`
`In re the Application of: Takuya OKAetal.
`
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Application Number: 16/495,943
`
`Examiner: Bartholomew Andrew Hornsby
`
`Filed: September 20, 2019
`
`Confirmation Number: 3223
`
`For. NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY AND BATTERY
`MODULE
`
`Attorney Docket Number:
`Customer Number:
`
`P190899US00
`38834
`
`STATEMENT OF SUBSTANCE OF INTERVIEW
`
`Commissionerfor Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Dear Commissioner:
`
`July 22, 2021
`
`Applicant submits herewith this statement of substance of interview conducted on July 22,
`
`2021.
`
`Duringthe interview,the ratio of independent claim 1, the Examiner’s calculation on pages
`
`6 and 7 of the Office Action, Masato (JP 2014216086)as well as table 1 of the current specification
`
`were discussed. The Examiner and his supervisor attempted asserted that there was no clear
`
`showing of unexpected results (i.e. criticality of the range) because the other materials of the
`
`comparative examples had a different Elastic modulus (MPa)ofelastic sheets from those stated in
`
`the Examples of Table 1.
`
`Applicant’s representative noted that the table did show criticality of the claimedratio in
`
`that the expansion factor effects the performance of the battery and that applicant was not per se
`
`arguing an unexpected result as the ratio derived at pages 6 and 7 of the Office Action do not
`
`overlap with the claimed range. Applicant’s representative further argued that the Office Action
`
`
`
`Application No.: 16/495,943
`
`Docket No.: P190899US00
`
`clearly provided an equation based on the material of Masato which did notfall within the claimed
`
`range and could therefore not be considered to read on the claim and did not address using a
`
`material with an identical Elastic modulus (MPa)of elastic sheets to find that the claimed ratio
`
`was read on. The Examiner andhis supervisor agreed and stated that they would further consider
`
`whetherthe use of such a material in place of Masato would be a routine optimization.
`
`Applicant’s representative noted that any further Office Action which may result from
`
`further search needs to be a non-final Office Action as there were no amendmentsto the claim and
`
`the rejection as set forth did not present the position taken during the interview. Both the Examiner
`
`and his supervisor orally agreed that such a further Office Action would be non-final.
`
`If any other fees that may be due with respect to this paper may be charged to Deposit
`
`Account No. 50-2866.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP
`
`/Michael J. Caridi/
`
`MichaelJ. Caridi
`Attorney for Applicants
`Registration No. 56,171
`Telephone: 703-827-3800
`Facsimile: 571-395-8753
`
`MJC/fo
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
