www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/282,094
`
`04/01/2021
`
`Hiroyuki Okuda
`
`P210273US00
`
`6857
`
`WHDA, LLP
`8500 LEESBURG PIKE
`SUITE 7500
`TYSONS, VA22182
`
`ERWIN, JAMES M
`
`1725
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/03/2024
`
`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)
`
`

`

`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/282,094
`Okuda et al.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`JAMES M ERWIN
`1725
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof 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 02/16/2024.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)[¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J This action is non-final.
`3) 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)(2) 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.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-6 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) 1-6 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* 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)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)(J 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)7) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)Z None ofthe:
`b)() Some**
`a)C All
`1.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) 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)
`
`2) (J Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20240319
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The presentapplication, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`2.
`
`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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory
`
`basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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.
`
`3.
`
`The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found ina
`
`prior Office action.
`
`4.
`
`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.
`
`5.
`
`This application currently namesjoint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the
`
`examiner presumesthat the subject matter of the various claims was commonly ownedas of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised
`
`of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effectivefiling dates of each claim that
`
`was not commonly ownedas ofthe effectivefiling date of the later invention in order for the examiner
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 3
`
`to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art
`
`against the later invention.
`
`6.
`
`Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita etal. (US
`
`2014/0141303 A1)in view of Okutani et al. (US 2003/0186095 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Matsushita et al. discloses a cylindrical secondary battery (as shownin Fig 1)
`
`comprising:
`
`a wound electrode assembly (20) formed by winding a positive electrode (cathode 21) having a
`
`positive electrode active material (cathode mixture layer 21b) disposed on a positive electrode current
`
`collector (cathode current collector 21a), a negative electrode (anode 22) having a negative electrode
`
`active material (anode mixture layer 22b) disposed on a negative electrode current collector (anode
`
`current collector 22a), and a separator (separator 23) interposed between the positive electrode and
`
`the negative electrode ([0044]);
`
`a positive electrode tab (lead 25) connected to the positive electrode (as shownin Fig 4A);
`
`a cylindrical case body (battery can 11) that housesthe positive electrode and the negative
`
`electrode (as shownin Fig 1); and
`
`a sealing assembly (battery cover 14) that seals an opening of the case body (as shownin Fig 1),
`
`wherein
`
`the negative electrode has, at a winding end of the negative electrode, (corresponding with non-
`
`coating section 22b1, as shownin Fig 4B), an exposed portion (non-coating section 22b1) of the negative
`
`electrode current collector in which no negative electrode active material is disposed ([0069]), and the
`
`exposed portion of the negative electrode current collector is disposed in contact with an inner surface
`
`of the case body (as shownin Fig 1),
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 4
`
`the electrode assembly has a region A in which the numberof layers of the positive electrode in
`
`a radial direction is smaller than in another region on a winding cross section of the electrode assembly
`
`(as shownin annotated Fig 3 below), and
`
`the positive electrode is disposed at a longitudinal center of the positive electrode (as shownin
`
`Fig 4A) and disposed in the region A (as shownin annotated Fig 3 below).
`
`
`
`Matsushita et al. discloses that the exposed portion of the negative electrode current collector
`
`is disposed in contact with an inner surface of the case body (as noted above), but does not disclose the
`
`exposed portion being disposed in direct physical contact with an inner surface of the case body.
`
`Okutani et al. teaches lithium secondary batteries (Title). Okutani et al. teaches that an
`
`alternative configuration for a spiral wound electrode group wherein the anode currentcollector,i.e.
`
`negative electrode current collector, is brought into direct contact with the inner face of the outer
`
`battery case, and thus the outer battery case doubles as the anode terminal ([0037)).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 5
`
`Matsushita et al. and Okutani et al. are analogous prior art to the current invention because
`
`they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely wound electrode assemblies.
`
`Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one
`
`having ordinaryskill in the art to routinely connect the negative electrode current collector of
`
`Matsushita et al. directly to the case body as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a
`
`known method, specifically direct contact, for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an
`
`entirely predictable result, specifically utilizing the case body as the negative electrode terminal.
`
`Accordingly, the skilled artisan would find it obvious that modified Matsushita discloses wherein
`
`the exposed portion is disposed in direct physical contact with an inner surface of the case body, as
`
`suggested by Okutani etal.
`
`7.
`
`Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita etal. (US
`
`2014/0141303 A1)in view of Okutani et al. (US 2003/0186095 A1), as applied to claim 1 above,in
`
`further view of Sawaetal. (US 2013/0266834 Al).
`
`Regardingclaim 2, modified Matsushita disclosesall of the claim limitations as set forth above.
`
`Matsushita et al. discloses that an angle formed by a straight line connecting one end of the
`
`region A and a winding center of the positive electrode and a straight line connecting the other end of
`
`the region A and the winding center of the positive electrode is about 180° (as shownin annotated Fig 3
`
`above), and therefore doesnot explicitly disclose a range of 10 to 120°.
`
`Sawa et al. teachesa lithium secondary battery (Title). Sawa et al. teaches a wound electrode
`
`assembly having a region A (as shownin annotated Fig 2 below).
`
`It is submitted that the recited angle
`
`reasonably appears to be about 120°, and further submitted that neither Sawaet al. nor Matsushita et
`
`al. reasonably appear to describe any importancetosaid angle, i.e. neither describes any importance to
`
`wherethe central winding portion begins.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 6
`
`Region &
`
`parsesa
`
`
`teTe,
`Pe,
`
`Sawaet al. is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the
`
`same field of endeavor, namely wound electrode assemblies.
`
`Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one
`
`having ordinaryskill in the art that the beginning of the winding portion of the electrode assembly does
`
`not reasonably appear to be particularly important, and would thus find it obvious to routinely select
`
`such a beginning point such that the angle so formed would be ~120°, as suggested by Sawaetal.
`
`Furthermore, absent any demonstration ofcriticality to the claimed angle range, it would have
`
`been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of
`
`the current invention to routinely select the beginning of the winding portion such that the angle
`
`formed would be moreor less than 120°, e.g. greater than 0° but lesser than 180°, and thus to select the
`
`overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has
`
`been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 7
`
`8.
`
`Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushitaet al. (US
`
`2014/0141303 A1)in view of Okutani et al. (US 2003/0186095 A1), as applied to claim 1 above,in
`
`further view of Schafer (US 2014/0045036A1).
`
`Regardingclaim 3, modified Matsushita disclosesall of the claim limitations as set forth above.
`
`Matsushita et al. discloses that the electrode assembly is housed in the case body (as shownin
`
`Fig 1), but does not explicitly disclose any form fit between the electrode assembly and the case body,
`
`and therefore doesnot explicitly disclose that a ratio of a diameter L1 of the electrode assembly to an
`
`inner diameter L2 of the case bodyis in a range of 0.97 to 1.03.
`
`Schafer teaches a converter cell and cell housing (Title). Schafer teachesthatit is particularly
`
`preferential for the cell housing to receive an electrode assembly in a form-fit manner ([0035]).
`
`Schafer is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the
`
`same field of endeavor, namely electrode assemblies and cell housings.
`
`Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one
`
`having ordinaryskill in the art that the electrode assembly of Matsushita et al. must necessarily be
`
`accommodatedin the cell housing in some manner (Matsushita: as shownin Fig 1), and would therefore
`
`find it obvious to accommodate the electrode assembly in a form-fit manner, as suggested by Shafer.
`
`Accordingly, the skilled artisan would find it obvious that a form-fit between the electrode
`
`assembly and the cell housing would correspond to approximately equal diameters, and would
`
`therefore find it obvious that a ratio of diameters, i.e. L1/L2, would be ~1.0, which falls within the
`
`recited range.
`
`9.
`
`Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et
`
`al. (US 2014/0141303 A1) in view of Okutaniet al. (US 2003/0186095 A1), as applied to claim 1 above.
`
`Regardingclaim 4, modified Matsushita disclosesall of the claim limitations as set forth above.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 8
`
`Matsushita et al. discloses a round cross-section of the electrode assembly (as shownin Fig 3),
`
`but does not explicitly disclose a roundness of 0.98 or more.
`
`Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one
`
`having ordinaryskill in the art that the electrode assembly of modified Matsushita et al. reasonably
`
`appearsto be a circle, and would thus find it obvious that the roundness would be ~1.0, whichfalls
`
`within the recited range.
`
`Regarding claim 5, modified Matsushita disclosesall of the claim limitations as set forth above.
`
`Matsushita et al. discloses that the positive electrode active material layer includes a composite
`
`oxide including Ni, Co, Li, and Mn or Al (see [0055] which describes LiNix1Coy1M2102, wherein M is Al or
`
`e.g. Mn and O<x1<1, O<y1<1, and 0<z1<1), but does not explicitly disclose an example wherein the
`
`content of Ni is at least 91 mol%.
`
`Absent any demonstration ofcriticality to the claimed angle range, it would have been obvious
`
`to one having ordinaryskill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention
`
`to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (O0<x1<1 overlaps with 0.91 or more) because
`
`selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see
`
`MPEP 2144.05(I)).
`
`10.
`
`Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushitaet al. (US
`
`2014/0141303 A1)in view of Okutani et al. (US 2003/0186095 A1), as applied to claim 1 above,in
`
`further view of Yamadaetal. (US 2016/0218368 A1).
`
`Regardingclaim 6, modified Matsushita disclosesall of the claim limitations as set forth above.
`
`Matsushita et al. discloses that the negative electrode active material layer includes a negative
`
`electrode active material including graphite (e.g. artificial or natural graphite, [0079]) and a Si compound
`
`(e.g. silicon, [0081]), but does not disclose an appropriate amount of the Si compound, and therefore
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 9
`
`doesnot explicitly disclose a ratio of the Si compound to a total mass of the negative electrode active
`
`material is 5.5 mass% or more.
`
`Yamada et al. teaches an anode for a secondary battery (Title). Yamada et al. teaches that, as an
`
`anode active material, artificial graphite was used, and a mixture ofartificial graphite and silicon was
`
`used with a weight ratio of 50:50 ([0231]).
`
`Yamada etal. is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with
`
`the same field of endeavor, namely anodes for secondarybatteries.
`
`Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one
`
`having ordinary skill in the art that the anode active materials of Matsushita et al. must necessarily be
`
`included in some amount, and would therefore find it obvious to include the artificial graphite and
`
`silicon in a weight ratio of 50:50, as suggested by Yamada etal.
`
`Accordingly, the skilled artisan would find it obvious that the silicon is included in ratio of 5.5
`
`mass% or more, e.g. “50 mass%.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`11.
`
`Applicant's argumentsfiled 02/16/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, specifically regarding the negative electrode
`
`current collector being disposed in direct physical contact with the inner surface of the case body, have
`
`been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any new reference
`
`applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the
`
`argument.
`
`Applicant argues (see Remarkspgs. 9-13) that it is not been established how Matsushita
`
`modified [by Saw] to incorporate the reduced angel of the region A would still maintain the positive
`
`electrode tab disposed in the region A as claimed.
`
`In other words,the skilled artisan could not ascertain
`
`whether said tab is or is not disposed in the region “A”.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 10
`
`The Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the routine selection of the beginning
`
`winding point, and thus the reduced angle of the region “A”, is not asserted to modify the placementof
`
`the positive electrode tab of Matsushita. Matsushita explicitly discloses the positive electrode tab 25
`
`disposed in a region of fewer layers (as noted above in annotated Fig 3), and there does not appear to
`
`be any reasonable basis for the skilled artisan to modify such placement. Rather, it is submitted that the
`
`beginning winding point does not appear to be significantly important, and thus, as demonstrated by
`
`Sawa (as noted abovein annotated Fig 2), it would be a simple matter of routine selection of said
`
`beginning point such that the area of fewer layers is reduced to ~120° while still maintaining the positive
`
`electrode tab in such an area.
`
`Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
`
`Conclusion
`
`12.
`
`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 eventa first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS ofthe 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 extension fee 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 date ofthis final action.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/282,094
`Art Unit: 1725
`
`Page 11
`
`13.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to JAMES M ERWIN whose telephone numberis (571)272-3101. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached Monday-Friday: Gam-3pm PDT.
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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,
`
`Basia Ridley can be reached on (571)272-1453. The fax phone number for the organization wherethis
`
`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 aboutfiling 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.
`
`/JAMES M ERWIN/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
`03/28/2024
`
`