respectively disposed on two sides of the first wall” (see annotation of Guo Fig. 3, below), and modified Guo renders obvious that “the flange portion is spaced apart from the holding portion”.
PNG
media_image7.png
485
887
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotation of modified Guo Fig. 3.
Claim(s) 9 and 13, 16-17 is/are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN-114175371-A; see English equivalent US-20240014525-A1 for citations) as applied to Claim 1, above, and in view of Li et al. (WO-2023005005-A1; see English equivalent US-20240222825-A1 for citations).
Regarding Claim 9, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses that the pole assembly further comprises a first insulating member (sealing member 5, Fig. 3) surrounding an outer side of the pole body, and the first insulating member comprises a first portion and a second portion (see annotation of Fig. 3, below), wherein the first portion is inserted into the mounting hole of the first wall, the second portion is connected to the first portion [0019-0022, 0088], and the second portion is sandwiched between the bending portion (second portion 422) and the first wall (sidewall 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
559
1105
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Guo Fig. 3.
Guo further discloses that an inner peripheral dimension of the second portion is greater than an inner peripheral dimension of the first portion (see annotation of Guo Fig. 2, below). By disclosing this limitation, the prior art is interpreted as reading on the recited limitations of Claim 9 (see 112(b) interpretation, above). Here the phrase “an inner peripheral dimension” is broadly and reasonably interpreted as referring to the inner diameter of each region, as supported by the instant specification [instant specification: 00130].
PNG
media_image3.png
500
1491
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Guo Fig. 3.
Assuming, arguendo, that Applicant is able to show by means of evidence or persuasive argument that Guo does not teach that “an inner peripheral dimension of the second portion is greater than an inner peripheral dimension of the first portion”, the limitations of Claim 9 would still have been obvious in light of Li.
Li teaches a terminal configuration wherein each electrode terminal is sheathed with a plastic member (7, Figs. 8-9). Advantageously, such a configuration not only provides an insulating role, but also ensures airtightness between the battery housing and the electrode terminals [0069].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the sealing member of Guo such that it “sheathes” the electrode terminal as taught by Li, with a reasonable expectation that such a configuration would result in a successful battery with an airtight seal between the battery housing and the electrode terminal. In order to “sheath” the battery terminal, the insulating member would necessarily have a protruding portion in order to surround the battery terminal as taught by Li (see annotation of Li Fig. 9, below). Accordingly, modified Guo renders obvious the limitation “the second portion is formed with a protruding portion, and the protruding portion surrounds the bending portion”, which is interpreted (see 112(b) rejection, above) as reading on the last twelve lines of Claim 9.
PNG
media_image8.png
326
698
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Li Fig. 9.
Regarding Claim 13, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Guo discloses a sealing member (5, Fig. 3) disposed between the holding portion and the first wall. Assuming, arguendo, that Applicant is able to show by means of evidence or persuasive argument that the sealing member of Guo does not read on the claimed second insulating member, such a structure would have still been obvious in view of the teachings of Guo and Li. Specifically, Guo contemplates that the sealing member can be provided in multiple portions, instead of integrally [0019, 0021].
Li teaches that a sealing member may be formed in multiple pieces (i.e. plastic piece 7, sealing ring 8, insulator 9; Figs. 8-9) and successfully prevent contact between electrical components and the battery housing [0007-0008, 0018, 0069].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the sealing member of Guo in multiple pieces as taught by Li with a reasonable expectation that such a configuration would result in a successful sealing member capable of preventing contact between electrical components and the battery housing. By providing the sealing member in multiple pieces, modified Guo thereby renders obvious a second insulting member “wherein the second insulating member is disposed between the holding portion and the first wall” (see annotation of Li Fig. 9, below).
PNG
media_image9.png
700
1072
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Li Fig. 9.
Regarding Claims 16-17, Guo anticipates all of the limitations as set forth, above. Assuming, arguendo, that Guo does not disclose “A battery comprising the battery cell according to claim 1” with sufficient specificity, such a limitation would still have been obvious over the teaching of Li. Li teaches that battery cells can be assembled into battery modules and used in an electrical device [0071, 0075-0076].
Since Guo desires the battery of claim 1 to power an electronic device [0004, 0047, 0050], it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided a battery (i.e. a battery module) comprising the battery cell according to Claim 1 with a reasonable expectation that providing a battery (battery module) comprising the battery cell according to claim 1 would result in a successful battery (battery module) capable of powering an electronic device as required by Claim 16, and to have provided an electric device (electronic device) comprising the battery (battery module) according to Claim 16, wherein the battery is configured to supply power to the electric device as required by Claim 17 with a reasonable expectation that such a configuration would result in a successful electric device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DREW C NEWMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9873. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 10:00 AM - 6:00 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.
/D.C.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 2/3/2026