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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-4, 9, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18 and 20 have been amended; support for the amendment can be found in original claims 1-5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18 and 20.
Claim 21 is newly added; support for this claim can be found in [0073] of the original specification.
Claims 1-4 and 9-21 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hosada fails to disclose the limitation “along the height direction of the connection assembly, the weakened portion of the first insulating film and the weakened portion of the second insulating film are arranged in a staggered manner” because the first slit and the second slit of Hosada are on the same plane (pg. 8, para. 2), the direction considered by the examiner as the height direction is actually the width direction (pg. 8, para. 2) and the first slit and the second slit are at the same height (pg. 8, para. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
231
291
media_image1.png
Greyscale
These arguments are not persuasive because the “height direction” of the instant claims is a relative direction requiring only a direction extending from the base to the top of something (Height - Wiktionary, The free dictionary. Wiktionary. (n.d.). https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Height). In the annotated Fig. 6 of Hosada, 2IF may be considered the base and 1IF may be considered the top of Hosada’s connection assembly.
Therefore, Hosada’s film may be interpreted as possessing along a height direction (annotated Fig. 6; Y), weakened portions (Fig. 6; 5, 6) arranged in a staggered manner (5 and 6 do not overlap in the Y direction). Further, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., weakened portions on different planes, pg. 8, para. 2) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 11, 15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhou (CN 207149613 U, machine translation used for rejection below).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou discloses a connection assembly (Fig. 4; element 100) for a battery module (Fig. 3; elements 200), wherein the connection assembly (100) comprises:
a connecting sheet (Fig. 4; 10), the connecting sheet (10) electrically connects battery cells (Fig. 3; 200) constituting the battery module (200); and an insulating film (Fig. 4; 20), a plurality of the connecting sheets (Fig. 4; 10) are mounted onto the insulating film (20), and are insulated (Fig. 4) from each other;
wherein the insulating film (20) is provided with a weakened portion (annotated Fig. 4; W1 and W2) and when the insulating film (20) is subjected to external force greater than a specified value, the insulating film (20) is deformed (“elastic deformation portion”; [0056]) at a position of the weakened portion (W1, W2),
wherein the insulating film (Fig. 4; 20) comprises a first insulating film (annotated Fig. 4; 1IF) and a second insulating film (annotated Fig. 4; 2IF); along a height direction (annotated Fig. 4; Y) of the connection assembly (100), at least part (Fig. 4; 10) of the connecting sheet (10) is located between (Fig. 4) the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF); and
the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF) each are provided with the weakened portion (W1, W2), and along the height direction (Y) of the connection assembly (100), the weakened portion (annotated Fig. 4; W1) of the first insulating film (1IF) is arranged corresponding to (W1 is similar to W2 in shape and location) the weakened portion (annotated Fig. 2; W2) of the second insulating film (2IF),
PNG
media_image2.png
499
383
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein along the height direction (Y) of the connection assembly (100), the weakened portion (W1) of the first insulating film (1IF) and the weakened portion (W2) of the second insulating film (2IF) are arranged in a staggered manner (annotated Fig. 4 illustrates that W1 and W2 do not overlap in the Y direction).
Regarding claim 11, Zhou discloses wherein the weakened portion (W1, W2) of the first insulating film (1IF) is provided as a first through hole (Fig. 4; 22 of W1), and the weakened portion (W2) of the second insulating film (2IF) is provided as a second through hole (Fig. 4; 22 of W2).
Regarding claim 15, Zhou discloses wherein the first insulating film (1IF) is provided with a first via hole (Fig. 4; 23 in 1IF), and the second insulating film (2IF) is provided with a second via hole (Fig. 4; 23 in 2IF); and along the height direction (Y) of the connection assembly (100), a connecting portion (Fig. 4; 111-113) of the connecting sheet (10) is between the first via hole (23) and the second via hole (23).
Regarding claim 18, Zhou discloses a battery module (Fig. 3; 100, 200), wherein the battery module comprises: a battery cell (Fig. 3; 200), wherein the battery cell (200) comprises electrode leads (Fig. 3; 201); and a connection assembly (Fig. 3; 100), wherein the connection assembly (100) is the connection assembly (100) according to claim 1; a connecting portion (Fig. 4; 111-113) of the connecting sheet (10) is configured to connect ([0051]) the electrode leads (231) of the battery cell (200).
Regarding claim 19, Zhou discloses a battery pack (Fig. 3; 100-300), wherein the battery pack comprises a box body (Fig. 3; 300) and the battery module (100, 200) according to claim 18, and the battery module (200) is fastened (Fig. 3) in the box body (300).
PNG
media_image3.png
499
339
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 2, 4 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 207149613 U, machine translation used for rejection below) as applied to claim 1 and 11 above and further in view of Hosoda (JP H09205257 A, machine translation used for rejection below).
PNG
media_image4.png
504
298
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Zhou discloses wherein the weakened portion (W1, W2) comprises a first body portion (annotated Fig. 4; 22 of W1 and 22 of W2); and along an extension direction (annotated Fig. 4; X) of the first body portion (22 of W1 and W2), an end (annotated Fig. 4; 222 of W1 and W2) of the first body portion (22 of W1 and W2) but fails to disclose an arc portion and is connected to the first arc portion.
Hosoda discloses a connection assembly (“flexible printed wiring board”; [0001]) comprising a weakened portion (Fig. 2; element 6, 6a), the weakened portion comprising a first body portion (Fig. 2; element 6) and a first arc portion (Fig. 1; element 6a; “circular portion”; [0007];) and along an extension direction (annotated Fig. 2; Y) of the first body portion (6), an end (Fig. 2; end of 6 attached to 6a) of the first body portion (6) is connected to the first arc portion (6a).
PNG
media_image5.png
188
226
media_image5.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 Zhou by substituting the weakened portion of Hosada for the weakened portion of Zhou such that the weakened portion of Zhou in view of Hosada comprises a first body portion and a first arc portion; and along an extension direction of the first body portion, an end of the first body portion is connected to the first arc portion in order to prevent the tearing ([0007]) of the tip of the body portion and prevent the occurrence of excessive stress ([0010]) as Hosada teaches.
PNG
media_image6.png
251
231
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Zhou in view of Hosada discloses wherein the first arc portion (Hosada 6a) is a circular structure (Hosada Fig. 2; 6a) having an opening (Hosada Fig. 2; opening of 6a), and the first arc portion (6a) communicates with the first body portion (6) through the opening (Fig. 2; opening of 6a); and a diameter D (Fig. 2; diameter of 6a) of the first arc portion (6a) is greater than a width dimension a (Fig. 2; width of 6 in the X direction) of the first body portion (6).
PNG
media_image7.png
507
383
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Zhou discloses a width dimension, a (annotated Fig. 4; width of 222 of W1, in X direction), of the first through hole (22 of W1) and a width dimension, b (annotated Fig. 4; width of 222 of W2 in X direction), of the second through hole (22 of W2).
Zhou fails to disclose wherein a is smaller than b.
Hosoda discloses wherein a width dimension, a (annotated Fig. 2; width of 6 in the X direction), of a first through hole (Fig. 2; 6, 6a) is smaller than a width dimension b (annotated Fig. 2; diameter of 5a in the X direction) of a second through hole (Fig. 2; 5, 5a).
PNG
media_image8.png
268
231
media_image8.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 Zhou by substituting the first and second through hole of Hosoda for the first and second through hole of Zhou such that a width dimension, a, of the first through hole is smaller than a width dimension b of the second through hole in order to prevent the tearing ([0007]) of the tip of the body portion and prevent the occurrence of excessive stress ([0010]) as Hosoda teaches.
PNG
media_image8.png
268
231
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Zhou in view of Hosoda discloses wherein a length dimension L1 (Hosoda annotated Fig. 2; length of 6 in the Y direction) of the first through hole (Hosoda 6, 6a) is greater than a length dimension L2 (Hosoda annotated Fig. 2; length of 5a in the Y direction) of the second through hole (5, 5a).
Regarding claim 14, Zhou in view of Hosoda discloses wherein the length dimension L2 (Hosoda annotated Fig. 2; length of 5a in the Y direction) of the second through hole (5, 5a) and the length dimension L1 (Hosoda annotated Fig. 2; length of 6 in the Y direction) of the first through hole (6, 6a) satisfy (see Hosoda Fig. 2): L2 < L1-2*D, wherein D is the diameter (Hosoda Fig. 2; diameter of 6a) of the first arc portion (Hosoda Fig. 2; 6a).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 207149613 U, machine translation used for rejection below) in view of Hosoda (JP H09205257 A, machine translation used for rejection below) as applied to claim 2 above and further in view of Matsumoto (US 20150282295 A1, cited in IDS filed 04/20/2022).
Regarding claim 3, Zhou in view of Hosada discloses wherein a section (Hosoda Fig. 2; 6) of the first body portion (Hosoda 6) is rectangular (Hosoda Fig. 2; 6), the first arc portion (Hosoda 6a) is a circular arc structure (Hosoda Fig. 2; 6a), and the first arc portion (6a) is tangent (Fig. 2) to two side walls (Hosoda Fig. 2; two straight portions of 6) of the first body portion (6). Zhou in view of Hosoda fails to disclose wherein a diameter D of the first arc portion is equal to a width dimension a of the first body portion.
Matsumoto teaches a connection assembly (“elastic flexible substrate”; [0003]) with a weakened portion (Fig. 1; element (c)), the weakened portion (c) having a first body portion (annotated Fig. 1; 1BP) and a first arc portion (annotated Fig. 1; one of 1AP), wherein a section (annotated Fig. 1; 1BP) of the first body portion (1BP) is rectangular (Fig. 1; (c)), the first arc portion (1AP) is a circular arc structure (annotated Fig. 1; one of 1AP), and the first arc portion (1AP) is tangent (Fig. 1) to two side walls (annotated Fig. 1; long sides of 1BP) of the first body portion (1BP); and a diameter D (annotated Fig. 1; short side of 1BP) of the first arc portion (1AP) is equal to a width dimension, a, (annotated Fig. 1; short side of 1BP) of the first body portion (1BP).
PNG
media_image9.png
213
268
media_image9.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 Zhou in view of Hosoda by substituting the shape of Matsumoto’s weakened portion in place of the shape of Zhou in view of Hosoda’s weakened portion such that a diameter D of the first arc portion is equal to a width dimension a of the first body portion, as taught by Matsumoto. In doing so, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect to prevent the end portion of the weakened portion from splitting as taught by Matsumoto ([0054]).
Claims 16, 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 207149613 U, machine translation used for rejection below) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Xialiang (CN-109103405-A, machine translation used for rejection below).
Regarding claim 16, Zhou fails to disclose wherein the connection assembly further comprises a circuit board, the circuit board is configured to be electrically connected to the connecting sheet, and the insulating film connects the circuit board and the connecting sheet together.
Xialiang discloses a connection assembly (Fig. 1; 100) comprising a circuit board (Fig. 2; 102), the circuit board (102) is configured to be electrically connected ([0055]) to a connecting sheet (Fig. 2; 104), and an insulating film (Fig. 2; 101, 103, 105, 106) connects (Fig. 2) the circuit board (102) and the connecting sheet (104) together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Zhou by adding the circuit board of Xialiang to the connection assembly of Zhou such that the connection assembly further comprises a circuit board, the circuit board is configured to be electrically connected to the connecting sheet, and the insulating film connects the circuit board and the connecting sheet together in order to collect voltage and temperature information as taught by Xialiang ([0048]; [0055]).
Regarding claim 17, Zhou in view of Xialiang discloses wherein the weakened portion (W1, W2) is located between (Zhou Fig. 4) adjacent connecting sheets (Zhou Fig. 4; adjacent elements 10) of the plurality of connecting sheets (Zhou 10).
Regarding claim 21, Zhou in view of Xialiang discloses wherein the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF) are configured to insulate (Zhou [0052]) between (Xialiang Fig. 2) the circuit board (Xialiang 102) and the battery cells (Zhou 200).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 207149613 U, machine translation used for rejection below) as applied to claim 18.
Regarding claim 20, Zhou discloses a device (“personalized electronic products”; [005]), using a battery cell (“rechargeable batter[y]”; [005]) as a power supply ([005]), wherein the device comprises: a power source (“battery module”; [005]), the power source ([005]) is configured to provide driving force (“voltage”; [005]) for the device ([005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Zhou by adding the device taught by Zhou to Zhou’s battery module of claim 18 such that the device, uses a battery cell as a power supply, the device comprises: a power source, the power source is configured to provide driving force for the device; and the battery module according to claim 18 is configured to provide electrical energy for the power source. In doing so, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect to supply electricity to the device as taught by Zhou ([005]).
Claims 1, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 207149613 U, machine translation used for rejection below) in view of Hosoda (JP H09205257 A, machine translation used for rejection below).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou discloses a connection assembly (Fig. 4; element 100) for a battery module (Fig. 3; element 200), wherein the connection assembly (100) comprises:
a connecting sheet (Fig. 4; 10), the connecting sheet (10) electrically connects battery cells (Fig. 3; 200) constituting the battery module (200); and an insulating film (Fig. 4; 20), a plurality of the connecting sheets (Fig. 4; 10) are mounted onto the insulating film (20), and are insulated (Fig. 4) from each other; wherein the insulating film (20) is provided with a weakened portion (Fig. 4; 22) and when the insulating film (20) is subjected to external force greater than a specified value, the insulating film (20) is deformed (“elastic deformation portion”; [0056]) at a position of the weakened portion (22),
wherein the insulating film (Fig. 4; 20) comprises a first insulating film (annotated Fig. 4; 1IF) and a second insulating film (annotated Fig. 4; 2IF); along a height direction (annotated Fig. 4; Y) of the connection assembly (100), at least part (Fig. 4; 10) of the connecting sheet (10) is located between (Fig. 4) the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF); and
the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF) each are provided with the weakened portion (22), and along the height direction (Y) of the connection assembly (100), the weakened portion (22) of the first insulating film (1IF) is arranged corresponding (22 of 1IF is similar in shape and position to 22 of 2IF) to the weakened portion (22) of the second insulating film (2IF).
PNG
media_image10.png
710
604
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Zhou fails to disclose wherein along the height direction of the connection assembly, the weakened portion of the first insulating film and the weakened portion of the second insulating film are arranged in a staggered manner.
Hosoda discloses a connection assembly (“flexible printed wiring board”; [0001]) comprising a film (“rigid substrate”; [0009]; Fig. 6; element 1), wherein the film is provided with a weakened portion (Fig. 6; element 5, 6), wherein the insulating film (1) comprises a first insulating film (annotated Fig. 6; 1IF) and a second insulating film (annotated Fig. 6; 2IF), the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF) each are provided with the weakened portion (5, 6), and along a height direction (annotated Fig. 6; Y) of the connection assembly ([0001]), the weakened portion (Fig. 6; 6) of the first insulating film (1IF) is arranged corresponding (Fig. 6; 6 is similar to 5 in shape) to the weakened portion (Fig. 6; 5) of the second insulating film (2IF); wherein along the height direction (Y) of the connection assembly ([0001]), the weakened portion (6) of the first insulating film (1IF) and the weakened portion of the second insulating film (2IF) are arranged in a staggered manner (Fig. 6; 5 and 6 do not
PNG
media_image11.png
231
291
media_image11.png
Greyscale
overlap in the Y direction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Zhou by substituting Hosoda’s weakened portions for Zhou’s weakened portions such that along the height direction of the connection assembly, the weakened portion of the first insulating film and the weakened portion of the second insulating film are arranged in a staggered manner. In doing so, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect to prevent the occurrence of excessive stress as taught by Hosoda ([0009]).
Regarding claim 9, Zhou in view of Hosada fails to disclose wherein a minimum distance between the weakened portion of the first insulating film and the weakened portion of the second insulating film is t, and 0 < t ≤ 0.5 mm.
However, it is the examiner’s position that employing a minimum distance between the weakened portion of the first insulating film and the weakened portion of the second insulating film of greater than 0 and less than or equal to 0.5 mm would not result in a different performance from the performance of the device of Zhou in view of Hosada as such a modification would still be expected to prevent the occurrence of excessive stress as taught by Hosada ([0009]). Therefore Zhou in view of Hosada renders the instant claim obvious as the courts have held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Regarding claim 10, Zhou in view of Hosada discloses wherein along the height direction (Y), the first insulating film (1IF) and the second insulating film (2IF) overlap together (Zhou Fig. 4; overlap of top 20 and bottom 20 with staggered weakened portions of Hosada Fig. 6), and an overlapping part (Hosada annotated Fig. 6; element OP) of the two is between the weakened portion (Hosada 6) of the first insulating film (1IF) and the weakened portion (Hosada 5) of the second insulating film (2IF).
PNG
media_image12.png
163
158
media_image12.png
Greyscale
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 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