DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendments received in the Remarks on November 26th, 2025:
Claims 1-27, 29, and 31-36 are pending in the current application. Claims 1, 2, 4, 8 and 21 have been amended, claims 28 and 30 have been cancelled and claims 32-36 were previously withdrawn as covering a non-elected invention.
Claim 1 has been amended to include “and wherein the rear housing part has at least one covering element for covering the rear housing part and at least one degassing connection piece for emergency degassing being formed integrally with the cover element.”
Claim 2 has been amended to include “in the form of double-wall hollow profile.”
Claim 4 has been amended to specify the profiles are “hollow”.
Claim 8 has been amended to exclude “and”.
Claim 21 has been amended to exclude “rear”.
Claim 28 has been cancelled.
Claim 30 has been cancelled.
Status of Objections and Rejections Pending from the Office Action of August 26th, 2025:
The previous claim objections regarding claims 21 and 28 have been overcome in view of the amendments received in the Remarks on November 26th, 2025.
The previous claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 112(b) have been overcome in view of the amendments received in the Remarks on November 26th, 2025.
The previous claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) have been overcome in the view of the amendments received in the Remarks on November 26th, 2025.
The previous claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 103 have been overcome in the view of the amendments received in the Remarks on November 26th, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed November 26th, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under Pflueger et al, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Pflueger et al (already on the record), Seo et al (already on the record) and Hofer, US 20160036025 A1.
Hofer teaches a battery comprising a degassing valve disposed in a wall of a housing [Hofer, 0031], in which figure 1 of Hofer depicts the degassing valve to be formed integrally with the housing.
Applicant argues Pflueger does not disclose the rear housing part has at least one cover element for covering the rear housing and at least one degassing connection piece for emergency degassing being formed integrally with the cover element.
Seo teaches a front and rear cover element that protects the internal components such as the cell stack [Seo, 0057]. Further, Lee, previously relied up, teaches a degassing cover, shown in figure 4 of Lee, which corresponds to the rear housing part of the claim, in which a through-hole connected to the protruding section, however, the through is integrally formed and connected with the cover piece, and is in communication with the flow passage of gas, therefore, with or without the addition of the discharge portion, the gas would discharge through the through-hole, just with less control.
Applicant argues that Pflueger does not show or suggest the newly introduced features of “the rear housing part has at least one cover element for covering the rear housing and at least one degassing connection piece for emergency degassing being formed integrally with the cover element” and that this distinguishing feature enables effective protection of the housing, especially the rear side, by means of the covering element. Further, the integrally formed, degassing connection piece allows the battery gasses to be discharged in an emergency before excessive pressure or an explosion can occur.
Seo teaches a front and rear cover element that protects the internal components such as the cell stack [Seo, 0057]. Further, Lee, previously relied up, teaches a degassing cover, shown in figure 4 of Lee, which corresponds to the rear housing part of the claim, in which a through-hole connected to the protruding section, however, the through is integrally formed and connected with the cover piece, and is in communication with the flow passage of gas, therefore, with or without the addition of the discharge portion, the gas would discharge through the through-hole, just with less control.
Applicant argues that it would not be obvious to consider, on the basis of Pflueger alone, “the rear housing part has at least one cover element for covering the rear housing and at least one degassing connection piece for emergency degassing being formed integrally with the cover element”, and that Pflueger does not disclose the arrangement of a cover element to protect the battery housing nor the degassing nozzle. Further, Pflueger does not mention the danger associated with and impact on a loaded battery housing or to remove gases from a battery module house. Thus, lacks the objecting according to the invention.
In response to applicants’ argument, while Pflueger may not explicitly disclose the arrangement of the cover element to protect the battery housing nor the dangers associated with a build up of gasses within the battery housing, both of those points would be well-known by someone with ordinary skill in the art, and Seo teaches a front and rear cover element that protects the internal components such as the cell stack [Seo, 0057].
Applicant argues that while Lee teaches a degassing connection piece, mandatorily integrated into the top cover of the battery case. Further, Lee’s discharge structure is tied to the upper surfaces of the battery pack, and does not hint towards relocating or integrating a degassing connection piece into a rear housing region, nor suggest a separate cover element protecting the housing exterior and that Lee teaches away from discharge orientation anywhere except the top cover of the battery case.
Lee teaches the embodiments described within the teachings are not limited, and rather cover various modifications and equivalent arrangements within the spirit and scope of the invention [Lee, 0059], further Lee teaches at least one of the degassing cover or cover plate may be configured to break and released the gas [Lee, 0017], further, depending on the orientation of the battery cells, the orientation of the cover comprising the degassing element of Lee can change.
Moreover, according MPEP 2144.04, IV, B, changing the shape of the main body is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed main body is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Applicant argues a skilled person would not combine Lee with Pflueger because Pflueger focuses on a module housing concept using L-shaped housing walls, clip connections and integrated cooling channels, which is not compatible with the robustness-orientated, multi-layered safety cover design of Lee.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the modification of Pflueger to include the degassing system taught by Lee would result in a battery pack with improved stability by discharging harmful gas components [Lee, 0058].
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 no obviousness.
Claims 1, 5-15, 19-20, 23-26, 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflueger et al, US20180219198A1 (already on the record), Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation) and Hofer, US 20160036025 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Pflueger teaches a battery module (Pflueger, 10; Figure 4), with a module housing (Pflueger, 11; Figure 1) formed from two housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 1), wherein the first housing side wall (Pflueger, 14.1; Figure 1), corresponding to the first central housing part of the claim, forms the cover and a side wall of the module housing, and the second housing wall (Pflueger, 14.2; Figure 1), corresponding to the second central housing part, forms the base and the other side wall, wherein cooling ducts (Pflueger, 16; Figure 1), corresponding to the cooling channels of the claim, are formed within the second housing side [Pflueger, 0035]. The battery module has a housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) on each end face of the, corresponding to the front and rear housing part, closing the module housing, moreover, all four corners of the end plate comprise connection elements (Pflueger, 23; Figure 4), to connect the end plates to the housing side walls in a force-fitting and/or form fitting manner [Pflueger, 0038]. However, Pflueger is silent to teach wherein the rear housing part has at least one covering element for covering the rear housing part.
Seo teaches a battery module configured to accommodate a battery cell stack, wherein the pair of front and rear housings (Seo, 400; Figure 3), comprise a front and rear cover (Seo, 430; Figure 3) [Seo, 0054].
Seo and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the rear cover as taught by Seo because such modification would protect the internal components, such as the cell stack [Seo, 0057].
However, modified Pflueger is silent to teach at least one degassing connection piece for emergency degassing being formed integrally with the cover element.
Hofer teaches a battery (Hofer, 1; figure 1) including a degassing valve (Hofer, 2; figure 1) disposed within the wall of a housing (Hofer, 3; figure 1) of a battery [Hofer, 0033], wherein figure 1 of Hofer depicts the degassing valve to be integrally formed within the wall of the housing.
Hofer and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify rear cover of modified Pflueger to include the degassing valve as taught by Hofer because such modification would allow a gas exchange between the interior of the housing and the surroundings of the housing through the membrane [Hofer, 0010].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing side walls and/or the housing plates may be produced as extruded sections or sheets-metal profiles or a combination thereof, in particular, the extruded profiles may be made of lightweight metal, aluminum and/or plastic [Pflueger, 0006].
Regarding Claim 6, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein it is conceivable for the two L-shaped housing sidewalls and/or the housing plate to be additionally connected to one another in a form-fitting/force-fitting/frictional and/or substance-bonded manner, such as screwed, riveted, and/or adhered and/or soldered [Pflueger, 0006], corresponding to the material bonding as required by the claim.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the two housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 1) are substantially L-shaped in design [Pflueger, 0035].
Regarding Claim 8, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the carrier element (Pflueger, 19; Figure 1), corresponding to the fixing rail of the claim, is mechanically connected to the housing side wall (Pflueger, 14.1; Figure 1), in a force-fitting and/or form-fitting manner, then the carrier element is placed on the cell terminals and/or the cell connectors (Pflueger, 12.1/12.2; Figure 1)[Pflueger, 0035]. The carrier element is integrally with at least one housing side wall, which allows it to achieve greater stability in the carrier side wall that is additionally mechanically fixed to the battery cell via the receiving means of the carrier element [Pflueger, 0010].
Regarding Claim 9, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, , Pflueger discloses the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 1), are connected to one another by means of the clip connection (Pflueger, 17; Figure 1), in a mechanically form-fitting and/or force-fitting manner [Pflueger, 0006], wherein a first clip connection can be rotated in respect of one another in at least one direction, and a second slip connection facilitates the force-fitting and/or form-fitting connection of the two housing side walls [Pflueger, 0012].
Regarding Claim 10, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 1), are connected to one another by means of the clip connection (Pflueger, 17; Figure 1), in a mechanically form-fitting and/or force-fitting manner [Pflueger, 0006], wherein at least one clip connection is configured in a substantially S-shaped, corresponding to the formed protrusions of the claim, and/or an O-shaped and/or wedge-shaped design [Pflueger, 0011], corresponding to the formed recesses of the claim, so as the housing side walls can be configured to correspond to one another geometrically [Pflueger, 0012].
Regarding Claim 11, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the clip connection (Pflueger, 17; Figure 1) with an S-shaped design has an undercut, as depicted in the upper right corner of figure 2, and the clip connection with the O-shaped design has a latching hook, as depicted in the lower left corner of figure 2, such that the first clip connection precents movement around the rotational axis, and the second clip connection fixes the housing sides together, in the force-fitting and/or form-fitting manner [Pflueger, 0012].
Regarding Claim 12, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing (Pflueger, 11; Figure 2) has a plurality of receiving means (Pflueger, 22; Figure 2), arranged in the housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 2) [Pflueger, 0036].
Regarding Claim 13, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the cooling ducts (Pflueger, 16; Figure 1), corresponding to the cooling channels of the claim, that are formed within the second housing side wall (Pflueger, 14.2; Figure 1) [Pflueger, 0035].
Regarding Claim 14, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the first connection piece (Pflueger, 16.1; Figure 4) may be configured as the cooling duct inlet, corresponding to the inlet (V) of the claim, and the second connection piece (Pflueger, 16.2; Figure 4) may be configured as the cooing duct outlet, corresponding to the return (R) of the claim [Pflueger, 0039].
Regarding Claim 15, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein there are a plurality of cooling ducts (Pflueger, 16; Figure 1) [Pflueger, 0008], as depicted in figure 1 and 2, wherein it is shown the ducts are separated and distinct from each other, however Pflueger is silent to teach the ducts being separated by means of a strut.
While modified Pflueger does not explicitly teach the cooling ducts, corresponding to the cooling channels of the claim, being separated by a strut, figures 1 and 2 show distinct and separate cooling ducts, and Pflueger teaches an embodiment in which there are a total of four ducts, indicating they are not connected and therefore separated, so it can be assumed the cooling ducts are separated by struts are required by the claim. There are a finite number of identified predictable solutions for the cooling ducts of Pflueger, such that they ducts are separated by struts or that they are not separated by struts. Therefore, absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, where the cooling ducts are separated by struts, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, see MPEP 2143 (E).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the front housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) comprises multiple components, such as an integrated end terminal (Pflueger, 25; Figure 4), a connection bolt (Pflueger, 26; Figure 4), and a terminal insulation (Pflueger, 27; Figure 4) [Pflueger, 0039].
Regarding Claim 20, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the front housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) has the connection elements (Pflueger, 23; Figure 4) that connected the front housing to the housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 4), in a force-fitting and/or form-fitting manner to close the module housing (Pflueger, 11; Figure 1) [Pflueger, 0038].
Regarding Claim 23, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) has a first connection piece (Pflueger, 16.1; Figure 4) for connecting to the inlet of the cooling duct, corresponding to the forward flow of the claim, and a second connection (Pflueger, 16.2; Figure 4) for connecting to the outlet of the connection duct [Pflueger 0039], corresponding to the return flow of the claim.
Regarding Claim 24, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) has a first connection piece (Pflueger, 16.1; Figure 4) for connecting to the inlet of the cooling duct, and a second connection (Pflueger, 16.2; Figure 4) for connecting to the outlet of the connection duct [Pflueger 0039], wherein via the connecting piece (Pflueger 16.1; Figure 5) a cooling fluid can be introduced, and via the second connecting piece (Pflueger, 16.2; Figure 5) a cooling fluid that has been conducted through the cooling ducts (Pflueger, 16; Figure 1) can be guided from the battery module (Pflueger, 10; Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 25, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) comprises multiple components, such as an integrated end terminal (Pflueger, 25; Figure 4), a connection bolt (Pflueger, 26; Figure 4), and a terminal insulation (Pflueger, 27; Figure 4) [Pflueger, 0039].
Regarding Claim 26, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the front housing plate (Pflueger, 15; Figure 4) has the connection elements (Pflueger, 23; Figure 4) that connected the front housing to the housing side walls (Pflueger, 14.1/14.2; Figure 4), in a force-fitting and/or form-fitting manner to close the module housing (Pflueger, 11; Figure 1) [Pflueger, 0038].
Regarding Claim 29, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein there are different variants for the cooling duct cooling ducts profiles (Pflueger, 16; Figure 4), such as the cooling fluid flow running in a U-shape from the first connection piece (Pflueger, 16.1; Figure 5) through a total of four cooling ducts in the direction of the second connection piece (Pflueger, 16.2; Figure 5) [Pflueger, 0041].
While modified Pflueger does not explicitly teach wherein the cover element has a transfer structure for transferring the forward flow of the cooling channel into the return flow, Pflueger teaches there are different variants for the cooling duct profiles, and that the fluid flows in a U-shape direction, so it can be assumed the transfer structure and that it is within the cover element. There are a finite number of identified predictable solutions for the cooling ducts of Pflueger, such that the transfer between the forward and reverse flow is happening at the cover element. Therefore, absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, that the transfer between the forward and reverse flow is happening at the cover element, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, see MPEP 2143 (E).
Regarding Claim 31, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein figure 5 depicts the first and second connection piece (Pflueger, 16.1/16.2; Figure 5), which are the inlet and outlets for the cooling ducts (Pflueger, 16; Figure 1), on the housing plates, and they are depicted as bolt/closure elements, corresponding to the closure element of the claim.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflueger et al, US20180219198A1 (already on the record), Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation) and Hofer, US 20160036025 A1 as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Liang et al, CN 110098362 A (English translation provided for citation).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the module housing (Pflueger, 11; Figure 1) has a profiled structure as depicted in figures 3 and 4, wherein the outline of the battery module (Pflueger, 10; Figure 4) can be clearly seen, but is silent to teach on the profiled structures in the form of a double-wall hollow profiles.
Liang teaches a battery module including a housing (Liang, 1; figure 2) [Liang, 0009], wherein the frame (Liang, 14; figure 9), corresponding to the housing of the claim, is composed of two L-shaped brackets (Liang, 143; figure 6) [Liang, 0033], and the L-shaped bracket is a hollow structure [Liang, 0034], and figure 9 of Liang shows the hollow structure resulting in the double-wall profile.
Liang and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Pflueger to include the hollow structure and double-wall profiled frame as taught by Liang because such modification would result effective thermal management of the module while reducing the volume of the module after assembly through structural optimization [Liang, 0007].
Regarding Claim 4, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, wherein the housing side walls and/or the housing plates may be configured as extruded profiles [Pflueger, 0006], but is silent to teach on the profiles being hollow.
Liang teaches a battery module including a housing (Liang, 1; figure 2) [Liang, 0009], wherein the frame (Liang, 14; figure 9), corresponding to the housing of the claim, is made of extruded aluminum alloy profiles and is composed of two L-shaped brackets (Liang, 143; figure 6) [Liang, 0033], and the L-shaped bracket is a hollow structure [Liang, 0034], and figure 9 of Liang shows the hollow structure profile.
Liang and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Pflueger to include the hollow structure and double-wall profiled frame as taught by Liang because such modification would result effective thermal management of the module while reducing the volume of the module after assembly through structural optimization [Liang, 0007].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflueger et al, US20180219198A1 (already on the record), Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation), Hofer, US 20160036025 A1, and Liang et al, CN 110098362 A (English translation provided for citation) as applied to claim 2 above, in further view of Kawai, JPH 1145691 A (already on the record).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 2, but is silent to teach on the partially profiled structure being at least partially filled with a shock-absorbing material.
Kawai teaches a battery pack with a silicon-based elastomer, corresponding to the shock-absorbing material, also called the buffer material, (Kawai, 1; Figure 1), place in all or part of the areas where the battery (Kawai, 2; Figure 1) and the battery case (Kawai, 4; Figure 1) may come into contact with each other [Kawai, 0004] to protect the battery incase the battery pack is subjected to vibrations or impact, maintaining a shock-absorbing function [Kawai, 0005].
Kawai and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Pflueger to include the silicon-elastomer as a shock-absorbing material between the battery and the battery case as taught by Kawai because such modification would result in a battery a performance unlikely to deteriorate due to vibrations or impact as well as a material that can maintain its shock-absorbing function at low temperatures [Kawai, 0005].
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflueger et al, US20180219198A1 (already on the record), Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation) and Hofer, US 20160036025 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Wada et al, JP 2018170211 A (already on the record).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, but is silent to teach on the cooling channel having cooling fins.
Wada teaches a battery pack and a battery module with improved heat dissipation and cooling performance [Wada, 0004], wherein the air cooling plate (Wada, 11; Figure 6), which is swappable with the liquid cooling plate (Wada, 9; Figure 5) [Wada, 0022] has a cavity/wind tunnel (Wada, 11a; Figure 6), corresponding to the cooling channel of the claim, provided with fins (Wada, 11b; Figure 6) [Wada, 0024].
Wada and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the fins within the cooling channel as taught by Wada, because such modification would improve the cooling performance of the device [Wada, 0026].
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflueger et al, US20180219198A1 (already on the record), Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation) and Hofer, US 20160036025 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Kondou et al, US 20120086176 A1 (already on the record).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, but is silent to teach seals provided for sealing the housing from the outside.
Kondou teaches a seal structure using a gasket with a high sealing performance [Kondou, 0008], wherein with the first embodiment, the battery pack (Kondou, 100; Figure 6) is arranged outside the vehicle, therefore, to protect the battery back from rain and ambient air, including dust, a seal is required between the lower case (Kondou, 110; Figure 7) and the upper case (Kondou, 120; Figure 7) [Kondou, 0052], corresponding to the claimed requirement of sealing from the outside, figures 12a and 12b depict the seal, wherein the seal/gasket segments (Kondou, 420/410; Figure 10), are shown between the upper and lower case.
Kondou and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the sealing structure, the gasket, taught by Kondou, because such modification would protect the battery pack from rain and ambient air, including dust [Kondou, 0052].
Regarding Claim 19, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, but is silent to teach the seal being formed of a rubber-based, polyurethan-based, or epoxy-based material.
Kondou teaches the sealing structure using a gasket, wherein the gasket is formed from, for example, a metal plate coated with a silicon rubber, a fluorine rubber, and ethylene propylene rubber, or the like [Kondou, 0055].
Kondou and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the sealing structure, the gasket, being formed of a metal plate coated with a silicon rubber, a fluorine rubber, and ethylene propylene rubber, or the like as taught by Kondou, because such modification would protect the battery pack from rain and ambient air, including dust [Kondou, 0052].
Claims 21-22 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflueger et al, US20180219198A1 (already on the record), Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation) and Hofer, US 20160036025 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Seo et al, WO 2019235724 A1 (already on the record, referencing US 20200395643 A1 for citation).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, but is silent to teach on the front housing part having at leave one reinforcing plate for reinforcing the front housing part.
Seo teaches a battery module configured to accommodate a battery cell stack, wherein the pair of front and rear housings (Seo, 400; Figure 3), comprise an insulation cover (Seo, 420; Figure 3) [Seo, 0054], corresponding to the reinforcement plate of the claim.
Seo and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the insulation cover taught by Seo because such modification would prevent a short circuit caused by an external factor [Seo, 0056].
Regarding Claim 22, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, but is silent to teach on the front housing part having at least one cover element for covering the front housing part.
Seo teaches Seo teaches a battery module configured to accommodate a battery cell stack, wherein the pair of front and rear housings (Seo, 400; Figure 3), comprise a front and rear cover (Seo, 430; Figure 3) [Seo, 0054].
Seo and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the front cover as taught by Seo because such modification would protect the internal components, such as the cell stack [Seo, 0057].
Regarding Claim 27, modified Pflueger teaches the housing according to claim 1, but is silent to teach on the rear housing part having at leave one reinforcing plate for reinforcing the front housing part.
Seo teaches a battery module configured to accommodate a battery cell stack, wherein the pair of front and rear housings (Seo, 400; Figure 3), comprise an insulation cover (Seo, 420; Figure 3) [Seo, 0054], corresponding to the reinforcement plate of the claim.
Seo and Pflueger are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Pflueger to include the insulation cover taught by Seo because such modification would prevent a short circuit caused by an external factor [Seo, 0056].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LILIAN ALICE ODOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at (571)272-3433. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LILIAN ALICE ODOM/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722