DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/02/2026 has been entered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 06/26/2025, has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 7 and 8 are cancelled. Claims 1-6 and 9-10 are now pending in the application.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1, 2, and 12 teach the limitation “coupled”, which is interpreted in accordance with the specification, which states “the term 'couple' or 'connect' includes not only a case where one member is directly coupled or directly connected to another member, but also a case where one member is indirectly coupled or indirectly connected to another member through a joint member”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 recites “electrode leads have different lengths” which is not described in the instant specification. While the “step X” of the instant specification at least supports a positional deviation of electrode leads, there is no explicit disclosure of leads with different lengths. Where, if at all, are electrode leads of different lengths necessarily disclosed? Drawings, which are not to scale (see “Mode for Disclosure”) in the instant specification are not alone sufficient to meet the written description requirement regarding dimensional limitations such as electrode leads with different lengths. Since a step X can be caused by leads of the same length having positional deviations from stacking, the described step X does not necessarily require different electrode lengths.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 9-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Toshiyuki (JP2019186042 A, refer to enclosed translations for citations).
PNG
media_image1.png
642
735
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1,
Toshiyuki teaches a battery module (Fig. 17A; see also Fig. 4, illustrative to 100; [0098]) comprising:
a battery cell stack (illustratively Fig. 5D, stack of 10; [0006]; hereinafter, figures other than 17A will be referred to for illustratively purposes only) in which a plurality of battery cells are stacked (Fig. 5D, 10; [0006]);
a bus bar (Fig. 5G, busbar unit 40/41/42; [0045]) wherein in the plurality of battery cells (stack of cells 10) includes a plurality (Fig. 11, plurality of 12) of positive [0016] electrode leads (Fig. 17A, electrode leads 12p; [0016]) coupled to the bus bar (Fig. 11, busbar 40/42; [0045]);
or a plurality (Fig. 11, stack of leads 12) of negative electrode leads (see Fig. 3A/B illustrative to negative electrode tabs 12n; [0016]) coupled to the bus bar (Fig. 12, busbar 42; [0045]; wherein the cells 10 positive/negative tab orientation alternates for each cell in the stack as described in [0031]);
and a cover disposed on the battery cell stack (Fig. 11, 30; [0075] disposed on cell stack of cells 10),
wherein at least a part of the bus bar (Fig. 5G, the 41/42 part) is in contact ([0096], “welded”) with a first surface (Fig. 17A, tip surface of 12; [0101]) of the plurality of positive electrode leads (see Fig. 5G/11, 12p; [0096]) or a first surface (Fig. 17A, tip surface of 12; [0101]) of the plurality of negative electrode leads (see Fig. 5G/11, 12n; [0096]);
wherein the cover 30 includes a support frame (Fig. 11 and 15, illustratively; [0075], wherein the vertical portion of 30 that receives 12/12p is the support frame)
defining an insertion opening (Fig. 11 illustratively, slit 34; [0028] “ housing portion 36 in which pair of electrode tabs 12”)
configured to receive the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p or the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n (see Fig. 11 and [0028]),
and wherein the bus bar 40/41/42 is disposed on (see https://www.thefreedictionary.com/ON, to indicate proximity) the support frame (see Fig. 11 illustratively, supporting vertical portion of 30 in proximity to 40) such that a buffer space (annotated Fig. 11, “buffer space”) is formed between the bus bar 40 and the support frame (see annotated Fig. 11, buffer space, and Fig. 13 illustratively, wherein at least a rightmost portion of a buffer space is between a leftmost portion of 40 and the vertical portion of 30),
and wherein the buffer space (annotated Fig. 11, “buffer space” on the left side of 40) is formed on a side of the bus bar (left side) facing in a direction of the battery cell stack (Fig. 11, the left side of 40 is a primarily vertical surface, thus facing the lateral directions, such as towards the cell stack to the right of 40)
to buffer a tensile force (see Fig. 11 and[0074]-[0075] which at least teaches the cell expansion of 10 in a vertical direction is still possible, and wherein 40 is directly connected between leads 12n and 12 p in vertical direction thus buffering expansion) applied to a positive electrode lead of the plurality of electrode leads or a negative electrode lead of the plurality of electrode leads (and wherein 40 is directly connected between leads 12n and 12 p in vertical direction thus buffering expansion) when the tensile force (Fig. 11,; [0074-0075], wherein 40 buffers vertical expansion of 10) is generated by at least one of the plurality of battery cells 10.
Regarding claim 2,
Toshiyuki teaches the battery module of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the bus bar 40/41/42 includes: a first member (Fig. 5G, 40) in contact with a second surface (Fig. 17A, inner side surface of 12) of the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p or a second surface (Fig. 17A, inner side surface of 12) of the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n; and a second member (Fig. 5G, 41/42) in contact with the first surfaces (Fig. 17A, tip surface of 12; [0101]) of the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p or the first surface (Fig. 17A, tip surface of 12; [0101]) of the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n.
Regarding claim 3,
Toshiyuki teaches the battery module of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), comprising the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and at the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n coupled ([0096], “welded”; see claim interpretation above) to the bus bar 40/41/42 [0096], and the first member 40 is disposed between (see Fig. 17A, 40 between 12n and 12p) the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n, and wherein the second member 41/42 extends from the first member 40 (see Fig. 5G illustratively) and contacts each (see Fig. 5G, 40 contacting plurality of 12, wherein all components are directly or indirectly contacting) of the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n.
Regarding claim 9,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim teaches a battery pack (see Fig. 1, structure holding 100; see [0012]), comprising the battery module according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 10,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim teaches a vehicle ([0011], “vehicle”), comprising the battery module according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 12,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim teaches the battery module of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), comprising the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n coupled to the bus bar 40/41/42 (see [0096]), wherein the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n extend through the insertion opening (Fig. 11, slits 34; [0028].
Regarding claim 13,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim teaches the battery module of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 15 above), wherein the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n are each bonded (welded; see [0096]) to the second member (Fig. 5G, 41/42) of the bus bar 40/41/42.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiyuki (JP2019186042 A, refer to enclosed translations for citations) in view of Kim (US-20140205889-A1).
Regarding claim 4,
Toshiyuki teaches the battery module of claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3 above), but fails to teach wherein the bus bar is formed in a "T" shape. Kim teaches a busbar formed in a T- shape (Fig. 6, T-like shape of 250). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the shape of the second member 40 of the busbar 40/41/42 to form in a “T” shape in order to realize a high-strength yet flexible electrical connection to the terminals [0046].
Regarding claim 5,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim teaches the battery module of claim 4 (see rejection of claim 4 above), wherein the second member 41/42 of the bus bar 40/41/42 is bonded by laser welding [0096] while being placed on (https://www.thefreedictionary.com/on ,“to indicate proximity”) first surfaces (Fig. 11, tip surfaces of 12; see [0096], “laser welding”) of the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p and the plurality of negative electrode leads 12n.
Regarding claim 6,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim teaches the battery module of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above), but is silent to wherein the plurality positive electrode leads are formed of an aluminum material and the plurality of negative electrode leads are formed of a copper material and wherein the bus bar is formed of an aluminum material, configured melted during the laser welding, and bonded to the copper material. Kim teaches wherein the positive electrode lead is formed of an aluminum material (Kim, [0053]), and the negative electrode lead is formed of a copper material (Kim, [0053]), and wherein the bus bar is formed of an aluminum material melted during the laser welding, and bonded to an electrode lead formed of a copper material (Kim, [0053]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to use aluminum for the plurality of positive electrode leads and bus bar and use copper the plurality of negative electrode leads, as Kim teaches these as known materials for such members in the art [0053]. Furthermore, Toshiyuki teaches that modification may be made to the device [0109].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiyuki (JP2019186042 A, refer to enclosed translations for citations) in view of Chu (US-20070269685-A1).
Regarding claim 11,
Toshiyuki in view of Kim battery module of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to teach wherein positive electrode leads 12p of the plurality of positive electrode leads 12p have different lengths. Chu teaches wherein positive electrode leads (Fig. 1, 7; [0060]) of the plurality of positive electrode leads 7 have different lengths [0075]. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to alter/correct the length of Toshiyuki’s exhibiting positional deviations (see [0106]) such that the electrode leads have different lengths, as taught by Chu, to accommodate positional variations after assembly (Chu, [0075]). Furthermore, Toshiyuki teaches that modification may be made to the device [0109] and discloses the problem of positional variations [0106].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Toshiyuki does not teach clusters of multiple positive or negative electrode leads connected to a bus bar. However, this is not persuasive, as Toshiyuki does teach a plurality of positive leads 12p and a plurality of negative leads attached to a bus bar 40/41/42 (see Fig. 5G, busbar unit 40/41/42 which contacts the plurality of 12). More specifically, Figs. 3A and B depict 1 battery cell, and [0022] teaches that the device 100 has a plurality of cells 10; hence, there is a plurality of 12. While the examiner notes a structural difference is present between Toshiyuki and the instant application, such differences are not currently captured under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language.
Applicant argues that all other claims, including the new claims, should be allowable based off an allowable independent claim. However, this is not persuasive, as the rejections on all claims have been sustained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL WYROUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-4806. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10am-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, TIFFANY LEGETTE can be reached on (571) 270-7078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL CHRISTIAN ST WYROUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights