www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/639,845
`
`02/18/2020
`
`Takuya Oka
`
`P200166US00
`
`4448
`
`WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP
`8500 LEESBURG PIKE
`SUITE 7500
`TYSONS, VA 22182
`
`CREPEAU, JONATHAN
`
`ART UNIT
`1725
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`08/20/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`patentmail @ whda.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-4 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)() The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s)filed on 2/18/20 is/are: a)¥) accepted or b)() objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)¥) All
`1.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.4 Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 2/18/20.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210812
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/639,845
`Okaetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`JONATHAN CREPEAU
`1725
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 2/18/20.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined underthe
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AJA.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`2.
`
`Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “each in contact with one
`
`of sidewalls of the secondary cell that oppose each other” should be “each in contact with one
`
`sidewall of the secondary cells that oppose each other” or equivalent. Appropriate correction is
`
`required.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`3.
`
`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 madein this Office action:
`
`A personshall be entitled to a patent unless —
`
`(a)(1) the claimed invention waspatented, 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.
`
`4,
`
`Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US
`
`20120171554). Regarding claim 1, Kim is directed to a power storage device (battery module)
`
`comprising a plurality of secondary cells (10), wherein two buffer plates (150a) are each in
`
`contact with one sidewall of the secondary cells that oppose each other (Figs. 1 and 2). Each
`
`buffer plate comprises a non-deformable section (151), and a deformable section (152) that
`
`elastically deforms with a volume changein the secondarycell, the non-deformable section
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 3
`
`including a hole (151a) in which the deformablesectionis fitted, and the deformable section is
`
`formed thicker than the non-deformable section (e.g., Fig. 3c, 5c, [(0078]-[0080], [0084], [0089]).
`
`Regarding claim 2, a secondary cell contains a cell stack body formed byalternately disposing
`
`the secondarycell and the buffer plate, and the apparatus further comprises a pair of end plates
`
`(110, 120) that press the cell stack body from both sides (Fig. 1).
`
`Thus, the instant claimsare anticipated.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which formsthe basis for all obviousness
`
`rejectionsset 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 obviousbefore the effective
`filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinaryskill in the art to which the claimed
`invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the mannerin which the invention was made.
`
`6.
`
`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 priorart.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences betweenthe prior art and the claimsat issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 4
`
`7.
`
`Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim.
`
`The reference is applied to claims 1 and 2 for the reasons stated above. However,the
`
`reference does not expressly teach that the battery cells contain an electrode body formed by
`
`stacking a plurality of positive electrodes and a plurality of negative electrodes with a separator
`
`therebetween,as recited in claim 3, or that the surface of the buffer plate in contact with the
`
`secondarycell is larger than the positive electrode, and the buffer plate is disposed so as to
`
`opposean entirety of the positive electrode with the sidewall in between,as also recited in claim
`
`3.
`
`However, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to oneskilled in the art at
`
`the time of filing because the use of a stacked, multi-electrode structure is conventionalin theart.
`
`Thus, it would have been obvious to use such a structure in the electrode assembly of Kim. Such
`
`a structure is known for being highly energy dense andis able to provide high current.
`
`Regarding the limitation the buffer plate is disposed so as to oppose an entirety of the
`
`positive electrode with the sidewall in between, since the perimeter of the buffer plate is the
`
`same as the perimeter of the battery cells, the entirety of the positive electrode would be
`
`opposed.
`
`Regarding the limitation that the surface of the buffer plate in contact with the secondary
`
`cell is larger than the positive electrode, such limitation would be rendered obvious becausethe
`
`artisan would be able to adjust/optimize the amountor area of contact of the battery with the
`
`deformable portion as well as the positions of the deformable portion so as to provide the desired
`
`elastic response and behaviorto effectively control the swelling of the batteries ([0009]). The
`
`claimed “surface of the buffer plate in contact with” can be interpreted as the surface or area
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 5
`
`defined by the outer perimeter of the outermost deformable portions(e.g., Fig. 4A), which would
`
`extend beyond the perimeter of the positive electrode.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimotoet al
`
`(US 20200365853).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Hashimotois directed to a power storage device (battery module)
`
`comprising a plurality of secondary cells (1), wherein two buffer plates (2) are each in contact
`
`with one sidewall of the secondarycells that oppose each other (Figs. 2, 3, 4). Each buffer plate
`
`comprises a non-deformable section (frame 3), and a deformable section (heat insulating base
`
`material 4) that elastically deforms with a volume changein the secondarycell, the non-
`
`deformable section including a hole (3X) in which the deformable sectionis fitted (Figs. 3, 4).
`
`Regarding claim 2, a secondary cell contains a cell stack body formed byalternately disposing
`
`the secondarycell and the buffer plate, and the apparatus further comprises a pair of end plates
`
`(7) that press the cell stack body from both sides (Fig. 1).
`
`The reference does not expressly teach that the deformable section is formed thicker than
`
`the non-deformable section as recited in claim 1.
`
`However, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to oneskilled in the art at
`
`the time of filing because Hashimoto teaches in [0010] that “[i]n this structure, heat insulation
`
`can be performed without providing an air layer betweenthe battery cell and the separator, and
`
`expansion of the battery cell can be absorbed by thickening the heat insulating base material
`
`member.” This disclosure would guide the artisan to use as thick a deformable memberas
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 6
`
`necessary, including using membersthat are thicker than the surrounding non-deformable
`
`frames. As such, this limitation would be rendered obvious.
`
`The reference further does not expressly teach that the battery cells contain an electrode
`
`body formedby stacking a plurality of positive electrodes and a plurality of negative electrodes
`
`with a separator therebetween,as recited in claim 3, or that the surface of the buffer plate in
`
`contact with the secondarycell is larger than the positive electrode, and the buffer plate is
`
`disposed so as to oppose an entirety of the positive electrode with the sidewall in between,as
`
`also recited in claim 3.
`
`However, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to oneskilled in the art at
`
`the time of filing because the use of a stacked, multi-electrode structure is conventionalin theart.
`
`Thus, it would have been obvious to use such a structure in the electrode assembly of Hashimoto.
`
`Such a structure is known for being highly energy dense andis able to provide high current.
`
`Regarding the limitation the buffer plate is disposed so as to oppose an entirety of the
`
`positive electrode with the sidewall in between, since the perimeter of the buffer plate is the
`
`same as the perimeter of the battery cells, the entirety of the positive electrode would be
`
`opposed.
`
`Regarding the limitation that the surface of the buffer plate in contact with the secondary
`
`cell is larger than the positive electrode, since the entirety of the buffer plate is in contact with
`
`the entirety of the secondarycell sidewall, the surface of the buffer plate in contact with the
`
`battery cell would necessarily be larger than the positive electrode contained within the battery
`
`cell.
`
`Claim 4 recites that the non-deformable section is disposed so that an edge portion of the
`
`through hole (e.g., the frame) opposesa peripheral portion of the positive electrode, and a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 7
`
`surface of the deformable section in contact with the secondarycell is smaller than the positive
`
`electrode. Such limitation would be rendered obvious because the artisan would be able to
`
`adjust/optimize the area of contact of the battery cell with both the deformable (central) and non-
`
`deformable (frame) portions so as to provide the desired elastic and heat exchange behavior. For
`
`example, in [0036], Hashimoto teachesthat the width of the frame specifies contact area and
`
`contact force and is preferably 3, 4, or 5 mm or more, however, “if width (h) of outer peripheral
`
`frame is too wide, the outer shape of heat insulating base material member 4 disposed in the
`
`opening 3X becomessmall, and heat insulating base member 4 has a small area for absorbing the
`
`deformation of stacking surface 1A. [...] The width (h) of outer peripheral frame 3 preferably
`
`ranges from 5 mm to 30 mm inclusive.” Therefore, it would be obvious to control the width of
`
`the frame based on desired force in consideration of the other factors noted above. As such, the
`
`limitation that the frame (edge portion) opposesthe periphery of the positive electrode is seen as
`
`a natural result of this optimization and would be rendered obvious.
`
`Note: The Hashimoto reference qualifies as prior art under 35 USC 102(a)(2). This
`
`rejection can be overcome byperfecting the priority of the instant application.
`
`Conclusion
`
`9.
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to Jonathan Crepeau whosetelephone numberis (571) 272-1299.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
`
`If attempts to reach the examinerby telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Basia Ridley, can be reached at (571) 272-1453. The phone numberfor the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/639,845
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 8
`
`organization wherethis application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 272-1700. Documents
`
`may be faxedto the central fax server at (571) 273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`maybe obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`/Jonathan Crepeau/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
`August 17, 2021
`
`