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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/29/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11 and 13-16 are currently pending;
Claim 12 is canceled;
Claims 1 and 13 are amended.
Status of Rejections and Objections Pending Since the Office Action of 07/29/2025
The objection of claim 15 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment;
The 112(b) rejection of claims 13-16 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment;
The 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 1, 10-12, 15, and 16 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment and argument, and have been replaced with a new 102(a)(1) rejection for claims 1, 10-11, and 16;
The 103 rejections of claims 2, 5, 6, and 9 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed10/29/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 10-12, 15, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hayashi (US-20100112424-A1) for claims 1, 10-11, and 16 and under Hayashi in view of Ju et al. (US-20200144570-A1) for claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 16 includes the limitation “wherein the side frame directly contacts an exterior surface of the first side of the module case” in lines 1-2. Claim 1, upon which claim 16 depends, already includes the limitation “a side frame having a first side, an entirety of the first side being outside the module case and directly contacting an exterior surface of a first side of the module case” in lines 8-10. All of the limitations of dependent claim 16 are already included in independent claim 1, therefore claim 16 does not further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1, 10-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayashi (US-20100112424-A1)
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi teaches a battery pack, comprising: a pack cover including: an upper cover (fig. 3; [0028] upper restraint band 51) and a lower cover (fig. 3; [0028] lower restraint band 56; alternatively [0031] lower casing 33 when the non-pictured embodiment is used that excludes 56 [0029]) and having an empty space inside (fig. 3), edge portions of each of the upper cover and the lower cover being coupled to each other (fig. 3; [0028] coupled at pin member 58; interpreting anything outside the battery module case 34 as the edge portion of the upper and lower covers); and a battery module including: a plurality of battery cells (fig. 3; [0024] battery cells 21), a module case in which the plurality of battery cells is received (fig. 3 [0024] battery holder 34), and a side frame having a first side ([0025] end plate 41), an entirety of the first side being outside the module case and directly contacting an exterior surface of a first side of the module case (fig. 3; [0025] end plate 41 is fully outside module case 34 and the first side fully directly contacts exterior surface of 34) and a second side interposed between the upper cover and the lower cover and configured to be coupled to the edge portions of each of the upper cover and the lower cover (fig. 3 [0025] the second side of end plate 41 is between the upper and lower covers 51 and 56 outside of the battery module, interpreted as the edge portions, and directly contacting, and therefore coupled to, the interpreted edge portions of 51 and 56), wherein the first side of the module case is between the first side of the side frame and the plurality of battery cells (fig. 3 [0024] module case 34 first side is between the plurality of battery cells and the side frame (end plate 41)).
Regarding claim 10, Hayashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches an electronic device comprising at least one battery pack of claim 1 ([0019]-[0020]).
Regarding claim 11, Hayashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches a vehicle comprising at least one battery pack according to claim 1 ([0020]; [0047]).
Regarding claim 16, Hayashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein the side frame directly contacts an exterior surface of the first side of the module case (fig. 3; [0025] end plate 41 is fully outside module case 34 and the first side fully directly contacts exterior surface of 34).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ju et al. (US-20200144570-A1), hereinafter Ju.
Regarding claim 15, Hayashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi fails to teach wherein the side frame includes a first insertion portion having a recess, the first side of the module case inserted into the recess.
Ju is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery packs ([0002]). Ju teaches wherein the side frame includes a first insertion portion having a recess, the first side of the module case inserted into the recess (fig. 6; fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hayashi such that the side frame includes a first insertion portion having a recess, the first side of the module case inserted into the recess. Doing so provides a way of securely mounting the battery module on the battery pack such as to improve energy density (Ju [0007]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 and 13-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 2, Hayashi teaches wherein the upper cover includes a first edge portion bent down to wrap an upper surface and a side of the side frame (fig. 3), wherein the lower cover includes a second edge portion bent up to wrap a lower surface and the side of the side frame (fig. 3). Hayashi fails to teach wherein the side frame includes, on the second side, a protrusion extending in a horizontal direction to the edge portions of each of the upper cover and the lower cover, wherein the upper cover includes a first edge portion bent down to wrap an upper surface and a side of the protrusion, wherein the lower cover includes a second edge portion bent up to wrap a lower surface and the side of the protrusion, and wherein the protrusion, the first edge portion and the second edge portion are fastened to one another. The addition of a secondary source would not cure the deficiencies of Hayashi since the end plate of Hayashi, interpreted as the side frame of the instant application, helps generate a fastening force in the stacking direction of the battery cells in combination with restraint band 50 (Hayashi [0027]). Therefore, it would not be obvious even with secondary art to modify the shape of the end plate/side frame of Hayashi such that it includes a protrusion on the second side, as such a protrusion would affect the function of the end plate to produce the fastening force in the stacking direction of the battery cells in combination with restraint band 50 as presented in Hayashi. As such, claim 2 is objected to as being allowable if rewritten in independent form. Claims 3-9 are also objected to due to being dependent on claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, Hayashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches a fixed frame extending along a second side of the module case (fig. 3; [0025]; end plate 40). Hayashi fails to teach a cross beam coupled to an inner side of the lower cover, wherein the fixed frame is coupled to the cross beam. The addition of a secondary reference such as Yamazaki (JP-2016219262-A) would also fail to cure the deficiencies of Hayashi because, while Yamazaki does teach that a cross beam coupled to an inner side of the lower cover, wherein the fixed frame is coupled to the cross beam (Yamazaki fig. 3 cross beam 27 is coupled to an inner side of the lower cover 10 and to a side of the fixed frame bracket 21; [0032]), Hayashi would not be able to be modified such that a cross beam is coupled to an inner side of the lower cover. In Hayashi, there is no space between the fixed frame and the lower cover that could accommodate a cross beam (fig. 3; no space between fixed frame 40 and lower cover 56; [0025]; [0028]). Consequently, someone of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to combine the cross beam of Yamazaki with the battery pack of Hayashi. Therefore, claim 13 is objected to as being allowable if rewritten in independent form. Claim 14 is also objected to due to being dependent on claim 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON L KYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0164. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 PM ET.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/M.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722