DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Remarks
Claims 1 and 2 have been amended. Claims 3-12 and 18-21. Claim 1-12 and 18-21 are presently amended.
Status of objections and rejections
The rejection below has been modified as necessitated by the applicant’s amendments
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 lines 6-8 recites a first and second accommodation spaced formed to be spaced apart from each other, and accommodating the electrode assembly in the first and second accommodation space.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of an accommodation space claim limitation would include any space that is capable of accommodating the electrode assembly. The breadth of “a first and second accommodation space formed to be spaced apart from each other” is such that any arbitrary line (such as down the center) creates a space formed such that the first and second accommodation space are formed apart from each other
The term “concave” used in at least claims 2-3 and 7 is a relative term which without claimed relationship to the direction thereof results in a situation in which depending on one’s view point convex and concave are interchangeable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burgers (US20120107663A1) in view of Takayama (JP2001060452A).
Regarding claim 1 and claim 2, Burgers discloses a secondary battery module comprising: a plurality of stacked pouch type secondary batteries [0003, 0016, 0053, fig. 1, Burgers]; and a cooling plate (20) configured to cool the plurality of stacked pouch type secondary batteries [0038, fig. 1, Burgers], wherein each of the pouch type secondary batteries includes: an electrode assembly [0035, Burgers discloses internal components (not shown) of the battery unit. The examiner notes that an electrode assembly is an internal component of a battery unit]; an exterior material (14) including first and second accommodation spaces formed to be spaced apart from each other [fig. 2, Burgers], and accommodating the electrode assembly in the first and second accommodation spaces [0035, Burgers]; and a base portion (16, “close contact portion”) formed by the exterior material in an outer periphery of the first and second accommodation spaces [0035, fig. 1-2, Burgers], the secondary battery includes three sides including a first side [fig. 1, Burgers], a second side [fig. 1, Burgers], and a third side [fig. 1, Burgers], the first side and the second side extending in a first direction and the third side extending a second direction approximately perpendicular to the first direction [fig. 1, Burgers], wherein the close contact portion is formed at a fourth side of the four sides of the pouch type secondary battery [fig. 1, Burgers], the fourth side extend in the second direction [fig. 1, Burgers], wherein an inner surface of the close contact portion is in contact with the electrode assembly [0035, 0037-0038, fig. 1, Burgers], wherein an outer surface of the close contact portion faces an outside in the first direction [fig. 1, Burgers].
PNG
media_image1.png
509
905
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
463
493
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Top) annotated fig. 1 of Burgers pointing to the four sides and their respective directions along with the close contact portion. Bottom) annotated fig. 2 of Burgers showing a first and second accommodating and spaced apart from each other.
Burgers teaches that the battery unit is placed upon and secured to the cooling plate via a “peg and socket connection” such that the base of the battery unit comes in contact with the cooling plate to achieve desirable (cooling) results. The examiner notes that one would obtain desirable cooling results by having the battery unit be placed upright on the cooling plate. Doing so would help insure contact between the battery unit and the cooling plate. Additionally when doing so a gravitational force is applied to the electrode assembly such that the electrode assembly would come in contact with the “close contact portion”.
Burgers is silent to the particulars of the pouch including 1) a sealing portion formed on the first, second and third side by bonding of the exterior material as well as 2) a first and second extending portion protruding outwardly in the first direction.
However, Takayama discloses a film-cased battery (“pouch type battery”) [0001, 0006, Takayama], with an exterior material used to accommodate an electrode assembly [0006-0007, Takayama]. Furthermore Takayama discloses the particulars of a pouch type battery contain four sides [0008, fig. 6, Takayama], with a sealing portion (7a, 7b) wherein the sealing portion is formed at three sides of four sides of the pouch type secondary battery by bonding of the exterior material [fig. 6, Takayama], and wherein the sealing portion includes: a first extending portion connected to a first end of the close contact portion and protruding outwardly in the first direction with respect to the outer surface of the close contact portion [fig. 6, Takayama], a second extending portion connected to a second end of the close contact portion and protruding outwardly in the first direction with respect to the outer surface of the close contact portion [fig. 6, Takayama], and wherein the first extending portion and the second extending portion are respectively disposed at opposite ends of the close contact portion so as to be spaced apart from each other [fig. 6, Takayama], wherein the sealing portion at the third side (7b) is disposed at an opposite end portion to the close contact portion in the first direction [fig. 6, Takayama].
PNG
media_image3.png
604
761
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 6 of Takayama pointing to the three sealed portions and the first and second extending portion.
Prior to the effective filing date one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Burgers such that the exterior material of the pouch type battery contains four sides wherein the sealing portion is formed at three of the four sides. Doing so would produce an exteriorly sealed battery [0008, Takayama]. Furthermore, one would find it obvious to have a first and second extending portion connected to a first and second end of the close contact portion protruding outwardly as this is a known structure for a pouch type battery to have [fig. 6a, Takayam].
In regards to claim 2, the overlapping limitations and citations applied above to claim 1 are additionally applied to claim 2 with the following added limitations.
Burgers discloses a close contact portion including a concave portion (18) formed into a surface of the close contact portion and extending along a length of the close contact portion [0035, 0038-0041, fig. 1-2, Burgers], wherein the concave portion is disposed between the first accommodation space and the second accommodation space [fig. 2, Burgers], and wherein, in across-section of each of the pouch type secondary batteries in the width direction, the concave portion is visible as protruding toward the electrode assembly [fig. 1-2, Burgers].
To expedite prosecution the examiner notes that Burgers teaches the concave portions (18) are to be spaced-apart along the length of the housing at predetermined intervales based on the particular design and application of the battery unit [0035, Burgers]. As such, the examiner asserts any changes in the design of the concave portion are a matter mere change in shape or proportions and would be obvious as a result of the particular design and application of the battery.
Regarding claim 3, modified Burgers discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the concave portion is configured to be in close contact with the electrode assembly [fig. 1-2, Burgers].
The examiner notes that by having the concave portions (18) go into the casing this would place the concave portion in close contact with the electrode assembly.
Regarding claim 4 and 19, modified Burgers is silent to the cooling plate containing a plurality if protrusion positioned between the close contact portion of adjacent pouch type secondary batteries.
However, Burgers does discloses the use of a the cooling plate has a plurality of protrusions formed thereon [0047, fig. 4a-4b Burgers]; and wherein each of the protrusions (36) is positioned between the close contact portions (16) of adjacent cylindrical type secondary batteries [0047, fig. 4a-4b Burgers].
Prior to the effective filing date, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the arts to modify Burgers such that it contained a plurality of protrusions positioned between the close contact portion of adjacent pouch type batteries as these can provide an additional engaging device that is sized to receive the close contact portion allowing for additional security for the battery to be locked in place [0046, Burgers].
Regarding claim 5 and 20, modified Burgers teaches the secondary battery module, wherein each of the protrusions has a curved surface corresponding to a shape of a portion of the close contact portion [0046, fig. 4, Burgers].Regarding claim 6, modified Hosokawa discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the plurality of protrusions are arranged in the same direction as a stacking direction of the plurality of pouch type secondary batteries [fig. 13-14, Lee].
Regarding claim 6 and 21, modified Burgers teaches the secondary battery module, wherein each of the protrusions has a curved surface corresponding to a shape of a portion of the close contact portion [0046, fig. 4, Burgers].
Regarding claim 7, modified Burgers teaches the secondary battery module, the cooling plate includes a concave portion support (30) protruding toward the close contact portion so as to correspond to the concave portion [fig 1-2, Burgers].
Regarding claim 18, modified Hosokawa discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the close contact portion includes a concave portion (18) extending along a length of the close contact portion [0035, 0038-0041, fig. 1-2, Burgers], wherein the concave portion is disposed between the first accommodation space and the second accommodation space [fig. 2, Burgers].
Claim(s) 8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Burgers as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee (KR 20160133776 A using KR 101792751 B1 previously attached as the translation).
Regarding claim 8, Modified Burgers is silent to the use of a thermally conductive adhesive disposed between the close contact portion and the cooling plate.
However, Lee discloses The secondary battery module of claim 1, wherein the secondary battery module further includes a gap filler or a thermally conductive adhesive disposed between the close contact portion of the plurality of pouch type secondary batteries and the cooling plate [0014-0016, 0062-0064, 0078, 0081, 0096-0097 0110, 0112-0113, Lee].
Prior to the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Hosokawa such that a thermally conductive adhesive were disposed between the closed contact portion and the cooling plate because doing so would allow for the pouch to be fixed to the plate and allow for heat to transfer from the battery to the adhesive and then to the cooling plate [0014, 0062-0064, 0112, Lee].
Regarding claim 10, modified Burgers is silent to a first and second insertion groove accommodating the first and second extending portion.
However, Lee discloses a slit (H) used to insert any protruding portion(s) of a pouch battery into the cooling tray [0111, fig. 14, Lee].
Given that Lee discusses the importance of maximizing contact between the battery and the cooling plate [0018-0022, 0030, 0071-0076, 0090-0091, 0105-0109, 0117. One of ordinary skill within the arts would appreciate that one could have a first and second slit (first and second “insertion groove”) as opposed to a single long slit to accommodate any downward protruding portions of the battery. Doing so would allow for one to still insert the pouch into the cooling plate without overly reducing the contact surface area between the pouch and the cooling plate thereby improving heat transfer.
Prior to the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Hosokawa such that the slit (H) was not a single long slit but a first and second slit (“insertion groove”) designed to conform and fit with the extension portions with the center portion in contact with the bottom of the pouch battery. Doing so would allow for the battery to rest on the cooling plate without reducing the contact surface area between the pouch and the cooling plate.
Regarding claim 11, modified Burgers discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the close contact portion (16) includes a concave portion (18) being concave toward the electrode assembly [fig. 1-2, Burgers], wherein the concave portion extends along a length of the close contact portion [fig. 1, Burgers], wherein the cooling plate includes a concave portion support (30) protruding toward the close contact portion so as to correspond to the concave portion [fig. 1-2, Burgers].Regarding claim 12, modified Hosokawa discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the concave portion support is positioned between the first insertion groove and the second insertion groove [fig. 13-14, Lee and in the rejection of claim 10].
The examiner notes that in the rejection of claim 10, Hosokawa was further modified such that the slit (H) was not a single long slit but rather two slits to accommodate the extension portion and a central portion that was in contact with the pouch battery. This reads on the applicant’s claim language of “the concave portion support is positioned between the first insertion groove and the second insertion groove”.
Regarding claim 12, modified Burgers discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the concave portion support is positioned between the first insertion groove and the second insertion groove [fig. 1, Burgers].
Burgers depicts the concave portion support (30) extending along the close contact portion throughout the center of the close contact portion. This would be in between the insertion grooves housing the first and second insertion grooves.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Burgers as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Deoksoo (WO2014014285A1).
Regarding claim 9, modified Burgers is silent to the use of an elastic pad.
However, Deoksoo discloses the secondary battery module, wherein the secondary battery module further includes an elastic pad (230) disposed between some of the plurality of pouch type secondary batteries [line 72-77, 176-200, fig. 6].
Prior to the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the arts would be motivated to modify Hosokawa to include the elastic pad disclosed by Deoksoo as the pad can be used to prevent deformation and impact of the pouch type cell [line 55-61].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See below for additional details.
In regards to the applicant’s remarks on the examiner’s claim interpretation of “concave” the examiner notes that the applicant’s recitation of the definition of concave and convex are correct. But it does not address the examiner’s stance on a reference point. The examiner has provided a simple diagram below where one can see how the same curve might be considered concave or convex depending upon the reference point from which one views it. From this simple diagram one can see how the same shape may form a “concave” as “hollowed or rounded inward like the inside of a bowl”. While from the other side one views a “convex” as “curved or rounded outward like the exterior of a sphere or circle”. The examiner is leavening their claim interpretation in for clarity of the record.
PNG
media_image4.png
245
880
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s arguments on pages 4-9 with respect to claim(s) 1 and 2 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Hosokawa and/or Lee applied in the prior rejection of record for the teachings or matter in regards to the shape of the pouch battery specifically challenged in the argument.
Deoksoo continues to be relied on for the elastic pad not for additional features of the independent claims; arguments presented with respect to Deoksoo are not persuasive.
The examiner maintains their rejection.
Conclusion
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 event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUINTIN DALE ELLIOTT whose telephone number is (703)756-5423. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-6pm (MST).
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached on 5712705256. 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.
/QUINTIN D. ELLIOTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights