DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.
Applicant's submission filed on October 27, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-18 are pending in the application. Of the pending claims, claims 13-15 are withdrawn from consideration. The previous claim objections and 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on October 27, 2025, have been fully considered.
Applicant argues that the amended independent claims now positively recite that the “hole is centrally disposed through the bottom contact surface, with a defined diameter and shape optimized to enhance bonding area, promote controlled bonding characteristics and reduce weight”, which is not merely a functional recitation, but an explicit structural limitation. Applicant argues that the geometry, size, and position of the hole are no longer generic. Respectfully, examiner disagrees that the claims define a non-generic geometry, size, and position that overcomes the cited prior art. The amended limitations are merely functional limitations that do provide any further structure that differentiates the present application.
For example, a “defined diameter” does not appear to be defined in the claims. No size, value, or geometry is attributed to the diameter. The “centrally disposed hole” of claim 1, for example, only states that the hole has a “defined diameter and shape” that is “optimized”. How is the diameter and shape optimized? Is diameter small or large? Is the shape a circle? Respectfully, the scope of these limitations are not limiting.
Applicant points to [0048] of the present specification stating that “holes can favor a cohesive connection … and contribute to a weight reduction through material savings.” There is no special geometry, size, or position defined in [0048] that is “optimized” by some distinct method of manufacture that achieves a cohesive connection with weight reduction in [0048] of the present specification.
Applicant agrees that Kreisel discloses a through-hole in the bottom contact surface of a spring, but asserts that Kreisel is silent regarding (a) the geometry or position being centrally disposed and controlled, (b) the diameter/shape being specifically chosen or optimized for bonding area, and (c) the function of the hole being to promote a tailored bonding behavior or controlled energy transfer, as opposed to being merely incidental or related to welding process convenience.
Kreisel discloses the requisite centrally disposed hole through a bottom contact surface of a contact spring 6 (Fig. 5B). The limitations of the claims are merely functional statements that do not differentiate the centrally disposed hole of Kreisel from the centrally disposed hole of the present invention. Applicant states that Kreisel’s hole is a byproduct of the mechanical construction and laser welding, while the hole of the present application is not, because it is specially controlled and optimized. Likewise, the present application states in [0052] that the individual positive poles 22 are bonded to the cell connectors 18, for example, by laser welding. The diameter/shape being specifically chosen or optimized for bonding area is not supported in the claim, because no diameter/shape defines the “centrally disposed hole”. The function of the hole being to promote a tailored bonding behavior or controlled energy transfer is functional and not structural, and appears to be merely incidental and related to the laser welding process.
Applicant submits that “configured to optimize the area for bonding, to promote controlled bonding characteristics, and to reduce connector weight” is materially different from a random incidental, or merely present hole of undefined geometry and placement. Applicant is not arguing that the structure of Kreisel is different from the present invention here. Applicant is relying on functional language that asserts an optimized and controlled function based on defined geometry. The structure of a centrally disposed hole is present in Kreisel and would not perform differently than the structure recited in the presently amended claims. A centrally positioned hole is recited, however, the specific geometry and dimensions are not recited. While the centrally positioned hole may be deliberately chosen to achieve a particular benefit, the hole in Kreisel is clearly positioned centrally, which is structurally the same as the hole in the present invention.
The weight reduction being a direct consequence of precise structural decisions, namely, the size, shape, and central placement of the hole interacting with the bottom contact geometry to yield controlled electrical and mechanical characteristics is not persuasive. The weight reduction is the result of there being a centrally disposed hole, which is a structural decision that is also present in Kreisel. Respectfully, examiner is not persuaded that any holistic, optimized design for mechanical and bonding performance is captured by the amended language. The amended language appears to solely describe a functional benefit of a claimed structure that is not different from the disclosed structure in Kreisel.
Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2114 I.).
Turning to the spring limitations, applicant states that the instant spring arm engagement with the cell cup is distinct from Kreisel, because the claims now expressly require that the spring arms are “configured to engage a cell cup that is structurally distinct from a cylinder cell wall and configured to receive and support an end of the round cell, such that the spring arms provide radial and axial retention forces.” The claim language does not provide any additional structure for how the spring arms of the present application engage the bottom cell cup differently than the spring arms of Kreisel. Rather, the claims merely provide a general function of the spring arms engaging a cell cup that receives and supports and end of the round cell, such that the spring arms provide radial and axial retention forces.
In the present specification, [0050] states that the respective spring arms 26 establish a force locking connection to the respective negative poles 20 of the respective round cells 16, wherein the round cells 16 must simply be pressed between the respective spring arms 26 of the contact elements 24 with their cell bottom, i.e., with their negative pole 20. The spring arms 26 expand outward and then enclose the round cells 16 in the area of the negative poles 20 ([0050]). Likewise, Kreisel teaches that the contact spring offers a receiving unit for a battery cell to be positioned above via designated spring arms, wherein the inserted battery cell is gripped by a restoring force and the electrical contact is made with an outer casing, in particular the negative pole of the inserted battery cell ([0018] & Fig. 2B). Examiner is not persuaded that a description in the specification stating that the round cells 16 must simply be pressed between the respective spring arms 26 of the contact elements 24 with their cell bottom, i.e., with their negative pole 20, achieves axial and radial retention forces different from the same axial and radial retention forces achieved by the structure in Kreisel. The spring arms alone do not provide axial retention without being connected to the base of the contact element. Rather, the spring arms extending from the base of the contact element provide retention by engaging the side wall of the cell (radial retention) and holding or pulling the base toward the cell cup end (axial retention).
Applicant states that the claimed invention leverages a cup-shaped terminal end of the cell, and the spring arms are physically configured to engage this terminal in both radial and axial directions, for more secure and engineering retention. This is different from Kreisel, according to applicant, because the figures and passages of Kreisel only show that the spring arms apply a radial restoring force by gripping the curved peripheral side wall, rather than an axially directed or mixed radial/axial engagement with a structurally separate cup/end region. Examiner is not persuaded that the structure of the present application with claimed axial and radial retention forces is different than the structure of Kreisel, because the same engagement with the negative pole of the inserted battery cell is achieved by the structure of Kreisel. Kreisel explicitly teaches that the inserted battery cell is gripped by a restoring force and the electrical contact is made with an outer casing, in particular the negative pole of the inserted battery cell ([0018] & Fig. 2B). Further, Fig. 5 of the present invention only shows radial engagement with the peripheral side wall of the battery cell. Applicant has not persuasively shown how the engagement structure of Kreisel is different than the engagement structure of the present application.
The claim language of defined curvature, engagement angle, and alignment with respect to the contact element axis do provide any additional structure. What is the defined curvature? What is the engagement angle? How is the battery cell aligned with respect to the contact element axis? Respectfully, the scope of these limitations are not limiting.
Turning to Mayer, Applicant states that Mayer merely recognizes zones or areas for battery cell reception on a flat plate, e.g., “arrangement areas 15,” which are simply portions of a continuous plate, not separately fabricated, formed, or physically distinct contact elements. As such, Mayer cannot be relied on to teach the structurally defined contact elements arranged in groups.
However, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Kreisel is relied on to disclose the structure of the contact elements. Further, Kreisel discloses a plurality of contact springs 6 arranged in groups (see Fig. 5E), but does not disclose that the plurality of distinct structurally defined contact elements are produced from a common punch-bent part which are interconnected by connecting webs.
Mayer discloses a contact plate 10 that can be produced by a method of punching with a plurality of arrangement areas 15 having contact sections 30, holding sections 40, and connecting sections 21 between the individual arrangement areas 15 ([0047] & Fig. 2). Each individual arrangement area 15 has its own structure that is connected to another arrangement area 15 with its own structure connected together by connecting section 21, wherein the plate comprises a plurality of arrangement areas 15 group together and formed by a method of punching, which corresponds to the claimed contact elements and connecting webs being produced from a common punch-bent part.
Applicant argues that the connecting webs of claim 10 are defined as physically and structurally distinct, three-dimensional bridging elements, not mere planar links or regions on a flat plate. By contrast, Applicant suggests that the connecting sections 21 in Mayer refer to portions of a unitary flat plate left between arrangement areas. Applicant’s argument is not commensurate in scope with the claim. The language of the claim merely requires connecting webs arranged so as to interconnect the contact elements arranged in groups, produced from a common punch-bent part, i.e., are left after being produced from a common punch-bent part. Applicant points to the specification stating that the connecting sections differ in material, thickness, elevation, or structural role beyond serving as a remnant of stamping. Again, this is not commensurate in scope with the claim. Further, the connecting webs interconnect the contact elements in the prevent application. Likewise, the connecting sections of Mayer interconnect the arrangement areas.
PNG
media_image1.png
640
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant states that the arrangement areas are not independent, three-dimensional contact elements but rater indented locations in a plate. This is not persuasive. As shown in Figs. 2, 4, & 5 of Mayer, the arrangement areas 15 are individual areas that are grouped together by connecting sections 21.
Applicant states that the combination of Kreisel and Mayer does not teach, suggest, or motivate one skilled in the art to produce discrete, physically grouped contact elements with structurally distinct interconnecting webs as required. As discussed above, Kreisel addresses the structure of the contact elements, and Mayer addresses the structure of the connecting webs for grouping and fabrication of the arrangement areas, corresponding to the contact elements. Accordingly, the combination of Kreisel and Mayer reads on the amended claims.
Turning to the combination of Kreisel and Xu, Applicant submits that the spring ring of the amended claims is structurally limited, not just a ring generally, but as a non-continuous, specifically segmented, load-distributing feature created and interactively arranged with punch-bent contact elements. For example, claims 1 and 10 recite “a spring ring surrounding the spring arms, the spring ring comprising circumferentially arranged but interrupted segments configured to apply a distributed preload to the spring arms, the discontinuities preventing continuous circumferential engagement and enhancing resilience and mechanical stability”.
The circumferentially arranged but interrupted segments are being interpreted as the segments of the spring ring between, for example, two spring arms. Further, the individual spring ring of the present application surrounds the spring arms entirely on the outer circumference thereof (see Figs. 10 and 11; also see [0056] – [0058] of the present specification).
Likewise, Xu discloses the contact element of Fig. 6 further includes an annular ring piece 101 fixedly connected to the arms 101b extending upward from the film 102, as shown in Fig. 6 ([0058]). The contact element of Fig. 6 including the ring piece 101 has high structural strength and provides strong battery enclosing force (abstract).
PNG
media_image2.png
520
692
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Further, Applicant states that Xu’s spring ring is fundamentally incompatible with Kreisel’s modular architecture, because Xu employs an integrated, circumferential, continuous spring ring as part of a single stamped component. However, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. The contact element of Fig. 6 of Xu including the ring piece 101 fixedly connected to the arms 101b provides high structural strength and provides strong battery enclosing force. A skilled artisan would look to Xu to include a ring piece surrounding the spring arms of the contact spring of Kreisel, to ensure strong battery enclosing force.
Applicant asserts that the combination of references cannot be combined because of “simple” motivation without resolving the fundamental differences in structure and function. Examiner disagrees and argues that the fundamental differences in structure and function have been addressed. The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)).
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-18 recite several variations of “contact elements”. For example, claim 1 recites “a plurality of electrically conductive contact elements” and “structurally defined electrically conductive contact elements”. Claim 10 recites “structurally defined contact elements” and “contact elements. The “electrically conductive contact elements”, the “structurally defined electrically conductive contact elements”, and the “contact elements” are being interpreted as the same contact elements, each of the plurality of contact elements having the same structure.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 should recite “.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-12 and 16-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 10 recites the limitation "the discontinuities" in line 28 near the end of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-9, 11-12, and 16-17 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 6 recites “a spring ring arranged to surround the spring arms of the respective contact elements along an outer circumference, the spring ring configured to reinforce the force locking connection”. This limitation is essentially the same limitation of amended claim 1 reciting “a spring ring surrounding the spring arms, the spring ring comprising circumferentially arranged but interrupted segments configured to apply a distributed preload to the spring arms”, without sufficient antecedent basis.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set 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 obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as 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 effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 16, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3096372 A1 (Kreisel ‘372 – citing to the previously attached English translation) in view of US 20200343512 A1 (Mayer ‘512 – claiming foreign priority to DE 102017219768.4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) with an effective filing date of November 7, 2017), and further in view of CN 107240667 A (Xu ‘667 – citing to the previously attached English translation).
Regarding claim 1, Kreisel ‘372 teaches a cell connector for electric-conductively connecting round cells of a battery (as shown in Fig. 1A, a battery storage system 100 comprising two battery storage modules 10 stacked one above the other, wherein the battery storage modules 10 each have a plurality of round individual battery cells 1 of the round cell type that are electrically conductively connected via a plurality of contact springs 6; [0016], [0029] & [0035]) for a motor vehicle (the battery storage system is used in an electrically driven vehicle; [0027]), comprising:
a plurality of electrically conductive contact elements (a plurality of contact springs 6; [0035], Fig. 5B, Fig. 5D, & Fig. 5E) each configured to connect two of the round cells in series on an end face (serial electrical connection of the individual battery cells 1 is achieved on an end face; [0036], Fig. 1A, Fig. 1B, Fig. 2A, & Fig. 2B), wherein the electrically conductive contact elements each have:
PNG
media_image3.png
306
250
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a bottom contact surface configured to form a cohesive bonded connection to a respective cell cap (the contact springs 6 are conductively and mechanically connected to a positive pole of the associated individual battery cell 1 by means of a laser welding method, having a bottom contact surface, as shown in Fig. 2B and Fig. 5A; [0035]),
a centrally disposed hole through the bottom contact surface, the hole having a defined diameter and shape optimized to enhance bonding area, promote controlled bonding characteristics, and reduce weight (the bottom contact surface of the contact spring 6 has a hole in the center thereof; Fig. 5B; the holes present in the contact spring 6 resulting in
PNG
media_image4.png
614
556
media_image4.png
Greyscale
reduced weight compared a contact spring of the same size and shape with no holes), and
a plurality of spring arms extending from the bottom contact surface, each spring arm having a defined curvature, engagement angle, and alignment with respect to the contact element axis (as shown in Fig. 5, the spring arms 6 a extend from the bottom contact surface of the contact spring 6), the spring arms configured to engage a cell cup (the spring arms 6 a are configured to engage the bottom, negative pole, of the battery cell 1 when the cell 1 is inserted into the contact spring 6, as shown in Fig. 2B) to provide radial and axial retention (the inserted battery cell 1 is gripped by a restoring force via the spring arms 6 a of a respective contact spring 6; [0035] & Fig. 2B), the cell cup being structurally distinct from a cylindrical wall (the cell cup being interpreted as the negative pole/bottom end of the battery cell 1; Fig. 2B) and configured to receive and support an end of the round cell (as shown in Fig. 2B, Fig. 5A, and Fig. 5B, the spring arms 6a of the contact spring 6 have a longitudinal slot that allows for a mechanically fixed, conductive, and non-detachable connection to the individual battery cells 1; [0035]).
Kreisel ‘372 does not disclose a plurality of electrically conductive connecting webs which interconnect the structurally defined electrically conductive contact elements arranged in groups, wherein the electrically conductive contact elements and connecting webs are produced from a common punch-bent part.
Mayer ‘512 discloses a contact plate 10 comprising a plate body 11 made of an electrically conductive plate material 12 having a large number of arrangement areas 15 defined on the plate body 11 ([0047] & Fig. 3). Connecting sections 21 remain between the individual arrangement areas 15, which ensures electrical parallel connection when the manufactured contact plate is later used in a battery stack 1 ([0047] & Fig. 2). The contact sections 30 of the contact plate 10 are electrically conductively connected to the battery cells 3 of the lower battery level 2, for example, laser-welded ([0051]). The battery cells 3 of the upper battery level are placed on the holding sections 40 of the contact plate 10 and are held securely by these in a force-fitting manner at the same time contacted in an electrically conductive manner ([0051]). The contact plate 10 may be installed with an insulation element 50 ([0051] & Fig. 8).
The contact plate 10 can be produced by a method of punching, because the removal of the plate material 12 to create the contact securing section 31 as well as the holding securing section 41, to create the arrangement spaces 20, may be produced by a method of punching ([0032], [0047], & [0048]). As a result, simplification of the production of a contact plate 10 and reduction of production costs can be achieved ([0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a plurality of electrically conductive connecting webs which interconnect the structurally defined contact elements arranged in groups, wherein the contact elements and connecting webs are produced from a common punch-bent part, to simplify production and ensure parallel connection, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Kreisel ‘372 does not disclose a spring ring surrounding the spring arms, the spring ring comprising circumferentially arranged but interrupted segments configured to apply a distributed preload to the spring arms, the discontinuities preventing continuous and circumferential engagement and enhancing resilience and mechanical stability.
Xu ‘667 discloses a battery sheet 1 having a plurality of contact elements (Fig. 2), wherein the battery sheet 1 is made of steel ([0024]). Each contact element (Fig. 6) includes a plurality of arms 101b extending upward from the film 102 having a protrusion 102a punched in the central portion of the film 102, wherein the protrusion is circular so as to insert the battery terminal, achieving good contact ([0058] & [0066]). The contact element further includes an annular ring piece 101 fixedly connected to the arms 101b extending upward from the film 102, as shown in Fig. 6 ([0058]). The ring piece 101 extends along an outer circumference of the upwardly extending arms 101b (Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
678
889
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The contact element of Fig. 6 including the ring piece 101 has high structural strength and provides strong battery enclosing force (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372, to include a spring ring surrounding the spring arms of the contact element along an outer circumference, as suggested by Xu ‘667, to provide high structural strength and strong battery enclosing force.
Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2114 I.).
Regarding claim 2, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, further comprising a voltage tap configured for balancing the rounds cell and formed on one of the externally arranged contact elements (a connector section 16 formed and extending from the connection sections 21 of the arrangement areas 15, wherein the connection section 16 may later be used for connecting a control and/or monitoring unit for controlled operation of battery stack 1; [0047] & Fig. 2 of Mayer ‘512).
The balancing, as described in paragraph [0010] of the presently filed specification, corresponds to monitoring the voltages of the parallel connected rounds cells among each other via the voltage tape, to avoid having to monitor the voltage of each cell individually. As such, the connector section 16, as shown in Fig. 2 of Mayer ‘512, is capable of monitoring the voltage of a group of battery cells connected in parallel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a voltage tap configured for balancing the rounds cell and formed on one of the externally arranged contact elements, to be connected to a monitoring unit for controlled operation of the battery stack, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Regarding claim 4, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, wherein the spring arms have one longitudinal slot in order to favor a flat flitting to the respective lateral surfaces of the cell cups of the round cells (as shown in Fig. 2B, Fig. 5A, and Fig. 5B, the spring arms 6a of the contact spring 6 have a longitudinal slot that allows for a mechanically fixed, conductive, and non-detachable connection to the individual battery cells 1; [0035] of Kreisel ‘372).
Regarding claim 5, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, wherein the floor-side bottom contact surfaces of the contact elements are raised (the bottom contact surface of the contact spring 6 having a hole in the center thereof, is raised in the opposite direction of the spring arms, as shown in Fig. 5A of Kreisel ‘372, corresponding to disclosure of paragraph [0013] of the presently filed specification, wherein the bottom contact surface is raised in the opposite direction to the direction in which the spring arms extend).
Regarding claim 8, Kreisel 372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, wherein the contact elements are arranged in a plurality of rows and columns with respect to one another (as shown in Fig. 2B, Fig. 5D, and Fig. 5E of Kreisel 372, there are a plurality of contact springs 6 that are arranged in a plurality of rows and columns, because the individual battery cells 1 can be arranged in rows and columns to form a rectangular shape; [0040] & Fig. 6A; representing one of the possible arrangements) and the contact elements which are each directly adjacent by means of one of the connecting webs are interconnected (in view Mayer ‘512, connecting sections 21 remain between the individual arrangement areas 15, which ensures electrical parallel connection when the manufactured contact plate is later used in a battery stack 1 ([0047] & Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide that the contact elements are arranged in a plurality of rows and columns with respect to one another and that the contact elements which are each directly adjacent by means of one of the connecting webs are interconnected, to ensure parallel connection, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Regarding claim 16, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, wherein the bottom contact surface is configured to produce a cohesive bonded connection to a respective cell cap of the round cells by way of laser welding (the contact springs 6 are conductively and mechanically connected to a positive pole of the associated individual battery cell 1 by means of a laser welding method, having a bottom contact surface, as shown in Fig. 2B and Fig. 5A; [0035] of Kreisel ‘372).
Regarding claim 17, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, further comprising an insulator configured and arranged to guard against a short circuit between individual round cells (an insulation element 50 may be arranged between the plate body of the contact plate and the battery cells of the upper battery level, for example, for thermal and/or electrical insulation; [0026], [0050] - [0051], Fig. 7, & Fig. 8 of Mayer ‘512).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide an insulator configured and arranged to guard against a short circuit between individual round cells, for electrical insulation, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Regarding claim 18, Kreisel ‘372 teaches a cell connector for electric-conductively connecting round cells of a battery (as shown in Fig. 1A, a battery storage system 100 comprising two battery storage modules 10 stacked one above the other, wherein the battery storage modules 10 each have a plurality of round individual battery cells 1 of the round cell type that are electrically conductively connected via a plurality of contact springs 6; [0016], [0029] & [0035]) for a motor vehicle (the battery storage system is used in an electrically driven vehicle; [0027]), comprising:
a plurality of electrically conductive contact elements (a plurality of contact springs 6; [0035] & Fig. 5B), each contact element having a bottom contact surface configured to produce a cohesive bonded connection to a respective cell cap of the round cells (the contact springs 6 are conductively and mechanically connected to a positive pole of the associated individual battery cell 1 by means of a laser welding method, having a bottom contact surface, as shown in Fig. 2B and Fig. 5A; [0035]), the bottom contact surface comprising a hole therethrough, the hole having a circumference fully defined by the bottom contact surface (the bottom contact surface of the contact spring 6 has a hole in the center thereof; Fig. 5B), the hole arranged and configured to promote the cohesive bonded connection and to contribute to weight reduction of the cell connector (the bonded connection achieved by the disclosed welding method, wherein weight reduction is achieved by the presence of a hole in the contact spring 6), and spring arms for configured to produce a force locking connection to a respective cell cup of the round cells (the inserted battery cell 1 is gripped by a restoring force via the spring arms 6 a; [0035] & Fig. 2B).
PNG
media_image4.png
614
556
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kreisel ‘372 does not disclose a plurality of electrically conductive connecting webs arranged so as to interconnect the electrically conductive contact elements arranged in groups, wherein the electrically conductive contact elements and connecting webs are produced from a common punch-bent part.
Mayer ‘512 discloses a contact plate 10 comprising a plate body 11 made of an electrically conductive plate material 12 having a large number of arrangement areas 15 defined on the plate body 11 ([0047] & Fig. 3). Connecting sections 21 remain between the individual arrangement areas 15, which ensures electrical parallel connection when the manufactured contact plate is later used in a battery stack 1 ([0047] & Fig. 2). The contact sections 30 of the contact plate 10 are electrically conductively connected to the battery cells 3 of the lower battery level 2, for example, laser-welded ([0051]). The battery cells 3 of the upper battery level are placed on the holding sections 40 of the contact plate 10 and are held securely by these in a force-fitting manner at the same time contacted in an electrically conductive manner ([0051]). The contact plate 10 may be installed with an insulation element 50 ([0051] & Fig. 8).
The contact plate 10 can be produced by a method of punching, because the removal of the plate material 12 to create the contact securing section 31 as well as the holding securing section 41, to create the arrangement spaces 20, may be produced by a method of punching ([0032, [0047], & [0048]). As a result, simplification of the production of a contact plate 10 and reduction of production costs can be achieved ([0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a plurality of electrically conductive connecting webs which interconnect the contact elements arranged in groups, wherein the contact elements and connecting webs are produced from a common punch-bent part, to simplify production and ensure parallel connection, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Kreisel ‘372 does not disclose a spring ring connected to the spring arms and arranged to surround the spring arms of the respective electrically conductive contact elements along an outer circumference of the spring arms abutting the round cells, the spring ring configured to reinforce the force locking connection.
PNG
media_image5.png
678
889
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Xu ‘667 discloses a battery sheet 1 having a plurality of contact elements (Fig. 2), wherein the battery sheet 1 is made of steel ([0024]). Each contact element (Fig. 6) includes a plurality of arms 101b extending upward from the film 102 having a protrusion 102a punched in the central portion of the film 102, wherein the protrusion is circular so as to insert the battery terminal, achieving good contact ([0058] & [0066]). The contact element further includes an annular ring piece 101 fixedly connected to the arms 101b extending upward from the film 102, as shown in Fig. 6 ([0058]). The ring piece 101 extends along an outer circumference of the upwardly extending arms 101b (Fig. 6).
The contact element of Fig. 6 including the ring piece 101 has high structural strength and provides strong battery enclosing force (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372, to include a spring ring arranged to surround the spring arms of the respective contact elements along an outer circumference of the springs arms abutting the round cells, the spring ring configured to reinforce the force locking connection, as suggested by Xu ‘667, to provide high structural strength and strong battery enclosing force.
Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2114 I.).
Claims 10, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3096372 A1 (Kreisel ‘372 – citing to the previously attached English translation) in view of US 20200343512 A1 (Mayer ‘512 – claiming foreign priority to DE 102017219768.4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) with an effective filing date of November 7, 2017).
Regarding claim 10, Kreisel ‘372 teaches a battery for a motor vehicle (a battery storage system for use in an electrically driven vehicle; [0027]), comprising a plurality of round cells (plurality of individual battery cells 1 of the round cell type; [0029] & Fig. 6) electrically conductively connected to one another by means of at least one cell connector (as shown in Fig. 1A, a battery storage system 100 comprising two battery storage modules 10 stacked one above the other, wherein the battery storage modules 10 each have a plurality of round individual battery cells 1 that are electrically conductively connected via a plurality of
PNG
media_image4.png
614
556
media_image4.png
Greyscale
contact springs 6; [0016], [0029], [0035]),
the at least one cell connector comprising a plurality of electrically conductive contact elements, each contact element having a bottom contact surface and a plurality of spring arms extending from the bottom contact surface (the contact spring 6 having a plurality of spring arms 6 a; [0035] & Fig. 5B), the spring arms each having a defined curvature, engagement angle, and alignment with respect to the contact element axis (as shown in Fig. 5, the spring arms 6 a extend from the bottom contact surface of the contact spring 6), the spring arms being configured to engage a cell cup (the spring arms 6 a are configured to engage the bottom, negative pole, of the battery cell 1 when the cell 1 is inserted into the contact spring 6, as shown in Fig. 2B) that is structurally distinct from a cylindrical cell wall (the cell cup being interpreted as the negative pole/bottom end of the battery cell 1; Fig. 2B) and configured to receive and support an end of the respective round cell such that the spring arms provide radial and axial retention forces (the inserted battery cell 1 is gripped by a restoring force via the spring arms 6 a of contact spring 6; [0035] & Fig. 2B);
structurally defined contact elements arranged in groups in the at least one cell connector (an arrangement of a plurality of contact springs 6 relative to one another of a battery storage module is shown in Fig. 5D & Fig. 5E; [0037]),
wherein the electrically conductive contact elements are configured to connect two of the round cells in series on an end face (serial electrical connection of the individual battery cells 1 is achieved on an end face; [0036], Fig. 1A, Fig. 1B, Fig. 2A, & Fig. 2B), wherein each of the contact elements comprises a bottom contact surface configured to form a cohesive bonded connection to a respective cell cap (the contact springs 6 are conductively and mechanically connected to a positive pole of the associated individual battery cell 1 by means of a laser welding method, having a bottom contact surface, as shown in Fig. 2B and Fig. 5A; [0035]), wherein the bottom contact surface comprises a centrally disposed hole therethrough (the bottom contact surface of the contact spring 6 has a hole disposed in the center thereof; Fig. 5B), the hole having a defined diameter and shape optimized to enhance bonding area, promote controlled bonding characteristics, and reduce weight (the contact springs 6 are furthermore non-detachably connected to a positive pole of the associated individual battery cell 1 by means of a laser welding method to ensure a fixed positioning of the individual battery cell 1; [0017]; the holes present in the contact spring 6 resulting in reduced weight compared a contact spring of the same size and shape with no holes).
Kreisel ‘372 does not disclose a plurality of electrically conductive connecting webs arranged so as to interconnect the contact elements arranged, wherein the contact elements and connecting webs are produced from a common punch-bent part.
Mayer ‘512 discloses a contact plate 10 comprising a plate body 11 made of an electrically conductive plate material 12 having a large number of arrangement areas 15 defined on the plate body 11 ([0047] & Fig. 3). Connecting sections 21 remain between the individual arrangement areas 15, which ensures electrical parallel connection when the manufactured contact plate is later used in a battery stack 1 ([0047] & Fig. 2). The contact sections 30 of the contact plate 10 are electrically conductively connected to the battery cells 3 of the lower battery level 2, for example, laser-welded ([0051]). The battery cells 3 of the upper battery level are placed on the holding sections 40 of the contact plate 10 and are held securely by these in a force-fitting manner at the same time contacted in an electrically conductive manner ([0051]). The contact plate 10 may be installed with an insulation element 50 ([0051] & Fig. 8).
The contact plate 10 can be produced by a method of punching, because the removal of the plate material 12 to create the contact securing section 31 as well as the holding securing section 41, to create the arrangement spaces 20, may be produced by a method of punching ([0032, [0047], & [0048]). As a result, simplification of the production of a contact plate 10 and reduction of production costs can be achieved ([0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a plurality of electrically conductive connecting webs arranged so as to interconnect the contact elements arranged, wherein the contact elements and connecting webs are produced from a common punch-bent part, to simplify production and ensure parallel connection, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in battery for the motor vehicle, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Kreisel ‘372 does not disclose wherein the at least one cell connector further comprises a spring ring surrounding the spring arms, the spring ring comprising circumferentially arranged but interrupted segments configured to apply a distributed preload to the spring arms, the discontinuities preventing continuous and circumferential engagement and enhancing resilience and mechanical stability.
Xu ‘667 discloses a battery sheet 1 having a plurality of contact elements (Fig. 2), wherein the battery sheet 1 is made of steel ([0024]). Each contact element (Fig. 6) includes a plurality of arms 101b extending upward from the film 102 having a protrusion 102a punched in the central portion of the film 102, wherein the protrusion is circular so as to insert the battery terminal, achieving good contact ([0058] & [0066]). The contact element further includes an annular ring piece 101 fixedly connected to the arms 101b extending upward from the film 102, as shown in Fig. 6 ([0058]). The ring piece 101 extends along an outer circumference of the upwardly extending arms 101b (Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
678
889
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The contact element of Fig. 6 including the ring piece 101 has high structural strength and provides strong battery enclosing force (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372, to include a spring ring surrounding the spring arms of the contact element along an outer circumference, as suggested by Xu ‘667, to provide high structural strength and strong battery enclosing force.
Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2114 I.).
Regarding claim 11, Kreisel ‘372 discloses the battery according to claim 10, further comprising a plurality of battery modules arranged one behind the other (the battery storage system 100 comprising two battery storage modules 10 stacked one above the other; [0029] of Kreisel ‘372), each comprising a module housing with respective through-openings enclosing the round cells (base plate 2 of each battery storage module 10 includes receiving regions which, via plus-in openings make it possible to position and align the individual battery cells; [0038], Fig. 1A & Fig. 1B of Kreisel ‘372), wherein at least one of the cell connectors is arranged between the respective facing end faces of the modules housings (the plurality of contact springs 6 are arranged between the respective end faces of the battery storage modules 10; [0034], Fig. 1A, & Fig. 2B of Kreisel ‘372), by means of which the round cells arranged in the respective module housings are electrically and conductively connected to each other (as shown in Fig. 1A, a battery storage system 100 comprising two battery storage modules 10 stacked one above the other, wherein the battery storage modules 10 each have a plurality of round individual battery cells 1 that are electrically conductively connected via a plurality of contact springs 6; [0016], [0029], [0035] of Kreisel ‘372).
Regarding claim 12, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the battery according to claim 11, wherein each of the module housings have an insulator with recesses for respective cell caps of the round cells (see Fig. 8 of Mayer ‘512 showing the insulation element 50 having recesses or openings for the respective cell caps of the battery cells 3 and contact sections 30; [0048]), on which the cell connectors are arranged and with their raised floor-side contact surfaces connected to the cell caps of the round cells, which are arranged in the insulator in a rearranged manner (an insulation element 50 may be arranged between the plate body of the contact plate and the battery cells of the upper battery level, for example, for thermal and/or electrical insulation; [0026], [0050] - [0051], Fig. 7, & Fig. 8 of Mayer ‘512).
PNG
media_image6.png
694
668
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide that each of the module housings have an insulator with recesses for respective cell caps of the round cells, on which the cell connectors are arranged and with their raised floor-side contact surfaces connected to the cell caps of the round cells, which are arranged in the insulator in a rearranged manner, for electrical insulation, as suggested by Mayer ‘512, in the battery, as taught by Kreisel ‘372.
Claims 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3096372 A1 (Kreisel ‘372 – citing to the attached English translation) in view of US 20200343512 A1 (Mayer ‘512 – claiming foreign priority to DE 102017219768.4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) with an effective filing date of November 7, 2017) and CN 107240667 A (Xu ‘667 – citing to the attached English translation), and further in view of EP 0859431 (Heimuller ‘431).
Regarding claim 3, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, but does not disclose the spring arms each having at least one stiffening bead.
Heimuller ‘431 teaches contact springs for use as connectors in automotive technology ([0002]). The box-shaped contact part 1 in Fig. 6 is shown with bottom wall 11 and top wall 15 each having a stiffening bead 35 to relieve the load on the support arms 21 and 23 ([0032]). As a result, spring arms 25 and 27 can be supported with their distal ends on the stiffening beads 35, and are protecting from over bending ([0032]). Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the spring arms of the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372, to include a stiffening bead to protect the spring arms from overbending and relieving the load of the spring arms, as suggested by Heimuller ‘431.
Regarding claim 9, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, but does not disclose the connecting webs comprising respective beads configured for compensating mechanical stresses.
Heimuller ‘431 teaches contact springs for use as connectors in automotive technology ([0002]). The box-shaped contact part 1 in Fig. 6 is shown with bottom wall 11 and top wall 15 each having a stiffening bead 35 to relieve the load on the support arms 21 and 23 ([0032]). As a result, spring arms 25 and 27 can be supported with their distal ends on the stiffening beads 35, and are protecting from over bending ([0032]). Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the connecting webs of the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372, to include stiffening beads to relieve the load on the connecting webs, compensating for mechanical stresses, as suggested by Heimuller ‘431.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3096372 A1 (Kreisel ‘372 – citing to the previously attached English translation) in view of US 20200343512 A1 (Mayer ‘512 – claiming foreign priority to DE 102017219768.4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) with an effective filing date of November 7, 2017) and CN 107240667 A (Xu ‘667 – citing to the previously attached English translation), and further in view of US 20190329825 (Fees ‘825).
Regarding claim 7, Kreisel ‘372 teaches the cell connector according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the common punch-bent part comprises a first sheet metal and a second sheet metal which are connected to each other and arranged one above the other, wherein the first sheet metal comprises a better electrical conductivity than the second sheet and the sheet metal comprises at least one of a high spring stiffness and a lower stress relaxation than the first sheet.
Fees ‘825 discloses a battery module having a plurality of battery cells that are connected in series (abstract) via a multi-layer contact plate ([0076]). A two-layer contact plate may be used in which there is a cell terminal connection layer being secured to a single conductive layer ([0069]), wherein the cell terminal connection layer is made of the same material or a different material from the at least one primary conductive layer ([0070]). For example, the cell terminal connection layer may be made of a less conductive material such as steel, while the at least one primary conductive layer may be made of conductive material such as aluminum or copper, two layers having structural differences based on the selection of materials ([0070]).
As disclosed in paragraph [0011] of the presently filed specification, copper is disclosed as a material that is a very good electrical conductor, but has a rater low tensile strength and a high stress relaxation. As such, a material other than copper may be selected to provide a material with a lower stress relaxation or a higher spring stiffness.
The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to manufacture the cell connector, as taught by Kreisel ‘372, out of a multi-layer contact plate having a first conductive layer made of copper and a second layer made of a less conductive material such as steel, wherein the structural differences in the two layers correspond to the second layer having a lower stress relaxation than the first sheet made of copper, as suggested by Fees ‘285.
The prior art can be modified or combined to reject claims as prima facie obvious as long as there is a reasonable expectation of success. See In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (see MPEP § 2143.02).
As such, Kreisel ‘372 renders obvious the limitation of claim 7: wherein the cell connector further comprises a punch-bent part comprising a first sheet metal and a second sheet metal which are connected to each other and arranged one above the other, wherein the first sheet metal comprises a better electrical conductivity than the second sheet and the sheet metal comprises at least one of a high spring stiffness and a lower stress relaxation than the first sheet.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAYLOR H KRONE whose telephone number is (571)270-5064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are 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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached on 571-270-3879. The fax phone number for the organization where this 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 about filing 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.
/TAYLOR HARRISON KRONE/Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JONATHAN CREPEAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725