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
Amendments filed 11/20/2025 have been entered. Amendments overcome the 102 and 103 rejection but as previously set forth in Non-Final Office action mailed 09/05/2025, new grounds of rejection are set forth below.
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.
Claim 39, 42, 45-53, 57, 59-60, 62 and 64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20110159348-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’ in view of (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’
Regarding Claim 39,
Park teaches a battery pack (Park, battery module, 100, Fig. 1), comprising: a casing (Park, case, 11, Fig. 1) and a battery assembly arranged inside the casing, wherein the casing comprises a bottom surface and a top surface (see Fig. 8) ; the battery assembly comprises a battery unit (Park, battery unit, Fig. 1) and reinforcing members (Park, side plates, 40, Fig. 1) , wherein the battery unit comprises N cells arranged in series, where N is an integer greater than 2; at least some of the cells in the battery unit are connected to each other via the reinforcing members (see Fig. 1) , where Q is an integer meeting N>Q>2 (see Fig. 4) ; and an outer surface of each of the cells comprises a bottom surface, a top surface, and lateral surfaces; wherein the bottom surface of each cell faces the bottom surface of the casing, the top surface of each cell faces the top surface of the casing, and the lateral surfaces of each cell comprise a pair of the first lateral surfaces opposite to each other and a pair of second lateral surfaces opposite to each other (Park, side plate, 240, Fig. 8) ; wherein an area of each of the first lateral surfaces is greater than an area of each of the second lateral surfaces, an area of the bottom surface, and an area of the top surface.
Park does not teach one of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of at least some cells in Q adjacent cells.
Kim teaches one of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of at least some cells in Q adjacent cells (see annotated Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
204
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that the arrangement allows for the battery pack to be slimmer and the manufacturing process to be improved. (Kim, “a plurality of battery cells stacked in vertical and horizontal directions are provided between a lower cover and an upper cover, and the plurality of battery modules are closely coupled to a connector in a vertical or horizontal direction, thereby providing a slim and compact battery pack.”, see [0019])(Kim, “In addition, since a battery pack is completed by sequentially coupling a plurality of battery modules to a connector in a vertical or horizontal direction, the manufacturing process efficiency is improved.”, see [0020])
Park and Kim are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arrangement as taught in Park to that which is taught in Kim, and in turn moving the reinforcement members to the first lateral side, in order to create a slimmer unit and improve process efficiency.
Regarding Claim 42,
Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein a number of cells among the Q adjacent cells connected to the reinforcing members is not less than Q/2 (Park, Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image2.png
475
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 45,
Modified Park teaches wherein the reinforcing members (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6) are arranged on a first side of the battery assembly in sequence along a direction, wherein a first reinforcing member of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces on the first side of first to Qth cells , a second reinforcing member of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces on the first side of Qth to (2Q-1)th cells, a third reinforcing member of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces on the first side of (2Q-1)th to (3Q-2)th cells, and an M th reinforcing member of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces on the first side of [MxQ-(M-1)-(Q-1)]th to [MxQ-(M-1)]th cells, and wherein a number of the reinforcing members is M and M is an integer greater than 1 (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
236
655
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that this arrangement of members protects against unwanted shorts between cells (Kim, “the barriers 117 a and 117 b prevent or protect from unwanted electrical shorts between the battery cells 114, and/or the barriers 117 a and 117 b release or conduct away heat generated from the battery cells 114.”, see [0048])
Park and Kim are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery cases.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arrangement as taught in Park with the arrangement as taught in Kim in order to prevent short circuits between cells.
Regarding Claim 46,
Modified Park teaches wherein the reinforcing members are distributed on a first side, and wherein a first reinforcing member of the reinforcing members arranged on the first side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of the Q adjacent cells on the first side of the battery assembly, and a second reinforcing member of the reinforcing members arranged on the second side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of the Q adjacent cells on the second side of the battery assembly (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6) (see annotated figure below)
Kim does not teach and a second side of the battery assembly, however it would have been an obvious matter of duplication to copy the same arrangement on the other side as a matter of duplication of parts (MPEP 2144.04 (B)).
PNG
media_image4.png
222
574
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 47,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 46, wherein the first reinforcing member arranged on the first side of the battery assembly partially covers the first lateral surfaces of the Q adjacent cells on the first side of the battery assembly (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6) (Park, side plates, 40, Fig. 1)
Regarding Claim 48,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 46, wherein the reinforcing members are arranged on both sides of the battery assembly in sequence along a direction, wherein a pair of first reinforcing members respectively arranged on both sides of the battery assembly are respectively fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of first to Q th cells on both side of the battery assembly, a pair of second reinforcing members are respectively fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of Qth to(2Q-1 )th cells on both side of the battery assembly, and a pair of M reinforcing members are respectively fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of [M x Q-(M-1)-(Q-1)]* to [M x Q-(M-1)]th cells on both side of the battery assembly, and wherein a number of the reinforcing members is 2M and M is an integer greater than 1 (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6) (see annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image3.png
236
655
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding Claim 49,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 46, wherein the reinforcing members are arranged on both sides of the battery assembly in sequence along a direction, wherein the first reinforcing member arranged on the first side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of first to Qth cells on the first side of the battery assembly, the second reinforcing member arranged on the second side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of Qth to (2Q-1)th cells on the second side of the battery assembly, a third reinforcing member arranged on the first side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of (2Q-1)th to (3Q-2)l cells on the first side of the battery assembly, a fourth reinforcing member arranged on the second side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of (3Q-2)th to (4Q-3) cells on the second side of the battery assembly, a (2M-1)th reinforcing member arranged at the first side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of [2 x M x Q-(2M-I)-2(Q-I)]°i to [2 x M x Q-(2M-1 )-(Q-1)]th cell son the first side of the battery assembly, and a (2M)th reinforcing member arranged on the second side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of [2 x M x Q-(2M-1)-(Q-1)]th to [2 xM x Q-(2M-1)]th cells on the second side of the battery assembly, and wherein a number of the reinforcing members is 2M and M is an integer greater than 1 (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
226
653
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 50,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 46, wherein the reinforcing members are arranged on both sides of the battery assembly in sequence along a direction; wherein the first reinforcing member arranged on the first side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to the first lateral surfaces of first to Qth cells on the first side of the battery assembly, a second reinforcing member is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of (Q+1)th to (2Q)th cells on the first side of the battery assembly, and a Mth reinforcing member is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of [MxQ-(Q-1)]th to (MxQ)th cells on the first side of the battery assembly, and wherein a number of the reinforcing members is 2M and M is an integer greater than 1; and a (M+1)th reinforcing member arranged on the second side of the battery assembly is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of second to (Q+1)th cells on the second side of the battery assembly, a (M+2)th reinforcing memberis fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of (Q+2)thto (2Q+1)th cells on the second side of the battery assembly, and a (2M)th reinforcing memberis fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of [MxQ-(Q-1)+1]th to [MxQ+1]thcells on the second side of the battery assembly (see annotated figure below) (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6) .
PNG
media_image6.png
236
655
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 51,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein at least one end of each of the reinforcing members is provided with an extension attached to the top surface or bottom surface of at least one of the cells (Park, flange units, 65, Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 52,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein at least one of the reinforcing members comprise a first extension and a second extension at two opposite ends of the at least one of the reinforcing members, respectively; and the first extension is attached to the top surface of at least one of the cells(Park, flange units, 65, Fig. 2)., and the second extension is attached to the bottom surface of at least one of the cells (Park, flange units, 64, Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 53,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein the casing comprises a first side frame and a second side frame arranged opposite to each other along a first direction, and wherein the battery assembly is arranged between the first side frame and the second side frame, a first end of the battery assembly is supported by the first side frame, and a second end of the battery assembly is supported by the second side frame, and wherein the first end and the second end are opposite to each other (Park, second end plates, 52 and 51, Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 57,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, comprising a plurality of battery assemblies including the battery assembly, and a gap is provided between two adjacent battery assemblies of the plurality of battery assemblies (see annotated figure below).
Regarding Claim 59,
Modified Park teaches a plurality of battery assemblies including the battery assembly, and one of the reinforcing members is provided between two adjacent battery assemblies of the plurality of battery assemblies (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 60,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 59, wherein the one of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to the two adjacent battery assemblies (Kim, barriers, 117b, Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image7.png
492
406
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 62,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein the casing comprises a tray (Park, lower plate, 30, Fig. 1) and an upper cover (Park, upper plate, 20, Fig. 1) ; and an accommodating space for the battery assembly is defined by the tray and the upper cover, wherein the top surfaces of the cells in the battery assembly are fixedly coupled to an inner surface of the upper cover, and the bottom surfaces of the cells are fixedly coupled to an inner surface of the tray (Park, battery units, 10, Fig. 1) .
Regarding Claim 64,
Park teaches an electric vehicle, comprising a battery pack (Park, “On the other hand, battery modules may be usually used instead of a single battery in devices such as electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles”, see [0005]), wherein the battery pack comprises: a casing (Park, case, 11, Fig. 1) and a battery assembly arranged inside the casing, wherein the casing comprises a bottom surface and a top surface; the battery assembly (Park, battery unit, 10,Fig. 1) comprises a battery unit and reinforcing members (Park, side plates, 40, Fig. 1), wherein the battery unit comprises N cells arranged in series, where N is an integer greater than 2; at least some of the cells in the battery unit are connected to each other via the reinforcing members; and one of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled to first lateral surfaces of at least some cells in Q adjacent cells, where Q is an integer meeting N>Q>2 (Fig. 4) ; and an outer surface of each of the cells comprises a bottom surface, a top surface, and lateral surfaces (see Fig. 1); wherein the bottom surface of each cell faces the bottom surface of the casing, the top surface of each cell faces the top surface of the casing, and the lateral surfaces of each cell comprise a pair of the first lateral surface opposite to each other and a pair of second lateral surfaces opposite to each other; wherein an area of each of the first lateral surfaces is greater than an area of each of the second lateral surfaces, an area of the bottom surface, and an area of the top surface (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
475
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 40-41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20110159348-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’, in view of (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’, in view of (US-20190334145-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Omura’, in view of (US-20220285768-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Tyler’
Regarding Claim 40,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein the cells are arranged in a first direction (Park, Fig. 1).
Modified Park does not teach of the reinforcing members has a width DO in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction
Omura teaches the reinforcing members has a width DO in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (Omura, “In covering 8, thin-walled part 46 has a thickness ranging, for example, from 0.5 mm to 1.0 mm, whereas thick-walled part 48, i.e. the remaining part, has a thickness ranging, for example, from 1.0 mm to 2.0 mm.”, see [0054])
Omura teaches that this prevents condensed water and dust and other foreign materials from coming in contact with the battery (Omura, “8 prevents condensed water, dust, and other foreign matter from coming into contact with parts such as output terminals”, see [0039])
Park and Omura are analogous as they both are from the same field of batteries and battery cases.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the reinforcement members of Park with the covers from Omura of the thickness to prevent water and dust from coming in contact with the cell.
Modified Park does not teach width D1 in the second direction, wherein a ratio between DO and D1 meets. 0.006<D0/D1<0.5, and D1 ranges from 10 to 90mm.
Tyler teaches the width D1 in the second direction, wherein a ratio between DO and D1 meets. 0.006<D0/D1<0.5, and D1 ranges from 10 to 90mm (Tyler, “CT is between 13 mm and 15 mm,”, see [0080]) (The examiner notes that this is within the range, for example 2mm/14mm= 0.14257).
Tyler teaches that this dimension allows for a sutable energy density which allows for use in motor vehicles (Tyler, “the cell thickness, the cell width, the cell length, and the electrochemically active components are such that each of the prismatic lithium-ion battery cells has a volumetric energy density between 67 Watt-hours per Liter (Wh/L)”, see [0009]) Tyler, “of the prismatic battery cell 44, as shown in FIG. 6, include a cell length (CL) along the sides 72, 74, a cell width (CW) along the terminal and base portions 62, 70, and a cell thickness (CT) extending between the first and second faces 76, 78. As one example, the battery module 28 may be designed to have an H5 base with a 12V”, see [0070]) (Tyler, “For example, in certain xEV contexts (among others, such as non-automotive or stationary energy expending applications), a 12 V”, see [0042])
Modified Park and Tyler are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the thickness of the cell taught in Park to match the dimensions as taught in Tyler in order to create a cell with sufficient voltage for use in an electric vehicle application.
Regarding Claim 41,
Modified Park teaches the battery pack according to claim 40, wherein the ratio between DO and D1 meets 0.012<DO/D1<0.4 (Tyler, “CT is between 13 mm and 15 mm,”, see [0080]) (Omura, “In covering 8, thin-walled part 46 has a thickness ranging, for example, from 0.5 mm to 1.0 mm, whereas thick-walled part 48, i.e. the remaining part, has a thickness ranging, for example, from 1.0 mm to 2.0 mm.”, see [0054]) (The examiner notes that this is within the range, for example 2mm/14mm= 0.14257).
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20110159348-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’, in view of (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’, in view of (US-20200212518-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’ in further view of (US-20220285768-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Tyler’
Regarding Claim 43,
Modified Park does not teach the battery pack wherein a length of the battery assembly along a first direction is 400-2500 mm, and the battery assembly abuts against the bottom surface of the casing to be supported on the bottom surface of the casing.
Jin teaches the cells arranged horizontally (Jin, “In some embodiments, the first and the second battery groups each can include a plurality of battery cells arranged along a horizontal direction”, see [0078])
Jin teaches this arrangement allows for the minimization of the expansion force of the cell (Jin, “and the number of battery cells 11 stacked along the vertical direction is small, the negative influence of the maximum expansion force of battery cells 11 on the battery module is small or negligible compared to the conventional design”, see [0078])
Park and Jin are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery arrangements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the claimed invention to have a horizontal arrangement in order to reduce expansion force.
Tyler teaches the width of a cell of 112m per cell (Tyler, “ a CW of 112 mm with a tolerance of 0.5 mm, and a CT of 14 mm with a tolerance of 0.5 mm.”, see [0070]), which combined with the 7 cells of Modified Park teaches a length of 784mm.
Tyler teaches that this dimension allows for a suitable energy density which allows for use in motor vehicles (Tyler, “the cell thickness, the cell width, the cell length, and the electrochemically active components are such that each of the prismatic lithium-ion battery cells has a volumetric energy density between 67 Watt-hours per Liter (Wh/L)”, see [0009]) Tyler, “of the prismatic battery cell 44, as shown in FIG. 6, include a cell length (CL) along the sides 72, 74, a cell width (CW) along the terminal and base portions 62, 70, and a cell thickness (CT) extending between the first and second faces 76, 78. As one example, the battery module 28 may be designed to have an H5 base with a 12V”, see [0070]) (Tyler, “For example, in certain xEV contexts (among others, such as non-automotive or stationary energy expending applications), a 12 V”, see [0042])
Modified Park and Tyler are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the thickness of the cell taught in Park to match the dimensions as taught in Tyler in order to create a cell with sufficient voltage for use in an electric vehicle application.
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over(US-20110159348-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’, in view of (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’, in view of (US-20190334145-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Omura’, in view of (US-20220285768-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Tyler’, in further view of (US-20120094161-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Zheng’
Regarding Claim 44,
Modified Park does not teach a length of the at least one of the cells in the first direction is P; and the S and the P ranges from 0.1P to 0.5P.
Zheng teaches a length of the at least one of the cells in the first direction is P; ranges from 0.1P to 0.5P. (Zheng, “the width about 40-60 mm, and the length about 20-40 mm”, see [0035]) (The examiner notes that 0.1*P to 0.5*P is 11.2mm to 46mm, which overalaps with the claimed range).
Zheng teaches that these sheets allow for buffering the shock of the cell and allowing for sealing with the cover (Zheng, “More preferably, they are formed by overlapping or coiling a plurality of layers of conductive sheets, so that it is favorable for buffering the shock on the joint of the electrode terminals and on the sealing portions between the electrode terminal and the cover”, see [0035])
Modified Park and Zheng are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the reinforcement plate as taught in Park with that as taught in Zheng in order to allow for the absorption of shock and sealing between the terminal and cover.
27. Claims 54-56, 58, and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20110159348-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’, in view of (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’, in view of (US-20200212518-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’
Regarding Claim 54,
Modified Park does not teach wherein the one of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled by a structural adhesive to the first lateral surfaces of the Q adjacent cells, and the structural adhesive is a thermally conductive structural adhesive.
Jin teaches wherein the one of the reinforcing members is fixedly coupled by a structural adhesive to the first lateral surfaces of the Q adjacent cells, and the structural adhesive is a thermally conductive structural adhesive (Jin, conductive adhesive, 4, Fig. 2).
Jin teaches that this structural adhesive provides a variety of performance benefits (Jin, “In some embodiments, the structural adhesive utilizes a longer polymer chain then did older generations, this ensures less volatile components and provides various performance benefits.”, see [0066])
Park and Jin are analogous as they both relate to the same field of battery structures.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the reinforcing member as taught in Park with the adhesive as taught in Jin in order to improve the performance of the cell.
Regarding Claim 55,
Park does not teach wherein the one of the reinforcing members is a reinforcing plate comprising a steel plate, an aluminum plate, or a glass fiber plate.
Jin teaches wherein the one of the reinforcing members is a reinforcing plate comprising a steel plate, an aluminum plate, or a glass fiber plate ( Jin, “Cooling plate 3 can be made of exemplary materials including, but not limited to aluminum, aluminum alloy, magnesium aluminum alloy, and steel, such that the three parts of cooling plate 3 can be joined by welding”, see [0083])).
Jin teaches that the cooling materials is exemplary material to help cool the cell assembly (Jin, “exemplary materials including, but not limited to aluminum, aluminum alloy, magnesium aluminum alloy, and steel, such that the three parts of cooling plate 3 can be joined by welding”, see[0083]).
Park and Jin are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery assemblies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the material of the plate to one that is exemplary for cooling in order to allow for the cells to be cooled and prevent short-circuit.
Regarding Claim 56,
Park does not teach the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein the reinforcing members comprise a reinforcing plate, and the reinforcing plate comprises one of a steel plate, an aluminum plate, or a glass fiber plate .
Jin teaches wherein the one of the reinforcing members is a reinforcing plate comprising a steel plate, an aluminum plate, or a glass fiber plate ( Jin, “Cooling plate 3 can be made of exemplary materials including, but not limited to aluminum, aluminum alloy, magnesium aluminum alloy, and steel, such that the three parts of cooling plate 3 can be joined by welding”, see [0083])).
Jin teaches that the cooling materials is exemplary material to help cool the cell assembly (Jin, “exemplary materials including, but not limited to aluminum, aluminum alloy, magnesium aluminum alloy, and steel, such that the three parts of cooling plate 3 can be joined by welding”, see[0083])
Park and Jin are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery assemblies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the material of the plate to one that is exemplary for cooling in order to allow for the cells to be cooled and prevent short-circuit.
Regarding Claim 58,
Park does not teach the battery pack according to claim 39, wherein the second lateral surfaces of two adjacent cells facing each other in the battery unit are attached to each other (Jin, “In some embodiments, the first and the second battery groups each can include a plurality of battery cells arranged along a horizontal direction”, see [0078])
Jin teaches this arrangement allows for the minimization of the expansion force of the cell (Jin, “and the number of battery cells 11 stacked along the vertical direction is small, the negative influence of the maximum expansion force of battery cells 11 on the battery module is small or negligible compared to the conventional design”, see [0078])
Park and Jin are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery arrangements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the claimed invention to have a horizontal arrangement in order to reduce expansion force.
Regarding Claim 63,
Park does not teach a plurality of battery assemblies including the battery assembly; second lateral surfaces of two adjacent cells in a first battery assembly of the plurality of battery assemblies are attached to each other at a first position, and second lateral surfaces of two adjacent cells in a second battery assembly of the plurality of battery assemblies adjacent to the first battery assembly are attached to each other at a second position, wherein the first position and the second position are arranged at an interval along the first direction.
Jin teaches a plurality of battery assemblies including the battery assembly; second lateral surfaces of two adjacent cells in a first battery assembly of the plurality of battery assemblies are attached to each other at a first position, and second lateral surfaces of two adjacent cells in a second battery assembly of the plurality of battery assemblies adjacent to the first battery assembly are attached to each other at a second position, wherein the first position and the second position are arranged at an interval along the first direction. (Jin, “In some embodiments, the first and the second battery groups each can include a plurality of battery cells arranged along a horizontal direction”, see [0078])
Jin teaches this arrangement allows for the minimization of the expansion force of the cell (Jin, “and the number of battery cells 11 stacked along the vertical direction is small, the negative influence of the maximum expansion force of battery cells 11 on the battery module is small or negligible compared to the conventional design”, see [0078])
Park and Jin are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery arrangements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the claimed invention to have a horizontal arrangement in order to reduce expansion force.
Claim 61 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20110159348-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’, in view of (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’, in further view of (US-20200212518-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’
Regarding Claim 61,
Modified Park does not teach wherein each of the reinforcing members comprises an aluminum plate or a steel plate.
Jin teaches wherein each of the reinforcing members comprises an aluminum plate or a steel plate( Jin, “Cooling plate 3 can be made of exemplary materials including, but not limited to aluminum, aluminum alloy, magnesium aluminum alloy, and steel, such that the three parts of cooling plate 3 can be joined by welding”, see [0083])).
Jin teaches that the cooling materials is exemplary material to help cool the cell assembly (Jin, “exemplary materials including, but not limited to aluminum, aluminum alloy, magnesium aluminum alloy, and steel, such that the three parts of cooling plate 3 can be joined by welding”, see[0083])
Park and Jin are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery assemblies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the material of the plate to one that is exemplary for cooling in order to allow for the cells to be cooled and prevent short-circuit.
Response to Arguments
On pg. 11, The applicant argues:
“In other words, in Park, the side plates 40… are not coupled to the lateral surfaces the cells that have a greater area.”
The examiner find this convincing. The examiner interpreted that the member 40 is indirect coupled to the lateral side through the back plate. However, the applicant’s reasoning is convincing. Therefore, the examiner has added (US-20110300433-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’ to the rejection of claim 1 to teach the feature as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm.
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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752