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
Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-3, 5-6, and 9-11 are as previously presented. Claim 12 is newly added. Claims 1-3, 5-6, and 9-12 are presently examined.
Status of objections and rejections
The rejection below has been modified as necessitated by the applicant’s amendments.
Examiner’s Interpretation
The examiner notes that in newly presented claim 12 applicant claims the “cooling pad” is a “tube”. One of ordinary skill would acknowledge that a “pad” and a “tube” are two separate materials. However, in view of the instant specification (page 15 line 21) and in view of the applicant’s ability to be their own lexicographer, see MPEP 2173.01. The examiner will consider a “cooling pad” may be a “tube” as described in the instant specification.
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) 1-3, 5-6, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagayama (JP2006073368A) and in view of Zhao (WO2018059143A1) and Minamitani (US20160248052A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nagayama discloses a battery module comprising: a tray having a battery cell receiving portion formed therein ([0011], fig. 1-4 (44, concave part is a receiving portion)),
The examiner notes that the “sheet-shaped battery” disclosed by Nagayama is equivalent to a tray as the battery elements within are sealed with a flexible exterior. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to have the battery module in a case as seen in fig. 9-10 (50), it’s common for electric vehicles to incorporate a tray for their battery modules to reside in);
Nagayama continues to disclose a first cell assembly being accommodated in the battery cell receiving portion of the tray (fig. 5-6, a first tray (10a), has a gap (46) that comprises a concave (44) and a convex portion (42) in between the assembled batteries. The gap (46) may be a small gap (fig. 5) or a larger gap (fig. 6) possessing an air gap (S1, S2)), the first cell assembly being a plurality of battery cells electrically connected to each other and arranged on a single layer (fig. 4, [0028]); and a second cell assembly being accommodated in the battery cell receiving portion of the tray (fig. 5-6, a second tray (10b) where the battery cells fits in the gaps of the first battery pack), the second cell assembly being a plurality of battery cells electrically connected to each other and arranged on a single layer (fig. 4, [0028, 0055, 0068]), wherein each battery cell includes a cell body [0017], first and second electrode leads protruding in opposite directions from the cell body (fig. 2 (25, positive electrode terminal and 27, negative electrode terminal)), and first and second terraces in regions where the first and second electrode leads are connected to the cell body (fig. 3-4, the receiving portion (44) is formed by connecting the first (25) and second (27) electrode leads), respectively, wherein a plurality of first receiving grooves [0059, fig. 4 (44)], which are defined by a space where the first electrode lead and the second electrode lead of adjacent battery cells of the first cell assembly [0059, fig. 4 (44)], are provided on one surface of the first cell assembly (fig. 4), wherein the cell body of each battery cell of the second cell assembly is accommodated in a corresponding one of the first receiving grooves of the first cell assembly (fig. 5-8), and the cell body of each battery cell included in each of the first and second cell assemblies is arranged on a same layer (fig. 5-8), and wherein an insulating pad are arranged between the first and second cell assemblies ([0070], fig. 8 (60), a heat radiating plate made of an insulating material or a materials whose surface is insulated is placed in between the first and second battery assembly).
Nagayama additionally discloses gaps in between the battery cells arranged between the first and second cell assemblies ([0064, 0074], fig. 6 (46, S1, and S2)), the gaps formed in this embodiment allow for a cooling medium, such as cooling gas, to be present in between the interlocking cells to cool them down.
Finally, Nagayama teaches of a first side of each battery cell convexly protruding from the first and second terraces [0059-0064, fig. 2 and 4, Nagayama], and a second side of each battery cell has a flat structure (fig. 5-6, Nagayama).
PNG
media_image1.png
524
480
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2, Nagayama
However, Nagayama is silent to:
1) the use of a plurality of cooling pads and a plurality of insulating pads (as shown in Fig. 8 Nagayama suggests the concept of an insulating pad (60) but not explicitly a plurality thereof).
2) the insulating pads and the cooling pads being located within the receiving grooves in the first and second cell assembly.
3) the insulating pad being arranged on a region contacting the first and second terraces of the battery cells or the first and second terraces and the first and second electrode leads.
4) an area of each of the first and second terrace is 5-20 times of an exposed area of the electrode lead.
5) the flat surface of the second surface being coplanar with the outermost surface of the first and second terrace.
In regards to 1), 2), and 3), Zhao discloses a battery module which may be arranged in series or parallel depending on the design [abstract, 0036, Zhao], wherein each battery cell unit includes a single battery cell, a heat-conducting sheet (12, “cooling pad”) and a heat-insulating sheet (13, “insulating pad”) [abstract, 0006, 0018, 0046, Zhao]. As such, there exists a plurality of battery cells and a plurality of “cooling pads” and “insulating pads” [0006-0008, 0046, Zhao, fig. 4a, Zhao]. Furthermore, Zhao teaches that each heat-conducting sheet (“cooling pad”) should be located on one side of the single battery cell to conduct heat away from the battery cell [0006, 0019, Zhao]. Additionally, Zhao teaches of a heat-insulating sheet (“insulating pad”) should be located on the other side of the heat-conducting sheet to prevent heat transfer between batteries of adjacent battery cell units [0006, 0019, Zhao]. Zhao notes that the heat-insulating sheet (“insulating pad”) may be fixed to at least one tab end (“electrode lead”, instant application; “electrode terminal”, Nagayama) of a unit cell [0009, Zhao].
Prior to the effective filing date, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the arts to modify Nagayama such that a heat-conducting sheet (“cooling pad”) was placed directly in contact with one side of the cell body of each single battery cell along with a heat-insulating sheet (“insulating pad”) on the other side of the heat-conducting sheet. Doing so would allow for the “cooling pad” to conduct heat away from the battery cell while the “insulating pad” prevents heat from being transferred to adjacent battery cells [0006, 0019, Zhao].
For clarity of the record the examiner has modified and annotated fig. 5 of Nagayama to clarify the statement written above. The examiner notes that “adjacent battery cells” may read on those horizontally as depicted in figure 5 or vertically as depicted in figure 7 [fig. 5, 7, Nagayama].
PNG
media_image2.png
243
648
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 5 of Nagayama clarifying the location of each of the plurality of cooling and insulating pads within the first and second cell assembly.
The examiner notes, that in the present modification the limitation of “wherein the insulating pad and the cooling pad are disposed on each of the first receiving grooves and second receiving grooves” is met. Additionally, each insulating and cooling pad is located between the first and second cell assembly as each insulating pad is located within either the first or second cell assembly. Furthermore, because the first and second cell assemblies are fixed atop one another, the cell assemblies “sandwich” the insulating pad. Additionally, each cooling pad is arranged on a region contacting one of the cell bodies of the battery cells included in the first and second cell assemblies.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Nagayama such that each “insulating pad” was connected to the first and second electrode leads, and by extension contacting the first and second terrace. Doing so provides one with a method to fix the “insulating pad” to the cell unit [0009, Zhao].
For clarity of the record, the examiner has produced an annotated figure 2 [Nagayama].
PNG
media_image3.png
301
675
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 2 of Nagayama depicting the insulating pad connecting to the electrode leads.
In an effort to expedite prosecution, the examiner notes that as long as the main functions of the cooling pad and insulating pad are met their size and/or proportion of the two pads may be whatever the manufacturer requires for their battery module, see MPEP 2144.04.IV.A.
In regards to 4) the examiner notes the relative size of the exposed area of the first and second electrode lead in relation to an area of the first and second terrace is a matter of change in size and proportion.
“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.”, see MPEP 2144.04.IV.A.
Additionally, the claim limitations of “an area of the first and second terrace” and “an exposed area of the first electrode lead and second electrode lead” have significant breath. Without further specification of what “an area” is defined as, one could choose any arbitrary area(s) to read on the claim limitation.
While Nagayama does not disclose relative dimensions, the terrace’s and electrode leads of the instant device and Nagayama’s device function the same. As such, one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Nagayama such that an area of each one of the first and second terraces is 5 to 20 times of an exposed area to the first and second electrode lead as this would provide one with the ability to connect batteries in a series via the exposed electrode leads. However, the unexposed portion is protected from outside elements.
In regards to 5) Minamitani discloses a sheet-type battery comprised of a plurality of battery cells [0054, fig. 1-2, Minamitani]. Wherein a first surface of the battery cell protrudes convexly outward from the first and second terraces and the second surface is flat and coplanar with the outermost surface of the first and second terrace [fig. 2, Minamitani].
PNG
media_image4.png
446
708
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2, Minamitani
Prior to the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Nagayama such that the flat second surface was coplanar with the outermost surface of the first and second terrace. Doing so would be a matter of mere change in shape, barring any criticality, see MPEP 2144.04.IV.B.
Regarding claim 2, Nagayama as modified above, discloses the battery module, wherein a plurality of second receiving grooves (fig. 5-6 (10b, 42), Nagayama), which are defined by a space where first electrode leads and second electrode leads of adjacent battery cells of the second cell assembly (fig. 4, (25, 27, 44), Nagayama), are provided on one surface of the second cell assembly (fig. 3-4, (10), Nagayama), and wherein the cell body of each battery cell of the first cell assembly is accommodated in a corresponding one of the second receiving grooves of the second cell assembly (fig. 5-6, Nagayama).
Regarding claim 3, Nagayama as modified above, discloses the battery module, wherein a length of a region where the first and second electrode leads protrude from the cell body is greater than a length of a region where the first and second electrode leads do not protrude from the cell body (fig. 6 (42, 46) [0064], Nagayama discloses that the electrode terminals (25, 27) and the battery element (21) can be adjusted so that the gap area (46) is larger than the convex portion (42) of the batter element. As such, the prior art teaches an embodiment where the first and second electrode leads are larger than the length of the leads that do not protrude from the cell battery.).
Regarding claim 5, Nagayama as modified above, discloses the battery module, wherein the battery module includes m first cell assemblies which are arranged on a same layer and n second cell assemblies arranged on a same layer (fig. 3-8, Nagayama show at least three cells followed by “…” to indicate the series of battery cells can continue. Therefore, the first cell assembly contains an integer m number of cells and the second assembly contains an integer n number of cells), wherein m is an integer of 2 or more [0007-0008, fig. 3-8, Nagayama], wherein n is an integer of 2 or more [0007-0008, fig. 3-8, Nagayama], wherein a first receiving groove of a j -th first cell assembly and a first receiving groove of a (j+1)-th first cell assembly are arranged on a same axis (fig. 3-8, Nagayama shows the arrangement of cells can be seen along the same axis so that the j and j+1 receiving groove are on a same axis), and wherein j is an integer which is equal to or greater than 1 and is equal to or less than (n-1) (fig. 5-6, Nagayama shows two cell assemblies with a minimum of 3 cells so that m and n = 3. As such the number of receiving grooves, or j, is equal to 2. Therefore, the limitation of 1≤j≤n-1 is met).
Regarding claim 6, Nagayama as modified above, discloses the battery module, wherein the battery module includes n second cell assemblies arranged on a same layer and m first cell assemblies arranged on a same layer, wherein n is an integer of 2 or more [0007-0008, fig. 3-8, Nagayama], wherein m is an integer of 2 or more [0007-0008, fig. 3-8, Nagayama], wherein a second receiving groove of a k-th second cell assembly and a second receiving groove of a (k+1)-th second cell assembly are arranged on a same axis fig. 3-8, the arrangement of cells can be seen along the same axis so that the k and k+1 receiving groove are on a same axis, and wherein k is an integer which is equal to or greater than 1 and is equal to or less than (m-I) (fig. 5-6, Nagayama show two cell assemblies with a minimum of 3 cells so that m and n = 3. As such the number of receiving grooves, or k, is equal to 2. Therefore, the limitation of 1≤k≤m-1 is met).
Regarding claim 9, Nagayama as modified above, discloses the battery module, wherein each of the first and second cell assemblies has a structure where the plurality of battery cells are electrically connected to each other in series [0028, 0055, 0068, Nagayama].
Regarding claim 10, Nagayama as modified above, discloses the battery cell, wherein the cell bodies of battery cells included in the first and second cell assemblies are arranged on a same layer, and wherein the first and second cell assemblies are stacked as a plurality of layers [0066, fig. 7-8, Nagayama].
Regarding claim 11, Nagayama as modified above, discloses a battery pack comprising the battery module according to claim 1 [abstract, 0026, Nagayama].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Nagayama as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Straubel (US20070009787A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Nagayama is silent to the cooling pad being a tube containing insulating oil.
The examiner notes that oils are non-polar and as such are insulating materials.
However, Straubel discloses a means for liquid cooling in which batteries are cooled via small, thermally conductive tubes through which a coolant, such as oil, may circulate [0081, Straubel]. The coolant tubes are placed near each battery cell such that are able to transfer heat from the cell to the liquid [0082-0083, Straubel].
Prior to the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill within the arts would find it obvious to modify Nagayama such that the cooling pad were a tube containing (insulating) oil. Doing so can allow one to transfer thermal energy from each battery cell to the liquid coolant thereby cooling the battery [0081-0083, Straubel].
Response to Arguments
Applicants arguments filed on 05/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See comments below.
Applicant argues allowability in light of the presently amended claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees in view of Minamitani as presently cited.
Applicant noted in their examiner interview section that one would not turn to Zhao to modify Nagayama as the two pads are overlapped by battery cells on both sides applicant claims this differs from Zhao and the instant invention and as such one would not turn to Zhao. The examiner respectfully disagrees with this as Zhao’s teachings show why one would have a “cooling pad” directly in contact with a battery cell with an “insulating pad” on the other side. Namely this allow for the “cooling pad” to conduct heat away from the battery cell while the “insulating pad” prevents heat from being transferred to adjacent battery cells [0006, 0019, Zhao].
No other arguments are presented. As such 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.
/Q.D.E./
Examiner, art unit 1724
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights