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 Amendments
The Amendment filed April 6th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 5-15 remain pending in the application. Claims 16-20 were added by the Applicant. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore the rejections have been withdrawn. New rejections follow.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a first longitudinal end this is closed” should be corrected to “a first longitudinal end that is closed”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 20 recites “means…for acting as an expansion joint…”. This claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). In light of the specification, the broadest reasonable interpretation of this claim limitation is that the “means” is an indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, which is described in the specification as functioning as a type of expansion joint, and further illustrated in Figure 3. Therefore, the claim was interpreted to mean an indentation acting as an expansion joint.
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 1-2, 5, 7, 10, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1 in view of Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1 and Rosskamp et al. US 2013/0164600 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Morita discloses a battery pack [0009] comprising:
a plurality of cells (plurality of batteries Figure 3 Item 1) [0009] with equal polarity in the N rows and opposite polarity in the M columns (batteries are lined up with the same orientation to form parallel units Item 6 Figure 3, a plurality of parallel units are arranged in the vertical direction with different orientations) [0027];
PNG
media_image1.png
651
1056
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 3
a plurality of cell connectors (lead plates Figure 3 & 5 Item 5) [0027] which are arranged on both sides of said battery mount in a staggered manner over two of the N rows and interconnect said battery cells with one another (see Annotated Morita Figure 5 below) [0032]
PNG
media_image2.png
795
1152
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 5
Morita discloses that the battery pack comprises reinforcing partition walls (spacers Figure 3 Item 7) between every two rows of battery cells [0014], thus Morita discloses that the reinforcing partition walls are located between the N rows at an interval of two rows. Morita discloses, as shown in Figure 5 above, that the walls separate two cell connectors arranged over the two of the N rows.
Morita is silent as to a plurality of cell holders for receiving the battery cells as claimed in Claim 1.
Kwag discloses a battery pack comprising a plurality of cylindrical battery cells accommodated in a case [Abstract], similar to that of Morita. Kwag discloses that the case has a first cover and a second cover [0018], similar to the case of Morita [Morita 0049]. Kwag discloses that the first and second covers comprise guide ribs (Figure 1 Item G) that surround the first and second end portions of the battery cells [0023], and that the guide ribs are arranged in rows and columns corresponding to the battery cells [0025, 0058]. Kwag discloses that the guide ribs are open in the vertical direction such that both poles of the battery cell can be contacted (see Figure 1; have a ring shape surround peripheries of the end portions of the battery cells) [0024].
Kwag discloses that the covers comprising guide ribs define assembly positions for the battery cells to provide alignment of the battery cells [0058] and prevents wobbling or movement [0081].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the cell holders (guide ribs) of Kwag in the battery pack of Morita to provide alignment of the battery cells and secure attachment through preventing wobbling or movement of the battery cells. Thus, modified Morita discloses a plurality of cell holders (guide ribs of Kwag) for receiving battery cells which are arranged in N rows and M columns (Morita discloses that the battery cells are arranged in N rows and M columns, and Kwag discloses that the cell holders are arranged corresponding to the battery cells). Morita discloses that there are 7 rows N and 8 columns M of battery cells, as shown in Figure 3, thus modified Morita discloses that M and N are each greater than 3.
Modified Morita further discloses that the cell holders are integrally formed with an integrally connected to one another to form a flat battery cell mount, as modified by Kwag. Kwag discloses that the covers, comprising the cell holders (guide ribs), as well as a partition wall, are formed of plastic and by injection molding [0022] and integrally formed [0019, thus Kwag discloses that the cell holders are integrally formed with and integrally connected to one another to form a flat battery cell mount (covers). Modified Morita thus discloses that the reinforcing partition wall is integrally formed and integrally connected to the cell holders as modified by Kwag.
Morita discloses that the partition walls can be planar plastic boards, but can also have a corrugated or sawtooth structure [0030, 0035], which provides excellent shock absorption [0035]. Morita also discloses that the partition walls can have depressions or protrusions which provide secure contact with battery cells [0035]. However, Modified Morita is further silent as to the reinforcing partition specifically including at least one indentation configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount.
Rosskamp discloses a battery pack comprising a housing and a plurality of cells [Abstract], similar to Morita. Rosskamp discloses that the housing further comprises a plurality of partition walls that divide the housing into a plurality of receiving spaces for battery cells [0046], similar to the partition walls of Morita. Rosskamp discloses that the partition walls comprise an indentation (deformation zone Item 90 Figure 9 that is a corrugated or S-shaped wall section) [0050], similar to the suggested embodiments of Morita as mentioned above. Rosskamp discloses that the indentation enables the housing to absorb forces acted on it without being destroyed, and provides elasticity to the partition wall and the rest of the battery module housing [0050]. Thus, Rosskamp discloses a partition wall with an indentation, wherein the indentation is an elastically deformable region that compensates for forces acting on the battery housing. Thus, it would expected that the indentation of Rosskamp could also act as an expansion joint that can compensate for thermal expansion forces like heating and cooling of the battery housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the partition walls of Morita to include an indentation as suggested by Rosskamp to provide an elastically deformable region that compensates for forces acting on the battery housing to prevent damage or destruction to the battery housing. Thus modified Morita discloses an indentation in the partition walls that would be configured to act as an expansion joint that can compensate for forces such as thermal expansion from heating and/or cooling of the battery housing.
With regards to the limitation that the indentation (in the reinforcing partition wall) is “configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for the deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount”, Examiner notes that this limitation is considered functional language as it does not limit the structure of the indentation, and was therefore not given undue weight. As pointed out above, Examiner notes that the limitation was examined in view of Morita, Kwag, and Rosskamp to the extent that the limitation does define structure, such as being capable of acting as an expansion joint that can compensation for the deformation of the battery cell mount caused by temperature changes.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Morita illustrates in Figure 3 that there are seven rows N and eight columns M (see Figure 3), however Morita further discloses that the battery pack output current and the output voltage can be increased by increasing the number of batteries in the battery pack [0002], and further discloses that the battery pack of the invention allows for easily accommodating changes to the number of batteries for further optimization of the battery pack configuration [0007], therefore it would have obvious to modify the number of battery cells in each M column and N row to arrive at the claimed limitation of greater than 10 for the benefit of optimizing the battery pack configuration, increasing the output voltage, and increasing the output current.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Morita discloses that the cell holders are made of plastic as modified by Kwag [Kwag 0022], and the reinforcing partition walls are made of plastic [0035].
Regarding Claim 7, modified Morita discloses the battery pack of Claim 5, and further discloses that the cell holders and the reinforcing partition walls are made by injection molding, as modified by Kwag [Kwag 0019].
Additionally, Examiner notes that the limitation “manufactured by means of injection die casting or vacuum casting” is functional language and does not provide any structural limitation to the product claimed (i.e. the battery pack), and therefore will not be given any undue weight.
Regarding claim 10, modified Morita discloses, as shown in Annotated Morita Figure 3, that the battery cells are connected in series in adjacent N rows and connected in parallel in adjacent M columns [0027].
PNG
media_image3.png
651
1056
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 3
Switching rows/columns to be connected in parallel/series would be obvious to the skilled artisan because there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (i.e., rows in series and columns in parallel or rows in parallel and columns in series), and either choice would lead to the predicted outcome of a battery pack capable of outputting power. See MPEP § 2143(I)(E).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Morita discloses that the cell holders are cylindrical in shape (“ring shape”, see Kwag Figure 1 Item G) [0024].
Regarding claim 14, modified Morita discloses at least four passages for connecting elements (see connecting ribs Item 15 Figure 1 for connecting the cover case with the battery pack) [0049].
Regarding claim 15, modified Morita teaches all limitations of claim 1. The limitation of “use of the battery pack…in a battery module for home applications” is an intended use of the battery pack of claim 1 and does not impose further structural limitation. A skilled artisan would have understood that the battery pack of modified Morita is capable of use in any number of alternatively suitable applications in and around the home.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Morita discloses that the indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, as modified by Rosskamp, is disposed along the reinforcing partition wall between a pair of adjacent cell holders, which as modified by Kwag correspond to the positions of the battery cells, as shown in Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 including Rosskamp Figure 9 below.
PNG
media_image4.png
460
894
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 including Rosskamp Figure 9
Regarding claim 17, Morita discloses a battery pack [0009] comprising:
a plurality of cells (plurality of batteries Figure 3 Item 1) [0009]
a plurality of cell connectors (lead plates Figure 3 & 5 Item 5) [0027] which interconnect said battery cells with one another [0032]
Morita discloses that the battery pack comprises reinforcing partition walls (spacers Figure 3 Item 7) [0014].
Morita is silent as to a plurality of cell holders for receiving the battery cells as claimed in Claim 1.
Kwag discloses a battery pack comprising a plurality of cylindrical battery cells accommodated in a case [Abstract], similar to that of Morita. Kwag discloses that the case has a first cover and a second cover [0018], similar to the case of Morita [Morita 0049]. Kwag discloses that the first and second covers comprise guide ribs (Figure 1 Item G) that surround the first and second end portions of the battery cells [0023], and that the guide ribs are arranged in rows and columns corresponding to the battery cells [0025, 0058]. Kwag discloses that the guide ribs are open in the vertical direction such that both poles of the battery cell can be contacted (see Figure 1; have a ring shape surround peripheries of the end portions of the battery cells) [0024].
Kwag discloses that the covers comprising guide ribs define assembly positions for the battery cells to provide alignment of the battery cells [0058] and prevents wobbling or movement [0081].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the cell holders (guide ribs) of Kwag in the battery pack of Morita to provide alignment of the battery cells and secure attachment through preventing wobbling or movement of the battery cells. Thus, modified Morita discloses a plurality of cell holders (guide ribs of Kwag) for receiving battery cells which are arranged in N rows and M columns (Morita discloses that the battery cells are arranged in N rows and M columns, and Kwag discloses that the cell holders are arranged corresponding to the battery cells). Morita discloses that there are 7 rows N and 8 columns M of battery cells, as shown in Figure 3.
Morita discloses that the partition walls can be planar plastic boards, but can also have a corrugated or sawtooth structure [0030, 0035], which provides excellent shock absorption [0035]. Morita also discloses that the partition walls can have depressions or protrusions which provide secure contact with battery cells [0035]. However, Modified Morita is further silent as to the reinforcing partition specifically including at least one indentation configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount.
Rosskamp discloses a battery pack comprising a housing and a plurality of cells [Abstract], similar to Morita. Rosskamp discloses that the housing further comprises a plurality of partition walls that divide the housing into a plurality of receiving spaces for battery cells [0046], similar to the partition walls of Morita. Rosskamp discloses that the partition walls comprise an indentation (deformation zone Item 90 Figure 9 that is a corrugated or S-shaped wall section) [0050], similar to the suggested embodiments of Morita as mentioned above. Rosskamp discloses that the indentation enables the housing to absorb forces acted on it without being destroyed, and provides elasticity to the partition wall and the rest of the battery module housing [0050]. Thus, Rosskamp discloses a partition wall with an indentation, wherein the indentation is an elastically deformable region that compensates for forces acting on the battery housing. Thus, it would expected that the indentation of Rosskamp could also act as an expansion joint that can compensate for thermal expansion forces like heating and cooling of the battery housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the partition walls of Morita to include an indentation as suggested by Rosskamp to provide an elastically deformable region that compensates for forces acting on the battery housing to prevent damage or destruction to the battery housing. Thus modified Morita discloses an indentation in the partition walls that would be configured to act as an expansion joint that can compensate for forces such as thermal expansion from heating and/or cooling of the battery housing.
With regards to the limitation that the indentation (in the reinforcing partition wall) is “configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for the deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount”, Examiner notes that this limitation is considered functional language as it does not limit the structure of the indentation, and was therefore not given undue weight. As pointed out above, Examiner notes that the limitation was examined in view of Morita, Kwag, and Rosskamp to the extent that the limitation does define structure, such as being capable of acting as an expansion joint that can compensation for the deformation of the battery cell mount caused by temperature changes.
Regarding Claim 18, similarly to claim 16 above, modified Morita discloses that the indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, as modified by Rosskamp, is disposed along the reinforcing partition wall between a pair of adjacent cell holders, which as modified by Kwag correspond to the positions of the battery cells, as shown in Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 including Rosskamp Figure 9 below.
PNG
media_image4.png
460
894
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 including Rosskamp Figure 9
Regarding Claim 19, modified Morita discloses that the indentation has the shaped as shown in Figure 9 and 12 of Rosskamp, which is illustrated to be wedge shaped, having a first end that is closed and a second end that is open:
PNG
media_image5.png
370
421
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Rosskamp Figure 12
Regarding claim 20, Morita discloses a battery pack [0009] comprising:
a plurality of cells (plurality of batteries Figure 3 Item 1) [0009]
a plurality of cell connectors (lead plates Figure 3 & 5 Item 5) [0027] which interconnect said battery cells with one another [0032]
Morita discloses that the battery pack comprises reinforcing partition walls (spacers Figure 3 Item 7) [0014].
Morita is silent as to a plurality of cell holders for receiving the battery cells as claimed in Claim 1.
Kwag discloses a battery pack comprising a plurality of cylindrical battery cells accommodated in a case [Abstract], similar to that of Morita. Kwag discloses that the case has a first cover and a second cover [0018], similar to the case of Morita [Morita 0049]. Kwag discloses that the first and second covers comprise guide ribs (Figure 1 Item G) that surround the first and second end portions of the battery cells [0023], and that the guide ribs are arranged in rows and columns corresponding to the battery cells [0025, 0058]. Kwag discloses that the guide ribs are open in the vertical direction such that both poles of the battery cell can be contacted (see Figure 1; have a ring shape surround peripheries of the end portions of the battery cells) [0024].
Kwag discloses that the covers comprising guide ribs define assembly positions for the battery cells to provide alignment of the battery cells [0058] and prevents wobbling or movement [0081].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the cell holders (guide ribs) of Kwag in the battery pack of Morita to provide alignment of the battery cells and secure attachment through preventing wobbling or movement of the battery cells. Thus, modified Morita discloses a plurality of cell holders (guide ribs of Kwag) for receiving battery cells which are arranged in N rows and M columns (Morita discloses that the battery cells are arranged in N rows and M columns, and Kwag discloses that the cell holders are arranged corresponding to the battery cells). Morita discloses that there are 7 rows N and 8 columns M of battery cells, as shown in Figure 3.
Morita discloses that the partition walls can be planar plastic boards, but can also have a corrugated or sawtooth structure [0030, 0035], which provides excellent shock absorption [0035]. Morita also discloses that the partition walls can have depressions or protrusions which provide secure contact with battery cells [0035]. However, Modified Morita is further silent as to the reinforcing partition specifically including at least one “means” configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount. Examiner notes that as stated in the Claim Interpretation section above, “means” in the claim was interpreted to be “an indentation” based on the description in the instant specification.
Rosskamp discloses a battery pack comprising a housing and a plurality of cells [Abstract], similar to Morita. Rosskamp discloses that the housing further comprises a plurality of partition walls that divide the housing into a plurality of receiving spaces for battery cells [0046], similar to the partition walls of Morita. Rosskamp discloses that the partition walls comprise an indentation (deformation zone Item 90 Figure 9 that is a corrugated or S-shaped wall section) [0050], similar to the suggested embodiments of Morita as mentioned above. Rosskamp discloses that the indentation enables the housing to absorb forces acted on it without being destroyed, and provides elasticity to the partition wall and the rest of the battery module housing [0050]. Thus, Rosskamp discloses a partition wall with an indentation, wherein the indentation is an elastically deformable region that compensates for forces acting on the battery housing. Thus, it would expected that the indentation of Rosskamp could also act as an expansion joint that can compensate for thermal expansion forces like heating and cooling of the battery housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the partition walls of Morita to include an indentation as suggested by Rosskamp to provide an elastically deformable region that compensates for forces acting on the battery housing to prevent damage or destruction to the battery housing. Thus modified Morita discloses an indentation in the partition walls that would be configured to act as an expansion joint that can compensate for forces such as thermal expansion from heating and/or cooling of the battery housing.
With regards to the limitation that the indentation (in the reinforcing partition wall) is “configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for the deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount”, Examiner notes that this limitation is considered functional language as it does not limit the structure of the indentation, and was therefore not given undue weight. As pointed out above, Examiner notes that the limitation was examined in view of Morita, Kwag, and Rosskamp to the extent that the limitation does define structure, such as being capable of acting as an expansion joint that can compensation for the deformation of the battery cell mount caused by temperature changes.
Modified Morita discloses that the indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, as modified by Rosskamp, is disposed along the reinforcing partition wall between a pair of adjacent cell holders, which as modified by Kwag correspond to the positions of the battery cells, as shown in Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 including Rosskamp Figure 9 below.
PNG
media_image4.png
460
894
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 including Rosskamp Figure 9
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, and Rosskamp et al. US 2013/0164600 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamura et al., US 2015/0147638 A1.
Regarding claim 6, modified Morita is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 5, however is silent as to the plastic material being specifically ABS.
Tamura discloses a battery pack [0024] featuring a reinforcing member [0025, 0046], similar to that of Morita, and further discloses that the reinforcing member may be made of any number of alternatively usable materials, including a synthetic resin such as ABS [0046].
In the absence of a specific teaching from Morita of the plastic material, one of ordinary skill in the art would look to analogous art such as Tamura for a direct teaching of a plastic material to use for the battery pack of Morita. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to use the suggested plastic of ABS from Tamura. Thus, modified Morita discloses that the plastic is ABS.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, and Rosskamp et al. US 2013/0164600 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Uehara et al., US 2014/0017531 A1.
Regarding claim 8, modified Morita is relied upon for the reasons give above in addressing Claim 1, however fails to disclose pin-shaped spacers arranged alternately with said reinforcing partition walls in the row direction.
Uehara discloses a battery pack comprising a housing and a plurality of battery cells [0010], similar to that of modified Morita. Uehara discloses that the housing comprising cell holders (battery storage sections Figure 6 Item 13) that hold the battery cells [0010], similar to modified Morita. Further, Uehara discloses pin-shaped spacers in the row direction of the cell holder (see Annotated Uehara Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image6.png
2500
2444
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Uehara Figure 5 showing the pin-shaped spacer
Uehara discloses that a battery pack with such a configuration can securely hold the battery cels [0008] and be efficiently assembled [0009].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the pin shaped spacers of Uehara in the battery pack of modified Morita to provide a battery pack that securely holds the battery cells and can be efficiently assembled.
Modified Morita, as mentioned above, discloses that the reinforcing partition walls are positioned at intervals of two rows, and thus modified Morita reads on the structure recited in Claim 8, as indicated below in Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3 below.
PNG
media_image8.png
348
818
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3
Regarding claim 9, as shown in Annotated Morita Figure 5 below, the reinforcing partition wall extends the length of the battery cells in the longitudinal direction:
PNG
media_image9.png
505
576
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 5
As shown in Annotated Uehara Figure 5 above with regards to Claim 8, the pin-shaped spacers sit on top of the battery cell holders in the longitudinal direction (length of the battery cell). Thus, modified Morita, with the pin shaped spacers of Uehara, discloses that the reinforcing partition walls extend up to below the spacers in the longitudinal direction, as shown in Modified Morita Figure 5 below showing the spacers of Uehara.
PNG
media_image10.png
505
851
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Modified Morita Figure 5 below showing the spacers of Uehara
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, and Rosskamp et al. US 2013/0164600 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anastas et al., US 2014/0147737 A1.
Regarding claim 11, modified Morita discloses that the cells employed therein are round (cylindrical) [0028] but is silent regarding a plastic coating on the cells employed.
Anastas discloses battery cells and packaging for battery cells [0005]. Anastas discloses more specifically coating batteries in a plastic material [0058].
Anastas discloses that coatings such as this provide battery cells and their sensitive internal components with protection from damage due air/moisture/foreign matter contaminants [0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the battery cells of modified Morita to include the plastic coating of Anastas to provide battery cells and their sensitive internal components with protection from damage due air/moisture/foreign matter contaminants.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, and Rosskamp et al. US 2013/0164600 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hermann et al., US 2010/0136402 A1.
Regarding claim 12, modified Morita discloses the broad use of lithium cells [0028] but does not further disclose the specific use of lithium ferrophosphate cells.
Hermann discloses a battery pack [0011] comprising a plurality of cells (plurality of individual batteries) [0011], similar to that of Morita. Hermann further discloses a number of alternatively usable lithium-based battery technologies for their battery pack, including lithium iron phosphate (a synonym for lithium ferrophosphate) [0010].
It therefore would have been obvious to a skilled artisan, as of the filing date of the claimed invention, to select the lithium ferrophosphate cells taught by Hermann for use in the battery pack of modified Morita.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7, 10, 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1 in view of Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1 and Wegner US 2006/0078789 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Kwag discloses a battery pack [0053] comprising:
a plurality of cell holders (guide ribs Figure 1 Item G) [0058] for receiving battery cells (plurality of battery cells Figure 1 Item 10) [0058] arranged in N rows and M columns (see Annotated Kwag Figure 1 which shows the guide ribs arranged in a N × M array) and are “integrally formed with and integrally connected” to one another so that a flat battery cell mount is formed (case and covers comprising the guide ribs are injection molded plastic [0056]), with M and N each > 3 (see Annotated Kwag Figure 1), wherein said cell holders are open in the vertical direction such that both poles of a battery cell stored therein can be contacted (guide ribs surround the ends of the battery cells) [0058];
PNG
media_image11.png
778
774
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 1
a plurality of cells (plurality of battery cells Figure 1 Item 10) [0053] with equal polarity in the N rows and opposite polarity in the M columns (batteries in rows have the same polarity whereas batteries in columns have alternating polarity) [0121];
a plurality of cell connectors (tab plates Figure 8 Item 110a/110b) [0130] which are arranged on both sides of said battery mount in a staggered manner over two of the N rows and interconnect said battery cells with one another (see Annotated Kwag Figure 8 below) [0130]
PNG
media_image12.png
697
845
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 8
Kwag discloses that the battery pack comprises a reinforcing partition wall (barrier wall Figure 2 Item 150) [0060-0061], and discloses that there can be a plurality of barrier walls [0065]. Kwag discloses that the reinforcing partition wall is integrally formed with and integrally connected to the cell holders (barrier wall and case, comprising the guide ribs, are integrally formed of one piece of plastic [0060]). Kwag discloses that the reinforcing partition wall has protruding coupling portions (Figure 3 Items 151 & 152) that extend into gaps in the covers comprising the cell holders (guide ribs) [0069]-0070], thus Kwag discloses that the reinforcing partition wall is formed higher in a longitudinal direction than the cell holders. See Annotated Kwag Figure 2.
PNG
media_image13.png
738
588
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 2
Kwag discloses that the partition wall is positioned between two rows of cells, as shown in Figure 3 [0068], and as mentioned above discloses that there can be a plurality of walls when there are a plurality of cooling fluid inlets and outlets since the walls divide the battery pack into regions for efficient heating and cooling [0065], however is silent as to how to configure the walls in the case where there are a plurality of walls. Thus Kwag is silent as to a specific embodiment wherein the wall is between every two N rows of cell holders, and that the walls separate cell connectors arranged over the respective two N rows.
Morita discloses a battery pack with a plurality of battery cells [Abstract], similar to that of Kwag, wherein a plurality of battery cells are arranged with equal polarity in the N rows and opposite polarity in the M columns (batteries are lined up with the same orientation to form parallel units Item 6 Figure 3, a plurality of parallel units are arranged in the vertical direction with different orientations) [0027]. Morita further discloses that the battery pack comprises reinforcing partition walls (spacers) between every two rows of battery cells [0014] (see Morita Figure 3 Item 7 “spacers”). Thus Morita discloses that the reinforcing partition walls are located between the N rows at an interval of two rows.
PNG
media_image1.png
651
1056
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 3
Morita further discloses cell connectors (lead plates Figure 1 Item 5) [0009]. Morita discloses, as shown in Figure 5 below, that the walls separate two cell connectors arranged over the two of the N rows.
PNG
media_image2.png
795
1152
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 5
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the configuration of the battery pack of Kwag to incorporate the configuration of Morita, specifically the positioning of the partition walls when there are a plurality of walls in the battery pack and the corresponding layout of battery cells and cell connectors, as Kwag is silent as to a direct teaching of where to place a plurality of barrier walls and one of ordinary skill would look to analogous art such as Morita for a more direct teaching of a configuration with multiple barrier walls. Additionally, Morita discloses that this configuration of multiple walls provides mechanical stability to the battery pack [0014], the configuration of batteries provides a low resistance configuration, and the lead plate configuration prevents disconnection of the lead plates from the batteries during manufacturing [0010-0011], thereby providing additional motivation to use the suggestions of Morita.
Additionally, Examiner notes that switching rows/columns to be connected in parallel/series would be obvious to the skilled artisan because there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (i.e., rows in series and columns in parallel or rows in parallel and columns in series), and either choice would lead to the predicted outcome of a battery pack capable of outputting power. See MPEP § 2143(I)(E).
Kwag discloses that the reinforcing partition walls can have a wavy (meandering) shape corresponding to the profile of the cylindrical battery cells (see Kwag Annotated Figure 3) [0068], and further discloses that the reinforcing partition wall facilitates cooling of the battery pack by dividing the battery cells into sections for efficient cooling [0065-0067]. However, Kwag is further silent as to the reinforcing partition specifically including at least one indentation configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount.
Wegner discloses a cooling device that comprises a case for holding a plurality of battery cells [0030], wherein the battery cells are cylindrical and the openings in the case correspond to the cylindrical shape of the battery cells [0030], as shown in Figure 1, similar to the barrier wall of Kwag. Wegner discloses that the case has walls (Figure 1 Item 4) that contact the outer surfaces of the battery cells [0031], wherein the walls comprise expansion joints (Figure 1 Item 5) that provide added elasticity to the walls surrounding the battery cells for more directly force-fitted contact [0031], providing a snug fit for the battery cells held within the walls of the case.
Wegner additionally discloses that the walls of the case comprising the expansion joints are made of plastic [0032], similarly to the case and walls of Kwag. Wegner discloses that cooling medium flows through the walls of the case which are in close contact with the battery cells, which provides efficient cooling to the battery cells [0034].
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the analogy of Kwag and Wegner, which both disclose partition walls in a battery pack having a contoured shape corresponding to the outer profile of cylindrical battery cells, and both disclose the function of the partition walls aiding in cooling of the battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the expansion joints of Wegner in the walls of Kwag to provide the walls with more elasticity for a tight force-fit with the battery cells, thereby providing a wall with an indentation that acts as an expansion joint that can compensate for deformation of the battery case caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery case. See Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3 below.
PNG
media_image14.png
738
1155
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3
Regarding Claim 2, modified Kwag illustrates in Figure 1 that there are 12 rows and 4 columns (see Figure 1) of battery cells and cell holders, however Kwag further discloses that the battery pack output current and the output voltage can be increased by increasing the number of batteries in the battery pack [0004], and further discloses that the battery pack of the invention can be modified with other embodiments [0169-0170], therefore it would have obvious to modify the number of battery cells in each M column and N row to arrive at the claimed limitation of greater than 10 for the benefit of optimizing the battery pack configuration, increasing the output voltage, and increasing the output current.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Kwag discloses that the cell holders and reinforcing partition walls are made of plastic [0022].
Regarding Claim 7, modified Kwag discloses the battery pack of Claim 5, and further discloses that the cell holders and the reinforcing partition walls are made by injection molding [0019].
Additionally, Examiner notes that the limitation “manufactured by means of injection die casting or vacuum casting” is functional language and does not provide any structural limitation to the product claimed (i.e. the battery pack), and therefore will not be given any undue weight.
Regarding claim 10, modified Kwag discloses, as modified by Morita, that the battery cells are connected in series in adjacent N rows and connected in parallel in adjacent M columns [Morita 0027]. See Annotated Morita Figure 3 below:
PNG
media_image3.png
651
1056
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Morita Figure 3
Switching rows/columns to be connected in parallel/series would be obvious to the skilled artisan because there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (i.e., rows in series and columns in parallel or rows in parallel and columns in series), and either choice would lead to the predicted outcome of a battery pack capable of outputting power. See MPEP § 2143(I)(E).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Kwag discloses that the cell holders are cylindrical in shape (“ring shape”, see Kwag Figure 1 Item G) [0024].
Regarding claim 14, modified Kwag discloses at least four passages for connecting elements (see recesses Item 201c/202c in Figure 12 which provide a space for clips Items 250 to connect the elements of the main housing body of the battery pack) [0165].
Regarding claim 15, modified Kwag teaches all limitations of claim 1. The limitation of “use of the battery pack…in a battery module for home applications” is an intended use of the battery pack of claim 1 and does not impose further structural limitation. A skilled artisan would have understood that the battery pack of modified Kwag is capable of use in any number of alternatively suitable applications in and around the home.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Kwag discloses that the indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, as modified by Wegner, is disposed along the reinforcing partition wall between a pair of adjacent cell holders, as shown in Modified Kwag Annotated Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3 below.
PNG
media_image14.png
738
1155
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, and Wegner US 2006/0078789 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamura et al., US 2015/0147638 A1.
Regarding claim 6, modified Kwag is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 5, however is silent as to the plastic material being specifically ABS.
Tamura discloses a battery pack [0024] featuring a reinforcing member [0025, 0046], similar to that of Kwag, and further discloses that the reinforcing member may be made of any number of alternatively usable materials, including a synthetic resin such as ABS [0046].
In the absence of a specific teaching from Kwag of the plastic material, one of ordinary skill in the art would look to analogous art such as Tamura for a direct teaching of a plastic material to use for the battery pack of Kwag. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to use the suggested plastic of ABS from Tamura. Thus, modified Kwag discloses that the plastic is ABS.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, and Wegner US 2006/0078789 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Uehara et al., US 2014/0017531 A1.
Regarding claim 8, modified Kwag is relied upon for the reasons give above in addressing Claim 1, however fails to disclose pin-shaped spacers arranged alternately with said reinforcing partition walls in the row direction.
Uehara discloses a battery pack comprising a housing and a plurality of battery cells [0010], similar to that of modified Kwag. Uehara discloses that the housing comprising cell holders (battery storage sections Figure 6 Item 13) that hold the battery cells [0010], similar to modified Kwag. Further, Uehara discloses pin-shaped spacers in the row direction of the cell holder (see Annotated Uehara Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image6.png
2500
2444
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Uehara Figure 5 showing the pin-shaped spacer
Uehara discloses that a battery pack with such a configuration can securely hold the battery cels [0008] and be efficiently assembled [0009].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the pin shaped spacers of Uehara in the battery pack of modified Kwag to provide a battery pack that securely holds the battery cells and can be efficiently assembled.
Modified Kwag, as mentioned above as modified by Morita, discloses that the reinforcing partition walls are positioned at intervals of two rows, and thus modified Kwag reads on the structure recited in Claim 8, as indicated in the annotated figure below showing Morita Figure 3 with the pin-shaped spacers of Uehara.
PNG
media_image8.png
348
818
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Modified Morita Annotated Figure 3
Regarding claim 9, as shown in Kwag Figure 2, the reinforcing partition wall extends the length of the battery cells in the longitudinal direction
As shown in Annotated Uehara Figure 5 above with regards to Claim 8, the pin-shaped spacers sit on top of the battery cell holders in the longitudinal direction (length of the battery cell). Thus, modified Kwag, with the pin shaped spacers of Uehara, discloses that the reinforcing partition walls extend up to below the spacers in the longitudinal direction, as shown in Modified Kwag Figure 2 below showing the spacers of Uehara.
PNG
image15.png
100
100
image15.png
Greyscale
Modified Kwag Figure 2 below showing the spacers of Uehara
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, and Wegner US 2006/0078789 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anastas et al., US 2014/0147737 A1.
Regarding claim 11, modified Kwag discloses that the cells employed therein are round (cylindrical) [0110], and discloses that the cells can be covered by an insulative coating “T” [0111], but is silent regarding the coating being specifically plastic.
Anastas discloses battery cells and packaging for battery cells [0005]. Anastas discloses more specifically coating batteries in a plastic material [0058].
Anastas discloses that coatings such as this provide battery cells and their sensitive internal components with protection from damage due air/moisture/foreign matter contaminants [0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the battery cells of modified Kwag to include the plastic coating of Anastas to provide battery cells and their sensitive internal components with protection from damage due air/moisture/foreign matter contaminants.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1, Morita et al. US 2005/0031945 A1, and Wegner US 2006/0078789 A1, and further in view of Hermann et al., US 2010/0136402 A1.
Regarding claim 12, modified Kwag discloses the broad use of battery cells but does not further disclose the specific use of lithium ferrophosphate cells.
Hermann discloses a battery pack [0011] comprising a plurality of cells (plurality of individual batteries) [0011], similar to that of Kwag. Hermann further discloses a number of alternatively usable lithium-based battery technologies for their battery pack, including lithium iron phosphate (a synonym for lithium ferrophosphate) [0010].
It therefore would have been obvious to a skilled artisan, as of the filing date of the claimed invention, to select the lithium ferrophosphate cells taught by Hermann for use in the battery pack of modified Kwag.
Claims 17-18 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwag US 2020/0112008 A1 in view of Wegner US 2006/0078789 A1.
Regarding claim 17, Kwag discloses a battery pack [0053] comprising:
a plurality of cell holders (guide ribs Figure 1 Item G) [0058] for receiving battery cells (plurality of battery cells Figure 1 Item 10) [0058] arranged in N rows and M columns (see Annotated Kwag Figure 1 which shows the guide ribs arranged in a N × M array) to form a flat battery cell mount (case and covers comprising the guide ribs are injection molded plastic [0056]), wherein said cell holders are open in the vertical direction such that both poles of a battery cell stored therein can be contacted (guide ribs surround the ends of the battery cells) [0058];
PNG
media_image11.png
778
774
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 1
a plurality of cells (plurality of battery cells Figure 1 Item 10) [0053]
a plurality of cell connectors (tab plates Figure 8 Item 110a/110b) [0130] which interconnect said battery cells with one another (see Annotated Kwag Figure 8 below) [0130]
PNG
media_image12.png
697
845
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 8
Kwag discloses that the battery pack comprises a reinforcing partition wall (barrier wall Figure 2 Item 150) [0060-0061], and discloses that there can be a plurality of barrier walls [0065].
Kwag discloses that the reinforcing partition walls can have a wavy (meandering) shape corresponding to the profile of the cylindrical battery cells (see Kwag Annotated Figure 3) [0068], and further discloses that the reinforcing partition wall facilitates cooling of the battery pack by dividing the battery cells into sections for efficient cooling [0065-0067]. However, Kwag is further silent as to the reinforcing partition specifically including at least one indentation configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount.
Wegner discloses a cooling device that comprises a case for holding a plurality of battery cells [0030], wherein the battery cells are cylindrical and the openings in the case correspond to the cylindrical shape of the battery cells [0030], as shown in Figure 1, similar to the barrier wall of Kwag. Wegner discloses that the case has walls (Figure 1 Item 4) that contact the outer surfaces of the battery cells [0031], wherein the walls comprise expansion joints (Figure 1 Item 5) that provide added elasticity to the walls surrounding the battery cells for more directly force-fitted contact [0031], providing a snug fit for the battery cells held within the walls of the case.
Wegner additionally discloses that the walls of the case comprising the expansion joints are made of plastic [0032], similarly to the case and walls of Kwag. Wegner discloses that cooling medium flows through the walls of the case which are in close contact with the battery cells, which provides efficient cooling to the battery cells [0034].
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the analogy of Kwag and Wegner, which both disclose partition walls in a battery pack having a contoured shape corresponding to the outer profile of cylindrical battery cells, and both disclose the function of the partition walls aiding in cooling of the battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the expansion joints of Wegner in the walls of Kwag to provide the walls with more elasticity for a tight force-fit with the battery cells, thereby providing a wall with an indentation that acts as an expansion joint that can compensate for deformation of the battery case caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery case. See Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3 below.
PNG
media_image14.png
738
1155
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3
Regarding Claim 18, similarly to claim 16 above, modified Kwag discloses that the indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, as modified by Wegner, is disposed along the reinforcing partition wall between a pair of adjacent cell holders, as shown in Modified Kwag Annotated Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3 below.
PNG
media_image14.png
738
1155
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3
Regarding claim 20, Kwag discloses a battery pack [0053] comprising:
a plurality of cell holders (guide ribs Figure 1 Item G) [0058] for receiving battery cells (plurality of battery cells Figure 1 Item 10) [0058] arranged in N rows and M columns (see Annotated Kwag Figure 1 which shows the guide ribs arranged in a N × M array) to form a flat battery cell mount (case and covers comprising the guide ribs are injection molded plastic [0056]), wherein said cell holders are open in the vertical direction such that both poles of a battery cell stored therein can be contacted (guide ribs surround the ends of the battery cells) [0058];
PNG
media_image11.png
778
774
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 1
a plurality of cells (plurality of battery cells Figure 1 Item 10) [0053]
a plurality of cell connectors (tab plates Figure 8 Item 110a/110b) [0130] which interconnect said battery cells with one another (see Annotated Kwag Figure 8 below) [0130]
PNG
media_image12.png
697
845
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 8
Kwag discloses that the battery pack comprises a reinforcing partition wall (barrier wall Figure 2 Item 150) [0060-0061], and discloses that there can be a plurality of barrier walls [0065].
Kwag discloses that the reinforcing partition walls can have a wavy (meandering) shape corresponding to the profile of the cylindrical battery cells (see Kwag Annotated Figure 3) [0068], and further discloses that the reinforcing partition wall facilitates cooling of the battery pack by dividing the battery cells into sections for efficient cooling [0065-0067]. However, Kwag is further silent as to the reinforcing partition specifically including at least one “means” configured to act as an expansion joint that compensates for deformation of the battery cell mount caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery cell mount. Examiner notes that as stated in the Claim Interpretation section above, “means” in the claim was interpreted to be “an indentation” based on the description in the instant specification.
Wegner discloses a cooling device that comprises a case for holding a plurality of battery cells [0030], wherein the battery cells are cylindrical and the openings in the case correspond to the cylindrical shape of the battery cells [0030], as shown in Figure 1, similar to the barrier wall of Kwag. Wegner discloses that the case has walls (Figure 1 Item 4) that contact the outer surfaces of the battery cells [0031], wherein the walls comprise expansion joints (Figure 1 Item 5) that provide added elasticity to the walls surrounding the battery cells for more directly force-fitted contact [0031], providing a snug fit for the battery cells held within the walls of the case.
Wegner additionally discloses that the walls of the case comprising the expansion joints are made of plastic [0032], similarly to the case and walls of Kwag. Wegner discloses that cooling medium flows through the walls of the case which are in close contact with the battery cells, which provides efficient cooling to the battery cells [0034].
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the analogy of Kwag and Wegner, which both disclose partition walls in a battery pack having a contoured shape corresponding to the outer profile of cylindrical battery cells, and both disclose the function of the partition walls aiding in cooling of the battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the expansion joints of Wegner in the walls of Kwag to provide the walls with more elasticity for a tight force-fit with the battery cells, thereby providing a wall with an indentation that acts as an expansion joint that can compensate for deformation of the battery case caused by heating and/or cooling of the battery case. See Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3 below.
PNG
media_image14.png
738
1155
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kwag Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3
Modified Kwag discloses that the indentation in the reinforcing partition wall, as modified by Wegner, is disposed along the reinforcing partition wall between a pair of adjacent cell holders, as shown in Modified Kwag Annotated Figure 2 including Wegner Figure 3 above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the claim limitation “configured to act as an expansion joint” should have been considered. Examiner respectfully points out that as stated in the rejections above, the claim limitation “configured to act as an expansion joint” was properly considered, but was not given undue weight in examination as “configured to” carries weight only to the extent that it defines a structural limitation within the claim. As such, Examiner further points out that while “configured to act as an expansion joint” was not given undue weight, Examiner did point out in the rejections above how the indentations of both Rosskamp and Wegner are capable of acting as an expansion joint.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA G NEWELL whose telephone number is (571)270-1088. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jeffrey T. Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/A.G.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 11 June 2026
Prosecution Insights