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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/18/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 2, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10 are canceled.
Claim 1 has been amended; support for the amendment can be found in Fig. 1.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8 and 11 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Kubota’737 is now relied on to teach the amended limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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, 3, 5, 8 and 11 are 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the bottom" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 3, 5, 8 and 11 are rejected for dependence on claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the protruded part that extends below the bottom of the one of the end plates" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The examiner notes that the previous recitation of a protruded part is one that “protrudes from a bottom surface of the one of the end plates”. “Protrudes from” and “extends below” do not have the same meaning. For examination, this limitation is interpreted as "the protruded part, wherein the protruded part extends below a bottom of the one of the end plates". Claims 3, 5, 8 and 11 are rejected for dependence on claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 3, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20180047383A, previously cited, US20180366794A1 used as translation) in view of Kubota (US 20210218082 A1, cited in IDS filed 06/13/2023) and Kubota’737 (US 20160141737 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a battery pack (Fig. 4; elements 300, 401) comprising:
a battery module frame (Fig. 3; element 302; annotated Fig. 4; elements FEP and REP) accommodating a battery cell laminated body (Fig. 3; element 301) therein, the battery module frame (302, FEP, REP) including front and rear end plates (annotated Fig. 4; elements FEP and REP) that cover respective front (annotated Fig. 4; FS) and rear (annotated Fig. 4; RS) surfaces of the battery cell laminated body (301),
the battery module frame (302, REP, FEP) having upper (annotated Fig. 4; US), lower (annotated Fig. 4; BS), left (annotated Fig. 4; LS), and right surfaces (annotated Fig. 4; RS) that together extend completely around (Fig. 4) the battery cell laminated body (301) and that each extend between (Fig. 4) and contact (Fig. 4) the front (FEP) and rear end plates (REP);
a battery pack frame (Fig. 4; element 401) to which the battery module frame (302, FEP, REP) is mounted (Fig. 4), and
a first side of the battery pack frame (Fig. 4; element 401) facing the battery module frame (302) is flat (Fig. 4),
wherein the battery pack frame (401) has a coupling hole (Fig. 5; holes of 401; “CH”) underlying the end plates (REP and FEP).
PNG
media_image1.png
530
672
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim fails to disclose the lower surface of the battery module frame facing and spaced apart from the battery pack frame; a thermal conductive resin layer positioned outside of the battery module frame between the lower surface of the battery module frame and the battery pack frame,
wherein one of the end plates includes a protruded part having a shape extending below the lower surface of the battery module frame, the protruded part being a part that protrudes from a bottom surface of the one of the end plates toward the battery pack frame and that contacts the battery pack frame, the one of the end plates and the protruded part thereof being a single unitary structure,
wherein the battery pack frame has a coupling hole underlying the protruded part, and
wherein a thickness of the thermal conductive resin layer is the same as a thickness of the protruded part that extends below the bottom of the one of the end plates.
Kubota discloses a battery pack (Fig. 1; element 100) comprising:
a battery module frame (Fig. 1; element 30, 70; Fig. 2; element 20e); and
a battery pack frame (Fig. 5; element 60) to which the battery module frame (20e, 30, 70) is mounted (Fig. 1; element 80 and 61), the battery module frame (20e, 30, 70) including front (Fig. 5; left element 30) and rear end plates (Fig. 5; right element 30), a lower surface (annotated Fig. 5; element L) of the battery module frame (20e, 30, 70) facing (Fig. 5) and spaced apart (Fig. 5) from the battery pack frame (60); a thermal conductive resin layer (Fig. 5; 50; “acrylic”; [0041]) positioned outside (Fig. 5) of the battery module frame (20e, 30, 70) between the lower surface (L) of the battery module frame (20e, 30, 70) and the battery pack frame (60),
wherein one (Fig. 5; either one of elements 30) of the end plates (30) includes a protruded part (annotated Fig. 5; element P) having a shape (annotated Fig. 5; shape of P) extending below the lower surface (L) of the battery module frame (20e, 30, 70) toward the battery pack frame (60) and contacting (Fig. 5) the battery pack frame (60), the one of the end plates (one of 30) and the protruded part (P) being a single unitary structure (Fig. 5)
wherein a thickness (Fig. 5; G) of the thermal conductive layer (Fig. 5; element 50) is the same (Fig. 5) as a thickness (annotated Fig. 5; height of P) of the protruded part (P) that extends below the bottom (B) of the one (one of 30) of the end plates (30).
PNG
media_image2.png
565
842
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Kim by adding the protruded part and thermal conductive resin layer of Kubota to Kim such that the lower surface of the battery module frame is facing and spaced apart from the battery pack frame, a thermal conductive layer is positioned outside of the battery module frame between the lower surface of the battery module frame and the battery pack frame, the end plates include a protruded part having a shape extending below the lower surface of the battery module frame, the protruded part being a part that protrudes toward the battery pack frame and contacting the battery pack frame, the end plates and the protruded part being a single unitary structure and a thickness of the thermal conductive resin layer is the same as a thickness of the protruded part. By performing this modification one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect to cool the battery cell laminated body in a predictable manner by compressing the thermal conductive layer and bringing the entire surface of the lower surface of the battery module pack into contact with the thermal conductive layer as taught by Kubota ([0041]).
The examiner notes that this modification would naturally result in the coupling hole of Kim in view of Kubota underlying the protruded part.
Kim in view of Kubota fails to disclose “the protruded part being a part that protrudes from a bottom surface of the one of the end plates”.
Kubota’737 discloses wherein end plates (Fig. 2 and 6; 170) include protruded parts (Fig. 3; 173) having a shape (Fig. 3; shape of 173) extending below ([0142]) a lower surface (Fig. 21; 109b) of a battery module (Fig. 21; 101), the protruded parts (173) being a part (Fig. 6; 177b) that protrudes from a bottom surface (Fig. 6; 171c) of the end plates (170) toward a battery pack frame (Fig. 21; 191) and that contacts (Fig. 21; 160 is representative of 170 per [0142], 163 contacts 191) the battery pack frame (191), the end plates (170) and the protruded parts (173) thereof being a single unitary structure (Fig. 6),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Kim in view of Kubota by changing the shape of the protruded part of Kim in view of Kubota such that protruded parts protrude from a bottom surface of the one of the end plates toward the battery pack frame as taught by Kubota’737. In doing so, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect to facilitate the control of the compression ratio of the thermal conductive resin layer as taught by Kubota’737 ([0148]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 discloses wherein the protruded part (173) and the coupling hole (Kim CH) are coupled to each other via a mounting member (Kim Fig. 4; element 501).
Regarding claim 11, Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 fails to disclose a device comprising the battery pack of claim 1.
Kim discloses a device ([0008]) comprising a battery pack (“battery”; [0008]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 by adding the battery pack of Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 to the device of Kim such that the device comprised the battery pack of claim 1. In doing so, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been combining familiar elements to achieve predictable results.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20180047383A, previously cited, US20180366794A1 used as translation) in view of Kubota (US 20210218082 A1, cited in IDS filed 06/13/2023) and Kubota’737 (US 20160141737 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Cao (CN-208923207-U, machine translation used for rejection below, cited 08/28/2024).
PNG
media_image1.png
530
672
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
634
456
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 discloses wherein the protruded part (173) is a first protruded part (Kubota’737 Fig. 3; left 173), the battery module frame (FEP, REP, 302) having a second protruded part (Kubota’737 Fig. 3; right 173) extending from the lower surface (BS) of the battery module frame (302, REP, FEP) toward the battery pack frame (401), each of the end plates (REP, FEP) having a through-hole (annotated Fig. 5; TH) extending therethrough, the first and second protruded parts (173) being located at opposite ends (Kubota’737 Fig. 3; right and left end of 170) of the one (annotated Fig. 4; either of REP or FEP) of the end plates (REP, FEP), and a mounting member (Fig. 4; one of the screws) is inserted through the coupling hole (CH) and one of the through-holes (TH).
Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 fails to explicitly disclose the through holes extending through the protruded parts.
Cao discloses a battery pack (Fig. 1) comprising:
a battery module frame (Fig. 3; 21) comprising a protruded part (Fig. 3; 212, 22, where 22 is integrally formed with 212 per [0012] and [0050]), wherein the protruded part (212, 22) is a first protruded part (Fig. 3; left 212, 22), the battery module frame (21) having a second protruded part (Fig. 3; right 212, 22) extending from the lower surface (annotated Fig. 3; LS) of the battery module frame (21), each of the protruded parts (212, 22) having a through-hole (Fig. 3; 211, 221) extending therethrough (Fig. 3), the first (left 212, 22) and second (right 212, 22) protruded parts being located at opposite ends (annotated Fig. 3; OE) of one end plate (Fig. 1; 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
614
604
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 by placing the throughholes in and extending through the protruded parts as taught by Cao. In doing so one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected to fix the end plates as taught by Cao ([0050]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 fail to disclose wherein the battery module frame further includes an insulating member attached to an end of the protruded part.
Cao discloses a battery pack (Fig. 1) comprising:
a battery module frame (Fig. 3; 21) comprising a protruded part (Fig. 3; 212) and an insulating member (Fig. 3; 22) attached to an end (Fig. 3; bottom surface of 212) of the protruded part (212).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 by substituting the protruded part of Kim in view of Kubota and Kubota’737 for the protruded part and insulating member of Cao such that the battery module frame had an insulating member attached to an end of the protruded part. In doing so one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected to prevent a temperature difference between the battery cells from being too large, which affects the performance of the battery cell as taught by Cao ([006]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRACE A KENLAW whose telephone number is (571)272-1253. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-6:00 PM.
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, Tiffany Legette-Thompson can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/G.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights