Appeal 2007-2550
Application 10/321,182
The rejections as presented by the Examiner are as follows:
1. Claims 38-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
unpatentable over Kucherovsky.
2. Claims 87-90 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Kucherovsky in view of Lake.
3. Claim 91 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Kucherovsky in view of Fujita.
Appellants separately argue claims 38, 40, and 91. Accordingly,
claims 39, 41, and 90, which depend from claim 38, stand or fall with claim
38. Claims 87-89, which depend from claim 40, stand or fall with claim 40.
OPINION
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) REJECTION OVER KUCHEROVSKY
INDEPENDENT CLAIM 38
Appellants argue that Kucherovsky fails to disclose positioning an end
of the internal current collector and an end of the external terminal within
the seal junction that forms the seal area (Br. 7). Appellants argue that
Kucherovsky discloses that electrical contacts 50, 52 (i.e., external
terminals) are located substantially inward from the outer edge of the layers
22 and 24 such that electrical contacts 50, 52 (i.e., external terminals) form a
continuous metal surface extending through the area where layers 22 and 24
are sealed together (Br. 7).
We have considered Appellants’ arguments and are unpersuaded for
the reasons below.
Kucherovsky discloses, in relevant part, a flexible battery having an
anode current collector 28 and a cathode current collector 26 (i.e., internal
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013