Ex Parte Mori et alDownload PDFBoard of Patent Appeals and InterferencesMar 31, 201111230282 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 31, 2011) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 11/230,282 09/19/2005 Tsutomu Mori 791_265 1398 25191 7590 03/31/2011 BURR & BROWN PO BOX 7068 SYRACUSE, NY 13261-7068 EXAMINER SIDDIQUEE, MUHAMMAD S ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 1726 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 03/31/2011 PAPER 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. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ________________ Ex parte TSUTOMU MORI, WATARU SHIONOYA, SHINJI OHTSUBO, and KENSHIN KITOH ________________ Appeal 2009-013481 Application 11/230,282 Technology Center 1700 ________________ Before JEFFREY T. SMITH, BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, and MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judges. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal 2009-013481 Application 11/230,282 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 1, 2, and 4-14. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). The Invention Appellants’ invention is directed to a lithium secondary battery comprising an inner electrode member having wound or laminated electrode plates of metal foil. Representative independent claims 1 and 10 are reproduced below: 1. A lithiurn secondary battery comprising: an inner electrode member having wound or laminated electrode plates of a metal foil; and a battery case for housing the inner electrode member, wherein when an inner pressure of the battery case rises to a predetermined pressure or more by a gas generated inside the inner electrode member, predetermined portions of the metal foil break to form a gas release channel which allows the release of the gas to the outside of the battery case. 10. A lithium secondary battery comprising: an inner electrode member having wound or laminated electrode plates of a metal foil; a battery case for housing the inner electrode member, wherein when an inner pressure of the battery case rises to a predetermined pressure of more by a gas generated inside the inner electrode member, the inner electrode member is expanded and deformed in a thickness direction of the electrode plate, and a space portion is formed between the electrode plates disposed adjacent to each other creating a gas release channel which allows the release of the gas to the outside of the Appeal 2009-013481 Application 11/230,282 3 battery case through the space portion by the function of the raised inner pressure in the case where the inner pressure rises to the predetermined or more pressure. Appellants seek review of the following rejections of claims 1, 2, and 4-14: I. Claims 1, 2 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Murashige (U.S. Publication No. 2003/0198863 A1, Oct. 23, 2003). II. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9-10, and 12-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Iwanaga (U.S. Publication No. 2003/0148175 A1, Aug. 7, 2003). III. Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Murashige or Iwanaga, further in view of Horie (JP 10-162801, June 19, 1998). IV. Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) Murashige or Iwanaga, further in view of Shirane (U.S. Publication No. 2004/0247999 A1, Dec. 9, 2004). V. Claim 11 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Iwanaga in view of Nakai (U.S. Patent No. 6,509,114 B1, Jan. 21, 2003). OPINION1 The dispositive issues for the rejections on appeal are the following: 1 We will limit our discussion to independent claims 1 and 10. Appeal 2009-013481 Application 11/230,282 4 I. Did the Examiner err in determining that Murashige or Iwanaga describes a lithium secondary battery that comprises a metal foil inner electrode member that contains predetermined portions of the metal foil that is capable of breaking to form a gas release channel to allow gas to be released outside of the battery case as required by the subject matter of independent claim 1? II. Did the Examiner err in determining that Iwanaga describes a lithium secondary battery that comprises a metal foil inner electrode member that is capable of expanding and deforming in a thickness direction of the electrode plate to form a gas release channel to allow gas to be released outside of the battery case as required by the subject matter of independent claim 10? After thorough review of the respective positions provided by Appellants and the Examiner, we agree with Appellants that the Examiner has identified insufficient evidence to establish that Murashige or Iwanaga describes a lithium secondary battery that anticipates the subject matter of claims 1 or 10. The Examiner found that Murashige describes a lithium secondary battery that comprises a metal foil inner electrode. The Examiner found that the foil is capable of breaking in the vicinity of a serrated portion (10b) to form a gas release channel to allow gas to be released outside of the battery case as required by the subject matter of independent claim 1. (Ans. 3). The Examiner found that Iwanaga describes a lithium secondary battery that comprises a metal foil inner electrode. The Examiner found that the foil is capable of breaking along the center pin (29) in the vicinity of the Appeal 2009-013481 Application 11/230,282 5 groove portion (29h) to form a gas release channel to allow gas to be released outside of the battery case as required by the subject matter of independent claim 1. (Ans. 4). Appellants argue, and we agree, that the Examiner has mischaracterized the teachings of both Murashige and Iwanaga as they apply to the subject matter of claim 1. (App Br. 6-8). Appellants correctly argue that Murashige and Iwanaga do not provide a metal foil inner electrode member that contains predetermined portions of the metal foil that is capable of breaking to form a gas release channel. Murashige and Iwanaga do not describe the center pin as containing sharp edges which would allow the metal foil to break under increased pressure. Consequently, the disclosures of Murashige and Iwanaga do not anticipate or suggest the subject matter of independent claim 1 As to claim 10, the Examiner has failed to identify the structure of Iwanaga that describes the claimed subject matter. (See Ans. generally). Notwithstanding this, Appellants correctly argue that Iwanaga does not provide a metal foil inner electrode member that is capable of expanding and forming in a thickness direction of the electrode plate to form a gas release channel to allow gas to be released outside of the battery case. Iwanaga discloses the purpose of the center pin is to prevent the spiral-wound electrode assembly from being deformed toward the inner space. (App Br. 9; Iwanaga [0010]). Consequently, the disclosure of Iwanaga does not anticipate or suggest the subject matter of independent claim 10. The remaining rejections fail for the reasons set forth above. The additional cited prior art were not cited to address the distinction discussed above. Appeal 2009-013481 Application 11/230,282 6 For the foregoing reasons we reverse the Examiner’s stated rejections. DECISION The prior art rejections of claims 1, 2, and 4-14 are reversed. REVERSED bar Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation