DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the August 27th, 2025 arguments and remarks (“Remarks”).
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 .
Response to Amendments
In response to the amendments received in the Remarks on August 27th, 2025:
Claims 1-9 are pending in the current application. Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-7 have been amended. Claim 9 is newly added.
The previous rejection under 35 USC 112 is overcome in light of the amendment.
The cores of the previous prior art-based rejections have been overcome in light of the amendment. All changes made to the rejection are as necessitated by the amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed with the Remarks on August 27th, 2024 with respect to claims 1-9 are based on the claims as amended. While Applicant’s arguments are acknowledged, they are found to be moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, presented below, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the Claims.
Claim Interpretation
The limitation “lined up” as seen in at least line 12 of Claim 1 is interpreted to mean arranged. For example, as shown in Figure 4 of Applicant’s disclosure, the voltage detection lines 25 are arranged in order of the potentials of the electrode terminals (from 0, the lowest potential, to 6, the highest potential) across the second substrate 19 (from the left side to the right side of the second substrate 19) across the connection end portion 27 of the second substrate 19.
The limitation “in the connection end portion of the second substrate, the plurality of second voltage detection lines are lined up in the order of the potentials of the electrode terminals to which the plurality of second voltage detection lines are electrically connected via the plurality of first voltage detection lines in the overlap region” (Claim 1, lines 18-22) is therefore interpreted to mean that across the connection end portion 27 of the second substrate 19, the second voltage detection lines 25 are arranged in the order of lowest potential to highest potential of the electrode terminals 14 from the left side of the second substrate 19 to the right side of the second substrate 19 (from 0, the lowest potential, to 6, the highest potential). And that the plurality of second voltage detection lines 25 are electrically connected to these electrode terminals 14 via the plurality of first voltage detection lines 20. Wherein a connection between the first substrate 18 and the second substrate 19 occurs in the overlap region 64.
Such that, for example, a second voltage detection line 25 runs from the numeral “6” found in the right side of the connection end portion 27 of the second substrate 19 (representing the highest potential) to a voltage detection land 28. The voltage detection land 28, found within the overlap region 64, is connected to a first voltage detection line 20 that runs to the electrode terminal 14 associated with the numeral “6” on the first substrate 18.
This interpretation is supported by at least paragraphs [0020]-[0023], [0059]-[0060], and [0069]-[0071] and Figure 7 of Applicant’s own PG Publication.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, lines 7-8 recite the limitation “the first plurality of voltage detection lands.” This appears to be a typographical error and should instead read “the plurality of first voltage detection lands.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Prior Art
Previously cited Tanabe US PG Publication 2019/0198944 (“Tanabe”)
Nishihara US PG Publication 2011/0024205 (“Nishihara”)
Previously cited Nishihara US PG Publication 2015/0137824 (“Nishihara”)
Previously cited Yuji CN106663567 (“Yuji”)
Previously cited Sato WO2018163736 (“Sato”)
Previously cited Kim US PG Publication 2019/0181508 (“Kim”)
Suga US PG Publication 2014/0023897 (“Suga”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claims 1, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe US PG Publication 2019/0198944 in view of Nishihara US PG Publication 2011/0024205 (“Nishihara’11”) and Nishihara US PG Publication 2015/0137824.
Regarding Claim 1, Tanabe discloses a wiring module (i.e. wiring pattern) disposed on a plurality of power storage devices (i.e. plurality of battery cells) that have electrode terminals (Abstract, [0005], entire disclosure dependent upon), the wiring module comprising:
at least one flexible first substrate 41 that is electrically connected to the electrode terminals ([0005], [0080]); and
a flexible second substrate 43 that is electrically connected to the first substrate 41 ([0080]-[0084]) and includes a connection end portion (i.e. second wiring patterns 52) configured to be electrically connected to an external device (i.e. monitoring unit 10) ([0084]),
wherein a plurality of first voltage detection lines 53 that are electrically connected to the electrode terminal are formed on the at least first substrate 41 ([0061], [0151]), and
a plurality of second voltage detection lines 54 are formed on the second substrate 43 ([0061], [0151]), and
in the connection end portion 52, the plurality of second voltage detection lines 54 are lined up in the order of the potentials of the electrode terminals to which the plurality of second voltage detection lines 54 are electrically connected via the plurality of first voltage detection lines 53 (Fig. 5, [0061], [0151]).
(NOTE: Tanabe teaches in [0061] that each of the wiring patterns that are electrically connected to board wirings are voltage detection lines. Therefore, the electrically connected wiring patterns defined by wirings 53 and 54 in [0151] are interpreted to be voltage detection lines).
Tanabe fails to disclose an overlap region.
However, Nishihara’11 discloses a battery module including a plurality of battery cells and comprising an insulating substrate ([0008]), wherein the insulating substrate comprises a first and a second substrate ([0020]).
Nishihara’11 teaches overlapping at least a portion of the first and second substrates such that the substrates can occupy a smaller area of the battery module without reducing the size of or removing any corresponding lines and wires by allowing for lines and wires to be connected within the overlap space and thereby preventing shorts and abnormal heat generation (Fig. 7, [0020]-[0021], [0107]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe such that at least a least a portion of the at least one first substrate overlaps the second substrate in an overlap region in a thickness direction of the second substrate to comprise the plurality of wires, lines, and leads of the first and second substrates (for example: such that the plurality of second voltage detection lines are connected to the plurality of first voltage detection lines in the overlap region) in order to prevent shorts and abnormal heat generation by being able to avoid reducing the size and/or removing any corresponding lines and wires, as taught by Nishihara’11.
Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 fails to disclose that the plurality of first voltage detection lines are not lined up in the order of the potentials of the electrode terminals to which the plurality of first voltage detection lines are connected.
However, Nishihara discloses a battery system comprising a plurality of battery cells and a plurality of voltage detecting lines connecting an electrode terminal of each of the battery cells to the input side of the voltage detecting circuit (substrate) (Abstract).
Nishihara teaches a plurality of voltage detection lines that are not lined up in order of the potentials of the electrode terminals to which the plurality of voltage detections lines are connected to in order to equalize electrical resistance (Fig. 4, [0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 such that the plurality of first voltage detection lines are not lined up in the order of the potentials of the electrode terminals to which the plurality of first voltage detection lines are connected in order to equalize electrical resistance, as taught by Nishihara.
Regarding Claim 6, Tanabe in view of Nishara’11 and Nishihara teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1, and Tanabe discloses wherein the at least one first substrate 41 has a front surface and a back surface, and the first voltage detection lines 53 are formed only on the front surface 40a of the at least one first substrate 41, and the second substrate 43 has a front surface and a back surface, and the second voltage detection lines 54 are formed only on the front surface 40a of the second substrate 43 (i.e. the first wiring patterns 51, comprising voltage detection lines 53 and 54 are formed on the front surface 40a of the flexible substrate 40) ([0151]).
Regarding Claim 8, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1, and Tanabe discloses the wiring module being a wiring module for vehicles that is to be used installed in a vehicle ([0028]-[0035]).
(NOTE: Tanabe teaches in [0028] that a hybrid vehicle uses battery pack 400 and Tanabe also teaches in [0033] that the battery pack 400 comprises the battery cells 200 of the wiring module. Therefore, it is interpreted that since the hybrid vehicle comprises the battery pack comprising the wiring module, that the wiring module is a wiring module for vehicles).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe US PG Publication 2019/0198944 in view of Nishara’11 US PG Publication 2011/0024205 and Nishihara US PG Publication 2015/0137824, as applied to Claim 1, further in view of Sato WO2018163736 (machine translation provided in a previous office action - for purposes of examination, US PG Publication 2019/0386350 is referenced throughout).
Regarding Claim 2, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1.
Tanabe discloses a second wiring pattern 52 ([0084]-[0085]), but Tanabe in view of Nishihara fails to disclose a first conduction path and a second conduction path.
However, Sato discloses a circuit of an in-vehicle battery (Abstract) comprising voltage detection (i.e. signal) lines 12 ([0024], [0028]). Sato teaches a first conduction path 11 that is different from the first signal lines 12 ([0024]-[0025]) connected to a first substrate (i.e. circuit 90) ([0024]) that is connected to a temperature sensor 14 via the monitoring circuit unit 20 for measuring battery temperature ([0030], [0034]) and a second conduction path 31 that is different from the second signal lines 12 ([0035]) and that is electrically connected to the first conduction path 11 and connected to a second substrate (i.e. circuit 30) wherein the second conduction path is disposed near the lowest potential signal line 12A (Fig. 1, [0028], [0034]-[0035]) such that the system may supply power from the in-vehicle battery to the first substrate ([0034]) and also consume power that is output from the in-vehicle battery ([0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara such that the second wiring pattern comprises a first conduction path that is different from the first voltage detection lines is formed on the at least one first substrate and connected to a temperature measurement sensor that detects the temperature of the battery and a second conduction path that is different from the second voltage detection lines and that is electrically connected to the first conduction path is formed on the second substrate in the overlap region; and the second conduction path is configured to be electrically connected to the external device (monitoring unit) in the connection end portion (wherein the second substrate is connected to the external device) such that the second conduction path is disposed near the second voltage detection line having the lowest potential in order to both supply and consume power for the in-vehicle battery, as taught by Sato.
Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Sato fails to discloses that the first conduction path is not lined up in the order of potential.
However, Nishihara teaches a plurality of conductive lines that are not lined up in order of the potentials of the electrode terminals to realize the plurality of voltage detection lines in order to equalize electrical resistance (Fig. 4, [0039]-[0046]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Sato such that the first conduction path is not lined up in the order of potential in order to equalize electrical resistance, as taught by Nishihara.
Regarding Claim 3, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Sato teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1, and (as previously described in the rejection of Claim 2 above) Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Sato discloses wherein a temperature measurement sensor that detects the temperature of the power storage devices is connected to the first conduction path and the second conduction path is disposed near the second voltage detection line having the lowest potential out of the plurality of second voltage detection lines (Sato Fig. 1, [0030]-[0035]).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe US PG Publication 2019/0198944 in view of Nishihara’11 US PG Publication 2011/0024205 and Nishihara US PG Publication 2015/0137824, as applied to Claim 1, further in view of Yuji CN106663567 (machine translation provided in a previous office action).
Regarding Claims 4-5, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1.
Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara fails to disclose wherein the first and second substrates are electrically connected via solder and wherein the solder is covered by a sealing portion that contains an insulative synthetic resin.
However, Yuji discloses a circuit pattern comprising an electronic component ([0014]).
Yuji teaches electrically connecting the substrates within the circuit pattern via soldering ([0036]) and covering the solder by a sealing portion that contains an insulative synthetic resin (i.e. second resin material 25 is capable or preventing melting) ([0080]-[0082]) in order to seal the internal space without impeding function of the sealed elements ([0086]).
(NOTE: Yuji discloses wherein the substrates are soldered, the substrates are covered by the protection element 10, and the protection element 10 is covered by the second resin material 25, and therefore, Yuji discloses wherein the soldered substrates are covered by the second resin material [0036], [0080]-[0082], [0086]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara such that the at least one first substrate and second substrate are electrically connected via solder and the solder is covered by a sealing portion that contains an insulative synthetic resin in order to seal the internal space without impeding function of the sealed elements, as taught by Yuji.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe US PG Publication 2019/0198944 in view of Nishihara’11 US PG Publication 2011/0024205 and Nishihara US PG Publication 2015/0137824, as applied to Claim 1, further in view of Kim US PG Publication 2019/0181508.
Regarding Claim 7, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1.
While Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara discloses an overlap region of the at least one first and second substrates (see the rejection of Claim 1 above, Nishihara’11 [0020]-[0021], [0107]) and Tanabe discloses a region of the first substrate the is different from the overlap region (i.e. wherein the flexible substrate 43 is smaller than the flexible substrate 41) ([0080]), Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara fails to disclose wherein the first and second substrates are disposed on an insulative protector.
However, Kim discloses a battery pack comprising a wiring substrate (Abstract). Kim teaches an insulating film connected to wiring substrates in order to bury any conductive wires and thereby insulate electrical signal transmitted through the conductive wire from the outside ([0050]). Kim also teaches the substrates may comprise latching portion holes ([0008]-[0009], [0059]) that are used to fix the location of the substrates in a specific direction when a latching protrusion of a frame fills the hole shape ([0058]-[0059]) and that the substrate may further comprise an additional elongated hole having an elongated width along a specific direction to allow a positional movement of the latching protrusion ([0072]) in order for the battery to be able to respond to swelling ([0074]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara such that the at least one first and second substrates are disposed on an insulative protector comprised of a film and a frame to insulate electrical signals transmitted from outside the system; and for a first reference hole and a second reference hole that respectively penetrate the first substrate and the second substrate are provided in an overlap region in which the first and second substrates overlap, for the wiring module to further comprise an elongated hole that has an elongated shape in an extension direction in which the first substrate extends is provided in a region that is different from the overlap region, and that the protector has a reference protrusion that is inserted into the first and second reference holes and that holds the first and second substrates in a locked position in at least one direction and a holding protrusion that is inserted into the elongated hole and that holds the first substrate so as to be moveable in the extension direction in order for the system to respond effectively to swelling, as taught by Kim.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe US PG Publication 2019/0198944 in view of Nishihara’11 US PG Publication 2011/0024205 and Nishihara US PG Publication 2015/0137824, as applied to Claim 1, further in view of Suga US PG Publication 2014/0023897.
Regarding Claim 9, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara teaches the instantly claimed wiring module of Claim 1.
Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara fails to disclose voltage detection lands.
However, Suga discloses a battery module including a plurality of battery cells and a circuit board comprising electrode terminals (Abstract, [0009], entire disclosure dependent upon).
Suga teaches the use of a land on a surface of each of the circuit boards that is connected to voltage detecting wiring for detecting a voltage of a battery cell ([0009], [0016], [0070], [0141], [0144]), wherein the lands are connected to the electrode terminals via the circuit board ([0011]), and wherein a plurality of wirings can be connected to each other via the lands ([0073]) - such that the plurality of wirings and lands can both be formed on the same circuit board, and therefore, an assembling performance is excellent, productivity can be improved, and the voltage detecting function can be accurate ([0102], [0141]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the wiring module of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11 and Nishihara such that a plurality of first voltage detection lands are further provided on a surface of the at least one first substrate and the plurality of first voltage detection lines electrically connect between the electrode terminals and the plurality of first voltage detection lands and a plurality of second voltage detection lands are further provided on the second substrate, and the plurality of second voltage detection lines are connected to the plurality of first voltage detection lines via the plurality of second voltage detection lands and the plurality of first voltage detection lands such that the plurality of wirings and lands can both be formed on the same circuit board, and therefore, an assembling performance is excellent, productivity can be improved, and the voltage detecting function can be accurate, as taught by Suga.
While Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Suga does not explicitly disclose wherein the second voltage detection lands and the first voltage detection lands are in the overlap region, Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Suga does disclose wherein the wirings corresponding to the first and second voltage detection lines are in the overlap region (see the rejection of Claim 1 above, Nishihara’11 [0020]-[0021], [0107]), wherein the voltage detection lands connect to their corresponding voltage detection line on the surface of their corresponding substrate (Suga ([0009], [0011], [0016], [0070], [0073], [0141], [0144]), and wherein at least a portion of the first and second substrates are disposed in the overlap region (see the rejection of Claim 1 above, Nishihara’11 [0020]-[0021], [0107]). Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that the voltage detection lands of Tanabe in view of Nishihara’11, Nishihara, and Suga are in the overlap region.
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 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 of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVIA MASON RUGGIERO whose telephone number is (703)756-4652. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7am-6pm 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached on (571)272-1481. 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.
/O.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights