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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 02/13/2026 has been entered. Support is found in [0036] and Figures 1 and 3 as filed 04/04/2022.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 4-5 of Remarks, filed 02/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 102 and 103 in the rejection of record (11/14/2025) have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendment which now recites further limitations regarding the shape of the module frame, which distinguishes from the Ogino primary reference. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below in view of the updated search necessitated by the amendment.
Examiner notes that, while the further limitations regarding the shape of the module frame distinguish from Ogino and necessitate the new grounds (i.e., Omura) presented below), there were no specific arguments in the 02/13/2026 Remarks regarding the additional amended/clarified limitations within claim 1 (directed to the cooling path within the lower plate). As such, previously-cited structural features of Ogino are still relied upon in the below rejection to satisfy the instant limitations regarding the cooling path and the lower plate.
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.
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 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino et al. (US 20210167443 A1, with foreign priority dates of 07/31/2018 and as cited in the 11/14/2025 rejection of record) in view of Omura (US 2018/0138559 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ogino discloses a battery module (battery module 1, Ogino [0026] and Fig. 1) comprising:
a battery cell laminated body including a plurality of stacked battery cells (assembly 2 in which a plurality of batteries 6 are assembled, [0027] and Figs. 1-2);
a lower plate (cooling member 4 includes a plate-shaped portion 26, [0041] and Fig. 1) defined by a flat upper surface and a flat lower surface (26a and 26b, [0042-0043] and Fig. 1), the battery cell laminated body being mounted on the lower plate (assembly 2 of batteries 6 mounted atop plate 26, Fig. 1); and
a module frame (restraining members 12, Ogino Fig. 1)… bent (four eaves portions 12b protruding from end sides of the flat surface portion 12a; [0036] and Fig. 2) … the module frame including two side parts facing each other (restraining member 12 has a rectangular flat surface portion 12a extending parallel to the short side surface of the battery 6, [0036]; two 12a’s facing each other in Y-direction per Figs. 1-2) and an upper part (the upper surfaces of the plurality of batteries 6 abut on the upper eaves portions 12b of the restraining members 12, [0038] and Fig. 2 in Z-direction) … to cover three surfaces of the battery cell laminated body (at surfaces of assembly 2 in -Y, +Y, and +Z directions; Figs. 1-2), and
a thermally conductive resin layer (a resin sheet having good thermal conductivity, [0040]) disposed between the lower plate and the battery cell laminated body (to further improve the heat exchange efficiency between the battery 6 and the cooling member 4, resin sheet interposed between the bottom surface of the battery 6 and the cooling member 4; [0040]),
wherein a cooling path is disposed in the lower plate (flow paths 28 within hollow portion 27 inside plate 26, [0041] and Fig. 1), the cooling path being formed by extrusion (hollow portion 27 and cooling member 4 formed by extrusion molding, [0042-0043]) such that the cooling path is an extruded channel (elongated channel shapes of paths 28, extending in X-direction within hollow 27; [0041] and Figs. 1 and 4) integrally formed within the flat upper surface and the flat lower surface of the lower plate (extruded formation 27/28 are within/between upper surface 26a and lower surface 26b of plate-shaped portion 26 of cooling member 4, [0041-0042] and Fig. 1),
wherein the entire thermally conductive resin layer is in direct contact with the lower plate and the battery cell laminated body (the entire bottom surface of the battery 6 and the cooling member 4 may be brought into abutment on each other via the above-mentioned resin sheet without providing the eaves portions located on the bottom surface side of the battery 6 such that the cooling member 4 takes on the function of the eaves portions located on the bottom surface side of the battery 6 – whereby the bottom surface of the battery 6 is thermally connected to the cooling member 4 via the resin sheet instead of the eaves; [0040]).
Ogino fails to teach: the module frame defined by a single plate-shaped structure bent to be coupled to the lower plate, the module frame including two side parts facing each other and an upper part connecting the two side parts to continuously cover three surfaces of the battery cell laminated body.
Omura is analogous in the art of stacked battery cells on a cooling plate ([0009]) and teaches an embodiment similar to that of Ogino having fastening members 21 around cells 1 (see Omura [0035] and Figs. 1-2, wherein 21 are similar in both shape and functionality to above-cited members 12 of Ogino Figs. 1-2). The fastening members 21 in this embodiment of Omura serve as the fixing part 20 (per Omura [0035] and Fig. 1). However, Omura further teaches an alternative embodiment (Embodiment 5 of Omura [0063] and Fig. 9) which instead includes: a module frame defined by a single plate-shaped structure (outer cover 26 as fixing part 20, [0063]) bent to be coupled (generally: fixing part 20 fixes assembled battery 10 to fixing plate 30 per [0035]; in Embodiment 5: sides of 26 are bent to form lower flanges which are fixed by bolts 41 to fixing plate 30F as shown in Fig. 9) to the lower plate (fixing plate 30 is thermally connected to the lower surface of battery stacked body 11, whereby 30 serves as a heat radiating board/cooling plate with a coolant is circulated inside, per [0045]), the module frame including two side parts facing each other (left and right of 26 covering sides of 11, Fig. 9) and an upper part connecting the two side parts (uppermost surface of 26 covering top of 11, Fig. 9) to continuously cover three surfaces of the battery cell laminated body (see integral/continuous shape of 26 covering the three surfaces of laminated/stacked body 11 as cited in Omura Fig. 9). Omura teaches in [0063] that in such an embodiment, battery stacked body 11 is fixed such that outer cover 26 and fixing plate 30F sandwich and hold battery stacked body 11 from up and down, and loosening of outer cover 26 and fixing plate 30F can be prevented.
Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results supports a conclusion of obviousness per MPEP 2143 I B, such that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious at the time of filing to substitute the module frame (i.e., cover 26 of Omura as cited above) of Omura for that (i.e., members 12 of Ogino as cited above) of Ogino (thus satisfying: the module frame defined by a single plate-shaped structure bent to be coupled to the lower plate, the module frame including two side parts facing each other and an upper part connecting the two side parts to continuously cover three surfaces of the battery cell laminated body) to obtain predictable prevention of loosening between the module frame and the lower plate (as taught toward by Omura).
Thereby, claim 1 is rendered obvious.
Regarding claim 3, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and wherein the cooling path includes an inlet connected to one side of the lower plate (inlet 30a side, Ogino [0050-0051] and Fig. 4), and an outlet connected to an opposite side (-X versus +X directions of plate 26, Ogino Figs. 1 and 4) of the lower plate (outlet 30b side, [0050-0051] and Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 4, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and wherein the cooling path extends across the lower plate between the inlet and the outlet (paths 28 within hollow 27 extend across 26 from 30a at -X side to 30b at +X side; Ogino [0045, 0050] and Figs. 1 and 4).
Claim(s) 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino et al. (US 20210167443 A1, with foreign priority dates of 07/31/2018 and as cited in the 11/14/2025 rejection of record) in view of Omura (US 2018/0138559 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hashimoto et al. (US 20130004822 A1, as cited in 04/22/2022 IDS and previous Office actions).
Regarding claim 8, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and teaches a battery pack (see Ogino Fig. 6) comprising: at least one battery module according to claim 1 (three adjacent battery groups 3 shown in Fig. 6, Ogino [0059]).
Ogino fails teach a pack case for packing the at least one battery module. While Ogino [0064] refers to a “module case”, Ogino does not provide detail of any such structure serving as a battery pack case that collectively packages the multiple modules shown in Fig. 6. Omura (as relied upon below in regards to claim 1) generally teaches toward a known conventional frame structure body 105 enclosing two assembles batteries 102 (Omura [0005-0006] and Fig. 15), but does not explicitly teach such structure reconciled with their Embodiment 5 as cited above (i.e., Omura Fig. 9).
Hashimoto is analogous in the art of battery modules comprising battery cell stacks atop cooling structures with intervening thermally-conductive resin sheets (see Hashimoto at least Fig. 5 and [0010-0011, 0054, 0075]) and teaches a battery pack comprising multiple battery modules (battery pack 10 having multiple battery assembly units therein, Hashimoto [0056] and Fig. 1). Hashimoto further teaches a pack case for packing the at least one battery module (exterior case 70 surrounds and accommodates the multiple battery assembly units of battery pack 10 to form overall power supply device 100, Hashimoto [0055] Fig. 1). Hashimoto [0055] teaches that portions of the exterior battery pack case have flanges which are secured to one another by nuts and bolts, and further that the battery assemblies within the pack are fastened in place to the pack case 70.
It would have been obvious, at the time of filing, for a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the battery pack of Ogino to include a pack case for packaging the battery modules therein as taught by Hashimoto with the motivation of achieving secure fastening of the battery assemblies within the pack.
Thus, the instant claim 8 is rendered obvious.
Regarding claim 9, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 8 above and teaches the lower plate of the at least one battery module is fixed to the pack case (in Hashimoto, lower plate 61 fixed to lower case 71 via securing of flanges 72/74, such that 61 is sandwiched against modules 10B; Hashimoto Fig. 1 and [0055] – as applied to modified Ogino in rejection of claim 8 above), the pack case being a flat plate (71 has a flat plate as its main surface against which 61 is fixed, Hashimoto Fig. 1 – against which 26 would be fixed in modified Ogino).
Regarding claim 10, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 8 above and further comprising a connection part that connects the cooling paths of each of the battery modules such that the cooling paths are in fluid communication with each other (merging portions 30 which are each a space where the plurality of flow paths 28 are merged, Ogino [0046] and Fig. 6 showing portions 30 between each adjacent battery module/group 3).
Regarding claim 11, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 10 above but fails to teach the connection part includes a flexible material.
Hashimoto similarly reaches connection parts portions of pipes 60 (which connect between cooling plates 61 of adjacent battery assemblies 5 within packs 10 of device 100, Hashimoto [0101-0102] and fig 20 in view of fig 1), thus connecting the cooling paths of each of the battery modules such that the cooling paths are in fluid communication with each other (two separate plates 61 under adjacent assemblies 5 shown in one connected cooling path / loop with cooling mechanism 69 which circulates coolant, per Hashimoto [0101-0102] and fig 20). Hashimoto further teaches that this connection part includes a flexible material (cooling pipe 60 — including connection parts between adjacent plates 61 as shown in fig 20 and described above — is a “relatively flexible aluminum pipe”, Hashimoto [0109]).
Ogino similarly teaches plate 26 being made of aluminum and being attached to merging portion 30 (Ogino [0044] and Fig. 6 in view of Fig. 1), but is silent toward specific material for connection/merging portion 30. In view of Hashimoto teaching that relatively flexible aluminum pipe is suitable for this use as a connection part, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to also select such material for part 30 in modified Ogino (see also MPEP 2144.07).
Thereby, claim 11 is rendered obvious.
Regarding claim 12, modified Ogino teaches the limitations of claim 8 above and further teaches a device comprising at least one battery pack of claim 8 (vehicle using the power supply device, Hashimoto [0054] and Figs. 23-24; vehicle uses battery module for power source per Ogino [0003]).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kubota et al. (US 2016/0141737 A1) teaches a single unit 110 continuously extending on three surfaces of stacked body 11, and being coupled at bent attachment pieces 112a to cooling structure 190 by screws 151 (Figs. 1-2).
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 Jessie Walls-Murray whose telephone number is (571)272-1664. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, typically 10-4.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/JESSIE WALLS-MURRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights