Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/21/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 11/21/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3-14 remain pending in this application. The examiner acknowledges no new matter has been added.
Applicant’s terminal disclaimed filed 10/23/2025 has overcome the double patenting rejection to claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 7-9, 11, and 14 previously set forth in the Final Office Action set forth 7/21/2025.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Razzell (US 2019/252734 A1) in view of Won et al. (KR 20180112617 A). Razzell (US 2019/0252734 A1) was cited in the IDS filed 8/07/2024. Won et al. (KR 20180112617 A) was cited in the IDS filed on 7/06/2022.
In regard to claim 1, Razzell teaches a battery pack (see e.g. the energy Storage System 600 in Para. 32 and Fig. 6) comprising:
a plurality of first battery modules (see e.g. Annotation A of annotated Fig. A and Para. 32) stacked in a first direction (see e.g. Annotation A spaced along the first direction of annotation C. As best understood considering the instant drawings show battery modules 300 placed in a row along a first direction horizontally, the batteries 108 of Razzell in Fig. 6 of the same row along a first direction along a horizontal plane would meet the limitation of “stacked.” The examiner reminds applicant the term “stacked” does not imply a specific required distance, side of the structure, or axis between the “stacked” features, just a neat arrangement. Considering applicant’s application of the phrasing “stacked” and the instant drawings, the term and phrasing does not require vertical stacking) and a plurality of second battery modules (see e.g. Annotation B of annotated Fig. A and Para. 32) stacked in the first direction (see e.g. Annotation B spaced along the first direction of annotation C. As best understood considering the instant drawings show battery modules 300 placed in a row along a first direction horizontally, the batteries 108 of Razzell in Fig. 6 of the same row along a first direction along a horizontal plane would meet the limitation of “stacked.” The examiner reminds applicant the term “stacked” does not imply a specific required distance, side of the structure, or axis between the “stacked” features, just a neat arrangement. Considering applicant’s application of the phrasing “stacked” and the instant drawings, the term and phrasing does not require vertical stacking) that are arranged in two rows spaced from each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (see e.g. the direction of annotation H in which annotation A and B of the first and second battery modules respectively are spaced apart that is perpendicular from the first direction marked by annotation C);
a plurality of first slave battery management systems (BMSs) that are positioned at one side of the plurality of first battery modules facing the plurality of second battery modules and are arranged in the first direction (see e.g. Para. 25, Para. 26, and see annotation D of annotated Fig. A in relation to annotation A and C);
a plurality of second slave BMSs that are positioned on one side of the plurality of second battery modules facing the plurality of first battery modules and are arranged in the first direction (see e.g. Para. 25, Para. 26, and see annotation E of see annotated Fig. A in relation to annotation B and C).
A first wave path guide extending in the first overlying an upper side of the plurality of first battery modules in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction (see e.g. the conductive surface 622 of waveguide 604 for battery pack 626 in Para. 32 along first direction, as noted by annotation C, that is formed on all sides of the battery module.
The wave guide 604 that contains the conductive surface 622 in Para. 32 is noted to be an embodiment of waveguide 504. Fig. 5 shows waveguide 504 is a three-dimensional structure, rather than a component with no height or depth. This is further shown by the depth of annotation I and the feature of annotation L of annotated Fig. B. Therefore, it would be an expected property that the waveguide 604, as shown in Fig. 6, is a physical structure with depth or height and a covering. This depth or height of the covering feature of the waveguide marked by annotation L would be expected to overlie the battery structure and may be viewed therefore as residing in a third direction above the battery modules that would perpendicular to the first direction and second direction in Annotated Fig. A. Depth would be expected to be at all points of the waveguide, as supported by Fig. 5 and annotated Fig. B, and would therefore include the wave guide having depth along a third direction, i.e. annotation I, at an upper side of the first wave path guide, at a point marked annotation L, along the first direction as shown by the stretch of the wave guide 504 that extends length-wise along the same stretch of annotation C. One can note that annotation I is perpendicular to the first direction marked by annotation C and the second direction marked by annotation H. This interpretation of a wave guide overlying an upper side of the plurality of first battery modules in a third direction being met by the waveguide structure of Razzell that includes features vertically covering the battery modules is supported because the instant drawings show the same configuration of features of the the wave guide vertically above the battery in a sheet that also extends in the first direction by first battery module 200 and first wave path guide 400 in Fig. 7.
In the alternative, it would be obvious to modify the waveguide 604 to have the overheard structure of waveguide 504 for the benefit of increasing the benefit of guiding wireless signals and acting as a mechanical stabilizer as noted in Para. 3-32 of Razzell, Fig. 5, annotated Fig. B. and the position of the wave guide in front of the battery in Fig. 6); and
Razzell teaches a second wave path guide extending in the first direction at an upper side of the plurality of second battery modules (see e.g. the conductive surface 624 of waveguide 604 for battery pack 626 in Para. 32 along first direction, as noted by annotation C, that is formed on all sides of the battery module.
The wave guide 604 that contains the conductive surface 624 in Para. 32 is noted to be an embodiment of waveguide 504. Fig. 5 shows waveguide 504 is a three-dimensional structure, rather than a component with no height or depth. This is further shown by the depth of annotation I and the feature of annotation L of annotated Fig. B. Therefore, it would be an expected property that the waveguide 604, as shown in Fig. 6, is a physical structure with depth or height and a covering. This depth or height of the covering feature of the waveguide marked by annotation L would be expected to overlie the battery structure and may be viewed therefore as residing in a third direction above the battery modules that would perpendicular to the first direction and second direction in Annotated Fig. A. Depth would be expected to be at all points of the waveguide, as supported by Fig. 5 and annotated Fig. B, and would therefore include the wave guide having depth along a third direction, i.e. annotation I, at an upper side of the first wave path guide, at a point marked by annotation L, along the first direction as shown by the stretch of the wave guide 504 that extends length-wise along the same stretch of annotation C. One can note that annotation I is perpendicular to the first direction marked by annotation C and the second direction marked by annotation H. This interpretation of a wave guide overlying an upper side of the plurality of first battery modules in a third direction being met by the waveguide structure of Razzell that includes features vertically covering the battery modules is supported because the instant drawings show the same configuration of features of the wave guide vertically above the battery in a sheet that also extends in the first direction by first battery module 200 and first wave path guide 400 in Fig. 7.
In the alternative, it would be obvious to modify the waveguide 604 to have the overheard structure of waveguide 504 for the benefit of increasing the benefit of guiding wireless signals and acting as a mechanical stabilizer as noted in Para. 3-32 of Razzell, Fig. 5, annotated Fig. B. and the position of the wave guide in front of the battery in Fig. 6).
Razzell fails to explicitly teach a battery case that houses the plurality of first and second battery modules and includes a plurality of cross beams for partitioning between the plurality of first battery modules and between the plurality of second battery modules;
However, Won et al. teaches a battery case that houses the plurality of first and second battery modules by the tray and cover in the Abstract, Fig.1, and Fig. 2, and seen by the plurality of two rows of battery modules and includes a plurality of cross beams for partitioning between the plurality of first battery modules and between the plurality of second battery modules by the l-shaped beam frames in the Abstract, Fig. 1., and Fig. 2 Won et al. teaches the tray provides a space to place the batteries and the beams absorb heat and increase the stiffness and volume ratio of the battery pack in the Abstract.
Razzell and Won et al. are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they both teach systems with a plurality of batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the battery system of Razzell with the tray and beam structure as taught by Won et al. to provide a space to place the batteries within and the absorb heat from the batteries and increase the stiffness and volume ratio of the battery pack as noted in the abstract of Won et al..
PNG
media_image1.png
828
710
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. A of Fig. 6 of Razzell
PNG
media_image2.png
434
524
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure B. Annotated Fig. B of Fig. 5 of Razzell
In regard to claim 3, Razzell in view of Won et al. teaches the battery pack according to claim 1,
Wherein the plurality of first slave BMSs and the plurality of second slave BMSs are respectively arranged in the first direction between the first wave path guide and the second wave path guide (see e.g. Razzell teaches an annotation D and E of annotated Fig. A that are between the exterior walls of conductive surfaces 622 and 624 of waveguide 604 marked by annotation F and noted in Para. 32).
In regards to claim 4, Razzell in view of Won et al. teaches the battery pack according to claim 3, further comprising:
a master BMS formed separately from the plurality of first and second battery modules between the first wave path guide and the second wave path guide (see e.g. Razzell et al. teaches controller 106, RF Gateway 114 and antenna 602 which is separate from the plurality of first and second battery modules and formed between the interior walls of short conductive surfaces 622 and 624 of first and second wave path guide marked by annotation G of annotated Fig. A. These features are noted in Para. 22 and 32).
In regards to claim 5, Razzell in view of Won et al. teaches the battery pack according to claim 4, wherein the first and second wave path guides are formed by passing through the plurality of first and second battery modules, respectively, and extending in the first direction up to a position where the master BMS is arranged (see e.g. Razzell teaches this by the direction of annotation C of annotated Fig. A that the wave path guides made up of conductive surfaces 622 and 624 pass through the two rows of battery modules and extend up to controller 106, RF Gateway 114 and antenna 602. These features are noted in Para. 22 and 32),
and the master BMS is arranged at a position separated from the plurality of first and second battery modules in the first direction (see e.g. Razzell teaches this by controller 106, RF Gateway 114 and antenna 602 that are not in line with annotation A or B in the direction of annotation C of annotated Fig. A. These features are noted in Para. 22 and 32).
In regard to claim 6, Razzell in view of Won et al. teaches the battery pack according to claim 4, wherein the master BMS is arranged symmetrically between the plurality of first and second battery modules (see e.g. Razzell teaches this by annotated Fig. A where controller 106, RF Gateway 114 and antenna 602 are arranged fairly symmetrically between annotation A and B. These features are noted in Para. 22 and 32).
In regard to claim 7, Razzell in view of Won et al. teach the battery packing according to claim 1, wherein an antenna is formed in each of the first and second slave BMSs (see e.g. Razzell teaches the antenna 116 in Fig. 6 and Para. 32).
In regard to claim 8, Razzell in view of Won et al. teach the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the first wave path guide is formed between the battery pack upper cover and the plurality of first battery modules (see e.g. Razzell teaches the conductive surface 622 of waveguide 604 for battery pack 626 in annotated Fig. A and Para. 32 that surrounds annotation A and would be also encased by cover 300 in Fig. 1 and Para. 10 of Won et al. upon the combination),
and the second wave path guide is formed between the battery pack upper cover and the plurality of second battery modules (see e.g. Razzell teaches the conductive surface 624 of waveguide 604 for battery pack 626 in annotated Fig. A and Para. 32 that surrounds annotation B and would be also encased by cover 300 in Fig. 1 and Para. 10 of Won et al. upon the combination of the rejection of claim 1).
In regard to claim 13, Razzell in view of Won et al. teach the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of first slave BMSs and the plurality of second slave BMSs are formed so as to be separated from each other (see e.g. Razzell teaches this by annotation D and E of annotated Fig. A that are separate and comprise slave BMSs as described in Para. 25-26).
In regard to claim 14, Razzell in view of Won et al. teach a device comprising the battery pack according to claim 1 (see e.g. Razzell teaches the energy storage system 600 in Para. 32 and Fig. 6 that makes up a device and combination of references in the rejection of claim 1 above using Razzell and Won et al.).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Razzell (US 2019/252734 A1) in view of Won et al. (KR 20180112617 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lim et al. (KR 101776853 B1). Lim et al. was cited in the non-final rejection filed 3/26/2025.
In regard to claim 9, the combined teachings of Razzell and Won et al. have been relied upon to teach the battery pack according to claim 1.
Won et al., upon the combined teachings of Razzell and Won et al. in claim 1, teaches a battery pack upper cover that covers an upper surface of the battery case (See cover 300 in Fig. 1).
Razzell in view of Won et al. fail to explicitly teach wherein at least one hole is formed in the battery pack upper cover.
However, Lim et al. teaches a gas discharge hole 521 on a cover 500 in Fig. 12. Lim et al. teaches the hole helps to discharge harmful gasses that may accumulate from a battery to the outside in Para 5-6.
Lim et al. is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they teach systems with a plurality of batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cover of the combined teachings of Razzell and Won et al. to add a hole, as taught by Lim et al., to allow for degassing of harmful gasses that may build up from a battery as noted by Lim et al. in Para 5-6.
In regard to claim 10, Razzell in view of Won et al. and Lim et al. teach the battery pack according to claim 9,
Razzell fails to explicitly teach the battery case further comprising an outside wall forming an outer hull part,
an upper end of the outside wall and the battery pack upper cover are coupled, and
the battery pack upper cover is formed separately from the plurality of first and second battery modules.
Won et al., upon the combined teachings of Razzell and Won et al. in claim 1 of the battery case of Won et al., teaches the battery case by the battery case in the Abstract further comprises an outside wall forming an outer hull part by the side frames 400 in Fig. 1,
an upper end of the outside wall and the battery pack upper cover are coupled as seen by Fig. 1 and side frames 400 and cover 300 in Fig. 1 and Para. 10, and
the battery pack upper cover is formed separately from the plurality of first and second battery modules as seen by Fig. 1 and 2 in which the cover 300 is formed separately from battery modules 100 in Para. 9-10.
Razzell and Won et al. are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they both teach systems with a plurality of batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the battery system of Razzell with the tray and beam structure including the walls and hull as taught by Won et al. to provide a space to place the batteries within and the absorb heat from the batteries and increase the stiffness and volume ratio of the battery pack as noted by Won et al. in its Abstract.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Razzell (US 2019/252734 A1) in view of Won et al. (KR 20180112617 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kenji (JP 2016178066). Kenji was cited in the non-final rejection filed 3/26/205.
In regard to claim 11, Razzell in view of Won et al. teach the battery pack according to claim 1.
Razzell in view of Won et al. fail to explicitly teach a plurality of first bus bars that are arranged so as to span between two adjacent battery modules among the battery modules of the plurality of first battery modules; and a plurality of second bus bars arranged so as to span between two adjacent battery modules among the battery modules of the plurality of second battery modules.
However, Kenji teaches a plurality of bus bars used to electrically connect a row of adjacent batteries in Para. 14, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5.
Razzell, Won, et al. and Kenji are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they teach both systems with a plurality of batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect each of the plurality of battery module rows of the combination of teachings of Razzell in view of Won et al. by bus bars, as taught by Kenji, to electrically connect adjacent batteries together as noted by Kenji in Para. 14.
In regards to claim 12, Razzell in view of Won et al. and Kenji teach the battery pack according to claim 11, wherein the plurality of cross beams are formed separately from each of the plurality of first and second bus bars at lower sides of the plurality of first and second bus bars (see e.g. the combination of the cross beams of Won et al., as seen by the claim 1 rejection, and the bus bars of Kenji, as seen by the claim 11 rejection, teach the plurality of cross beams are formed separately from each of the plurality of first and second bus bars, as they would be formed separately because of the combination, at lower sides of the plurality of first and second bus bars because in order for the combination to mechanical fit together, the cross beams of Won et al. would have to make space for the bus bars of Kenji et al. and therefore form around multiple sides of the bus bars such as the edges that could be considered lower sides).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on paragraph 4 of page 5 of Applicant’s remarks that Razzell is citing for disclosing two rows of batteries, a plurality of slave BMSs attached to each, a master BMS, and a pair of waveguides. Won teaches crossbeams between the battery modules. Applicant argues on paragraph 1 of page 6 of Applicant’s remarks that claim 1 recites a first battery module extending in a first height and a second battery modules extending in the first direction such as to form two rows spaced apart in a second direction. Applicant argues claim 1 recites a first wave path guide extending in the first direction and overlying an upper side of the first battery modules in a third (depth) direction and the same for the second wave path guide but for the second battery modules. Applicant cites the office action noting that the term “overlie” or other terms asserting waveguides that are not inwardly spaced are and that the multiple directions are not defined and could be the same direction. Applicant argues the further defining of the second direction being perpendicular to the first and the third direction perpendicular leads to the combination of Razzell and Won to not result in the subject matter of claim 1 because the waveguides of Razzell are between the columns of battery modules and does not overlie any battery modules in a third (depth direction).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. While the examiner believes the amendment to claim 1 is helpful in moving prosecution forward by further defining the directions relative to each other, the claims may still be broadly interpreted such that the wave guides of Razzell may read on the claims. Examiner’s response in the Advisory Action filed 11/4/2025 notes the claim limitations are not found to differentiate themselves from the waveguides of Razzell because the claims do not provide a clear distinction between the directions relative to one another so arguments about the art showing “inward spacing” is moot because the claim doesn’t further define away from “inward spacing”, however the arguments also assert that Razzell may still potentially read on “overlie."
As discussed in the Advisory Action filed 11/4/2025 , the wave guide 604 that contains the conductive surfaces 622 and 624 in Para. 32 is noted to be an embodiment of waveguide 504. Fig. 5 shows waveguide 504 is a three-dimensional structure, rather than a component with no height or depth. This is further shown by annotation I of annotated Fig. B and annotation L. Therefore, it would be an expected property that the waveguide 604, as shown in Fig. 6, is a physical structure that extends above the batteries in an annotated third direction marked by annotation I and pointed to by annotation L. This depth or height may be viewed as a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and second direction in Annotated Fig. A. The wavelength section shown by annotation L would be expected to be above, and therefore at an upper side of the battery modules considering the battery modules 108 are surrounded by the wave guides 604 in Fig. 6 and Fig. 5 shows the waveguides 504 have height and a top and based upon the purpose of the waveguide to guide wireless signals and act as mechanical stabilizer in Para. 30-32 of Razzell, Fig. 5, annotated Fig. B. and the position of the wave guide in front of the battery in Fig. 6.
In the alternative, it would be obvious to modify the waveguide 604 to have the overheard structure of waveguide 504 for the benefit of increasing the benefit of guiding wireless signals and acting as a mechanical stabilizer as noted in Para. 3-32 of Razzell, Fig. 5, annotated Fig. B. and the position of the wave guide in front of the battery in Fig. 6.
Considering the nature of applicant’s arguments, the examiner recommends the applicant further define the claims to detail the structural features of the wave guide (i.e. the strip like structure to potentially get around the wave length encasement structure of Razzell) and further define it relative to other features such as the bus bar in order to move prosecution forward. If this is the path applicant chooses to go down, the examiner does recommend reviewing to the prior art made of record and not relied upon, particularly US 2022/0328890 A1 and US 2019/0221894 A1.
For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0260097 A1 teaches a battery system with a controller and slave controller system. This was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 3/26/2025.
US 2017/0331159 A1 teaches a battery system with a controller and slave controller system and wave paths. This was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 3/26/2025.
US 2022/0328890 A1 teaches a wave path guide and a bus bar above the battery cell (see e.g. Para 88- 90).
US 2019/0221894 A1 teaches module antennas 12 and microstrip transmission line 14 overtop the battery in Para. 41 and 45 and Fig. 2.
WO 2019/059568 A1 teaches wireless communication and multiple slave BMSs.
US 20200099107 A1 teaches batteries with management modules and communication modules and a microstrip.
US 2019/0252564 A1 teaches a dielectric strip between solar cells and batteries in Para. 36 and Fig. 4c.
US 2016/0365554 A1 teaches a dielectric battery between the top surface 72 of the battery cells and the center bar in Para. 55 and Fig. 2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE J METZGER whose telephone number is (571)272-0170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (1st week) or Monday - Friday (2nd week) 7:30am-5:00am - 9-day biweekly schedule.
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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/KATHERINE J METZGER/Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/TONG GUO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723