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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 19, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11, 15-18, 20, and 23-26 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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8-10, 16-18, 20, and 23-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa (JP 2014107069 A), further in view of Kusakabe (JP H11224692 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Hosokawa is an analogous art to the instant application, being directed towards secondary batteries for vehicles (Paragraph 0001, “The present invention relates to a vehicle secondary battery mounted on a vehicle such as a car.”). Hosokawa discloses a battery case for one or more electrode cores (Paragraph 0018, “the electrode bundle 20 is formed in a flat shape, and the cell case 10 is formed in a rectangular shape that matches the shape of the electrode bundle 20, that is, a rectangular parallelepiped shape.”) comprising a plurality of side plates, shown in their figure 1, which depicts a rectangular case constructed of a plurality of side plates 14 and 13. As depicted in Hosokawa’s figure 2, the plurality of side plates comprise two first side plates 13 which are oppositely arranged, these side plates having the largest area among the plurality of side plates. Additionally, as depicted in their figure 2, each of the side plates comprises a first portion 16 corresponding to and pointing towards an electrode 20, as well as a second portion of the plate 13 which surrounds the first portion 16.
Additionally, the first portions 13 are curved towards an inside of the battery case, where the curved surface concave is on an outer surface of the at least one of the first two side plates facing away from the electrode core, and the curved surface concave is curved towards the electrode cores, as shown in figure 2. Additionally where a three dimensional coordinate system is established in a first direction, a second direction, and a third direction the first direction is perpendicular to the side plate 14, the second direction is perpendicular to the first plate 13, and the third direction is perpendicular to the third plate 12. Accordingly, the second direction is perpendicular to the two first side plates.
However, in regards to the limitation which requires that the two first side plates clamp and abut the electrode core along the second direction of the electrode core, Hosokawa fails to disclose said structure, where their two first side plates are not in direct contact with the electrode core 20, shown in their figure 4. Accordingly, we look to Kusakabe, which is an analogous art to the instant application, being directed towards the art of secondary batteries (Paragraph 0001, “The present invention relates to a rectangular non-aqueous secondary battery.”).
Kusakabe discloses structure wherein a secondary battery comprises side walls and an electrode body which is pressed and sandwiched by the side wall (Paragraph 0006, “The non-aqueous secondary battery is characterized in that the center portion of the taken out side wall is bent inward by pressing, the side wall is strained, and the side wall and the laminated body or the wound body are pressed and sandwiched.”). Kusakabe further discloses that when the side wall is pressed against the electrode body, sandwiching it, by means of an inwardly facing concave portion, shown in Kusakabe’s figure 2b, the side wall and electrode body being in direct contact allows the side wall to be in direct contact with the positive electrode current collectors and the electrode body, thereby removing the need to weld the positive electrode current collector to a terminal structure (Paragraph 0017, “In the second embodiment, after the laminated body A in which the positive electrode current collector is arranged in the outermost layer is housed in the positive electrode can 11, the central portion of the side wall 14 is pressed inward to be curved inward, and the positive electrode current collector 3 is thus formed. Are pressed and sandwiched by the side wall 14 and brought into direct contact with each other. In this case, since the contact with the current collector is maintained by the pressing and holding force of both side walls, it is not necessary to weld the positive electrode current collector to the positive electrode can.”). Here, this is further taught to simplify the manufacturing process of the battery, as well as reducing the manufacturing cost by obviating the use of some internal components (Paragraph 0021, “The current collector and the can are electrically connected. Therefore, welding of the positive electrode or negative electrode current collector connecting conductor and the can is not required, the manufacturing process of the battery is simplified, and the insulating sheet around the laminated body is not required, so that the manufacturing cost can be reduced.”).
Accordingly, based on this teaching of Kusakabe, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to have the first portions of the concave portions contact and sandwich/abut the electrode body along a second direction which is a thickness direction of the electrode core, thereby reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant claim.
Further, where a curvature of the first portion in the second direction is less than a curvature of an ellipsoid, where the curvature of the first portion includes curvature about the second direction, the curvature obtained from an ellipsoid function which is ((x-a)/i)2+((y-b)/j)2+((z-c)/k)2=1, where a, b, c, i, j, and k are determined according to the coordinates of at least four points that are different from each other in the first portion, the first direction is an X direction in the three-dimensional coordinate system, the second direction is a Y direction in the three- dimensional coordinate system, the third direction is a Z direction in the three-dimensional coordinate system, and x, y, and z are coordinates of three directions of the ellipsoid function, this limitation does not provide any external frame of reference by which to determine the coordinates of the points used to determine the curvature of the ellipsoid. Accordingly, where the curvature of the ellipsoid could be set by selecting any points, one could therefore identify an ellipsoid which has a greater curvature than the curvature of the first portion, meaning that the bounds of the claim would inherently be met.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, where the instant claim requires structure wherein when two of i, j, and k are equal, a, b, c, i, j, and k are determined according to coordinates of five points that are different from each other in the first portion, it does not specify a method by which those points are determined, thereby allowing the selection of any points, which include points which would result in an ellipsoid that has a curvature greater than the curvature of the first portion.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires structure wherein i, j, and k are equal, and the ellipsoid is a sphere, with the ellipsoid function being (x-a)2+(y-b)2+(z-c)2=R2, where a, b, c, and R are determined according to four points that are different from each other in the first portion, as the instant claim requires that a, b, c, and R are determined according to four points, it does not specify a method by which those points are determined, thereby allowing the selection of any points, which include points which would result in a sphere that has a curvature greater than the curvature of the first portion.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires structure wherein each of the at least one of the two first side plates a length of the first side plate in the third direction is H, and a length of the first side plate in the first direction is W, and a distance between an edge of the first portion and an edge of the first side plate is d, and the edge of the first portion comprises a first point, a second point, a third point, and a fourth point, the structure of the first side plates 13 is such that these points can be identified.
Further, where in the three-dimensional coordinate system, a coordinate of the first point is A (0 mm, 0 mm, 0 mm), a coordinate of the second point is B (0 mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), a coordinate of the third point is C ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), and a coordinate of the fourth point is D ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, 0 mm); and a, b, c, and R are determined according to coordinates of the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point, as the instant claim requires that a, b, c, and R are determined according to four points, it does not specify a method by which those points are determined, thereby allowing the selection of any points, which include points which would result in a sphere that has a curvature greater than the curvature of the first portion.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires that differences in curvatures between upper and lower surfaces of each of the at least one of the two first side plates is less than 5%, Hosokawa’s figure 1 depicts that the second portion of the first side plates are uniformly connected. Accordingly, the difference in the degree of curvature between a top surface of the first side plate and a bottom surface of the first side plate is 0%.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally , Hosokawa discloses structure wherein the plurality of side plates comprise two second side plates 14 that are oppositely arranged, and wherein the battery case is defined by the two first side plates and the two second side plates, as shown in Hosokawa’s figure 2, where the first side plates 13 and second side plates 14 define the bounds of the battery case.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 8. Additionally, Hosokawa discloses structure wherein the battery case further comprises a bottom plate 15 (Paragraph 0020, “a bottom surface portion 15”) which is connected to one side of the two first side plates and the two second side plates (Paragraph 0020, “Therefore, the cell case 10 is formed in a rectangular parallelepiped shape including six surfaces of the front surface portions 13 and 13, the end surface portions 14 and 14, the lid member (upper surface portion) 12 and the bottom surface portion (lower surface portion) 15.”).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Hosokawa discloses structure which comprises a cover plate 12 (Paragraph 0019, “a lid member 12 mounted on the open upper portion of the cell case main body 11”).
Additionally, Hosokawa discloses structure where the cover plate and the battery case are hermetically connected to jointly define a sealed accommodating chamber (Paragraph 0018, “As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the secondary battery 1 according to the present embodiment is a sealed secondary battery”), and wherein the electrode core is corresponding to the first portion and sealed in the accommodating chamber (Paragraph 0018, “As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the secondary battery 1 according to the present embodiment is a sealed secondary battery, and includes an electrode bundle (element) 20”), with the correspondence shown in Hosokawa’s figures 1 and 2, with the electrode core sealed within the accommodating chamber.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 10. Additionally, as depicted in Hosokawa’s figure 2, the two first side plates 13 are identical (Paragraph 0031, “the front surface portions 13 and 13,”) and have the first portion 16 and the second portion surrounding the first portion. Additionally, based on the placement of the electrode core 20 between the two first side plates, and in view of the teachings of Kusakabe discussed above in regards to claim 1, it is obvious to have the first portion of the two first side plates that are oppositely arranged abut against an outer surface of the electrode core. Additionally, as discussed above, where the two first side plates are identical, the curvatures of the curved surfaces of the first portions of the two first side plates are the same.
Regarding Claim 17, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 10. Additionally, Hosokawa anticipates the invention of claim 10. Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires that before the battery case is evacuated, a gap is provided between the electrode core and an inner surface of the battery case, where the electrode core 20 is not in direct contact with the second side walls 14 based on the positioning depicted in Hosokawa’s figure 4.
Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires that after evacuation the first portion is concave toward the electrode core and pressed against an outer surface of the electrode core, said structure is made obvious in view of Kusakabe, for the reasons and rationale presented above in regards to claim 1.
Here, it is noted that where the claim requires that certain structure is present before and after evacuation, it represents a product by process claim, which does not necessarily require said evacuation, but only requires that the structure that would result from said process be present. Accordingly, where structure “before an evacuation” would be equivalent to structure where no evacuation takes place, Sasaki’s structure of a gap provided between an electrode core satisfies and an inner surface of the battery case satisfies the instant claim. Additionally, where after the case is evacuated, the side panels of the first side plate would press directly against the electrode cores of Hosokawa’s invention, as the panels are already in direct contact, as shown in figure 2 there would be no modification present in regards to the orientation of the first portion, or that it is directly in contact with the electrode core, thereby reading upon the structure of the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 10. Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires that the battery comprise a plurality of electrode cores, the cores arranged along a third direction, where the third direction is a length direction of the electrode cores Hosokawa fails to disclose said structure.
Additionally, it is noted that claim 1 defines that the third direction is a z-direction in the three dimensional coordinate system. Accordingly, the requirement of the instant claim which requires that the third direction is a length direction is interpreted based on the length direction being a z-direction in the three dimensional coordinate system.
However, Hosokawa discloses structure, shown in their figure 7 which comprises multiple secondary batteries 1 stacked adjacent to each other in a grouping (Paragraph 0037, “[1-3. Mounting on Vehicle] For example, as shown in FIGS. 7 (a) and 7 (b), a plurality of (for example, about 5 to 8) secondary batteries 1 configured in this way are grouped together.”). Here, where Hosokawa discloses that individual secondary batteries can be stacked together and modularized in to a single battery (Paragraph 0037, “The battery case is housed in module cases (small cases) 61 and 62 and modularized, and further, as shown in FIG. 6, a battery case (a plurality of module cases 61 and 62 including battery tray 71 and battery cover 72 The battery pack 70P is housed side by side in the large case 70).”), they therefore make obvious other variations of stacking secondary batteries 1 together to form a larger battery. Additionally, where there are finite possible variations by which batteries can be stacked together, those being along the first direction, second direction, or third direction, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to try stacking secondary batteries in the third direction, based on the stacking of said secondary batteries to form a larger battery being an activity with known predictable results, those being the formation of a larger battery which comprises multiple secondary batteries within, thereby making obvious the limitation of the instant claim.
Additionally, where the secondary batteries 1 are stacked in the third direction, the secondary batteries 1 each comprise first side plates as depicted in Hosokawa’s figure 1, thereby resulting in structure wherein the at least one of the two first side plates comprise a plurality of first portions, and one of the first portions and one of the electrode cores are arranged correspondingly.
Regarding Claim 20, modified Hosokawa makes obvious a battery module comprising a plurality of batteries 1 (Paragraph 0037, “For example, as shown in FIGS. 7 (a) and 7 (b), a plurality of (for example, about 5 to 8) secondary batteries 1 configured in this way are grouped together.”) where plurality of batteries are the secondary batteries 1 which comprise the battery case according to claim 1 and the electrode core arranged in the battery case, as shown in Hosokawa’s figures 1 and 2.
Regarding Claim 23, modified Hosokawa makes obvious an electric vehicle comprising the battery module according to claim 20 (Paragraph 0037, “Therefore, in battery pack 70P, vehicle secondary battery 1 is accommodated in a dual case structure of module cases 61 and 62 and battery case 70. And this battery pack 70P is mounted in vehicles 2, such as an electric vehicle, as shown in FIG. In this example, the battery pack 70P is attached below the floor panel 4 of the passenger compartment 3 of the vehicle 2 (below the front seat 5F and the rear seat 5R).”).
Regarding Claim 24, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention according to Claim 1. Additionally, in each of the at least one of the two first side plates, when a length of the first side plate in the third direction is H and a length of the first side plate in the first direction is W, a distance between an edge of the first portion and an edge of the first side plate is d, and the edge of the first portion comprises a first point, a second point, a third point, and a fourth point; in the three-dimensional coordinate system, a coordinate of the first point is A (0 mm, 0 mm, 0 mm), a coordinate of the second point is B (0 mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), a coordinate of the third point is C ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), and a coordinate of the fourth point is D ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, 0 mm); and a, b, c, and R are determined according to coordinates of the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point, as the instant claim requires that a, b, c, and R are determined according to four points, it does not specify a method by which those points are determined, thereby allowing the selection of any points, which include points which would result in a sphere that has a curvature greater than the curvature of the first portion.
Regarding Claim 25, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 20. Additionally, in each of the at least one of the two first side plates, when a length of the first side plate in the third direction is H and a length of the first side plate in the first direction is W, a distance between an edge of the first portion and an edge of the first side plate is d, and the edge of the first portion comprises a first point, a second point, a third point, and a fourth point; in the three-dimensional coordinate system, a coordinate of the first point is A (0 mm, 0 mm, 0 mm), a coordinate of the second point is B (0 mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), a coordinate of the third point is C ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), and a coordinate of the fourth point is D ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, 0 mm); and a, b, c, and R are determined according to coordinates of the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point, as the instant claim requires that a, b, c, and R are determined according to four points, it does not specify a method by which those points are determined, thereby allowing the selection of any points, which include points which would result in a sphere that has a curvature greater than the curvature of the first portion.
Regarding Claim 26, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 20. Additionally, in each of the at least one of the two first side plates, when a length of the first side plate in the third direction is H and a length of the first side plate in the first direction is W, a distance between an edge of the first portion and an edge of the first side plate is d, and the edge of the first portion comprises a first point, a second point, a third point, and a fourth point; in the three-dimensional coordinate system, a coordinate of the first point is A (0 mm, 0 mm, 0 mm), a coordinate of the second point is B (0 mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), a coordinate of the third point is C ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, (-H+2d) mm), and a coordinate of the fourth point is D ((-W+2d) mm, 0 mm, 0 mm); and a, b, c, and R are determined according to coordinates of the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point, as the instant claim requires that a, b, c, and R are determined according to four points, it does not specify a method by which those points are determined, thereby allowing the selection of any points, which include points which would result in a sphere that has a curvature greater than the curvature of the first portion.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa (JP 2014107069 A) and Kusakabe (JP H11224692 A) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Iwasaki (US 20160211491 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires that a distance between an edge of the first portion and an edge of at least one of the two first side plates is d and d is from 5 to 20 mm, Hosokawa is silent in regards to any spatial dimensions of their battery. Therefore, we look to Iwasaki, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a sealed electricity storage device (Abstract, “A method for producing a sealed type electricity storage device”) which is the same as the energy storage devices that are electrode cores of Sasaki (Paragraph 0049, “As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the energy storage apparatus 10 includes a plurality of (twelve in the present embodiment) energy storage devices 100”).
Iwasaki discloses that their energy storage devices have a dimension of 5 to 50 mm by 50 to 200 mm by 50 to 200 mm (Paragraph 0058, “a large prismatic outer can having a size of 5 to 50 mm×50 to 200 mm×50 to 200 mm may be used as an example.”), specifically indicating in one embodiment 38 mm in width, 112 mm in length, and 150 mm in height (Paragraph 0082, “an outer can 38 mm in width, 112 mm in length, and 150 mm”), disclosing that this specific combination of dimensions allows for the joint strength of the energy storage device from fracturing when the internal pressure of the energy storage device rises (Paragraph 0082, “When an outer can 38 mm in width, 112 mm in length, and 150 mm in height and a sealing plate are welded, the joint strength is preferably sufficient to prevent the weld part from being fractured at an internal pressure of 1.5 MPa in the joint strength test described below.”). Accordingly, based on this benefit, where mechanical stability is a desirable attribute, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to implement these dimensions for the battery cases of Hosokawa.
Additionally, in regards to the first side plate of Hosokawa, where the first portion is a part of the first side plate, the edges of the first portion are therefore edges of the first side plates. Additionally, where the edges of the first portion are located between the electrode current collectors 31 and 32 as shown in Hosokawa’s figure 4, the length of the first portion is therefore at lease a majority of the length of the battery case. Where the battery case has a length of 112 mm, the length of the first portion is at least a majority of this length, or at least 56 mm. Accordingly, the length-edges of the first portion are at least 56 mm. Therefore, a distance between one portion of the edge of the first portion and another section of the edge of the first portion which is 5 mm exists within the battery case of modified Hosokawa, thereby reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant claim.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa (JP 2014107069 A) and Kusakabe (JP H11224692 A) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Yamauchi (US 20050106453 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, an orthographic projection of the first portion on a plane defined by the first direction and the third direction, those being the y-axis and z-axis dimensions as discussed above, would be an irregular figure.
Additionally, where the instant claim requires that the plurality of side plates is composed of 3 series aluminum, though Hosokawa discloses that the side plates are formed of an aluminum (Paragraph 0019, “The cell case main body 11 and the lid member 12 are formed of, for example, a metal such as aluminum alloy, iron or stainless steel”), they fail to disclose specific structure where they are made of 3 series aluminum. Therefore, we look to Yamauchi, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a sealed secondary battery enclosed within a case (Abstract, “This invention aims to provide a prismatic sealed secondary battery which is capable of ensuring a high battery capacity and suppressing the case swelling and which achieves high quality in appearance at low cost, and the method for manufacturing the same.”).
Here, Yamauchi discloses structure which comprises a battery case constructed of series 3 aluminum (Paragraph 0051, “The case 10 is made of, for example, an Al--Mn alloy (Japanese Industrial Standards: 3000-series aluminum alloy).”). Yamauchi further discloses that series 3 aluminum material experiences little hardening by means of heat treatments, thereby allowing for improved weldability and ductility (Paragraph 0009, “This is because the 3000-series Al alloys have characteristics of little hardening by heat treatments, including the treatment by laser beam irradiation. If a type of Al alloys which can be easily hardened by quenching (2000-, 6000-, and 7000-series) is used for the case, a problem of less weldability will arise since these Al alloys contain Mg in the compositions.”). Accordingly, where increased flexibility during an overheating event in a battery is a desirable attribute, as well as to respond to swelling of the battery cell, it would therefore be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to select a series 3 aluminum material for the shell of the side and bottom plates of the invention of Hosokawa, thereby reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant claim.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa (JP 2014107069 A) and Kusakabe (JP H11224692 A) as applied to claim 10 above, in further view of Park (US 20140072839 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of claim 10. Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires structure wherein an air pressure of the accommodating chamber is lower than an air pressure outside the battery case, though Hosokawa discloses a sealed chamber, they are silent in regards to the air pressure of the accommodating chamber and the air pressure outside the battery case.
Therefore, we look to Park, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a hermetically sealed battery which makes use of a pressure differential compared to an external pressure to determine heating or cooling (Abstract, “Disclosed herein is a system for controlling the cooling or heating of a battery. The system includes a battery having a hermetic sealing structure to prevent passage of air from an exterior, a pressure sensor provided on the battery to measure internal pressure of the battery, an climate control system cooling or heating the battery, and a controller determining cooling or heating of the climate control system depending on whether the internal pressure of the battery is positive pressure or negative pressure based on a measured result of the pressure sensor, the controller controlling cooling or heating strength depending on a level of the positive pressure or negative pressure.”). Here, Park discloses that based on if the pressure within the sealed case is a greater than the external pressure (positive pressure) or less than the pressure outside the case (negative pressure), a system is implemented to heat or cool the battery (Paragraph 0013, “and a controller configured to determine whether to heat or cool the battery depending on whether the internal pressure of the battery is a positive pressure or a negative pressure based on a measured result of the pressure sensor.”), providing cooling when the pressure is positive, and heating when the temperature is negative (Paragraph 0016, “The controller may control the climate control system to provide cool air when the internal pressure of the battery is positive pressure, and control the climate control system to provide warm air when the internal pressure of the battery is a negative pressure.”).
Additionally, Park discloses that when batteries are excessively cooled the voltage supplied decreases, preventing the battery’s use (Paragraph 0010, “Furthermore, when batteries are operated below a certain temperature (i.e., 0.degree.C.), the voltage supplied from the battery cell decreases. As a result, it may become impossible to supply power the required to the vehicle to start the vehicle. Furthermore, under a low-temperature conditions, the prior art is problematic in that the battery does not charge smoothly.”).
Accordingly, based on these teachings of Park which make use of a hermetically sealed battery to determine heating or cooling, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to apply this structure to the invention of Hosokawa, which would result in structure which, during the course of operation, have an air pressure within the accommodating chamber that is lower than an air pressure outside the battery case, reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant claim.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokawa (JP 2014107069 A) and Kusakabe (JP H11224692 A) as applied to claim 10 above, in further view of Qin (US 20190245168 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Hosokawa makes obvious the invention of Claim 10. Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires structure wherein a thickness of each of the side plates of the battery case is 0.05 mm to 1 mm, Hosokawa is silent in regards to the thickness of their case’s side plates.
Therefore, we look to Qin, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a battery module comprising top plates, side plates, and end plates (Abstract, “The present disclosure provides a battery module. The battery module includes: a housing including a top plate and a bottom plate which are disposed opposite to each other, and two side plates which are connected to the top plate and the bottom plate and spaced along a first direction; two end plates spaced along a second direction which is perpendicular to the first direction,”) which are made of aluminum alloy with a thickness of 1 mm (Paragraph 0051, “the wall thickness of the aluminum alloy housing 10 is 1 mm;”), which is a housing which comprises multiple side plates, containing multiple energy storage units as shown in Qin’s figure 2, allowing for heat conduction from the energy storage units to the side plates (Paragraph 0055, “In this way, the heat conduction paths and heat conduction efficiency among the plurality of batteries 31 arranged side by side in the housing 10 are the same, and furthermore, the heat conduction efficiency can be improved.”), further stating that the structure of said housing 10 increases the reliability of the battery module (Paragraph 0055, “As a result, the temperature uniformity among the individual batteries 31 can be ensured, and the reliability of the battery module is improved.”).
Accordingly, based on these benefits, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to apply the thickness of the aluminum housing side plates of Qin to the side plates of Hosokawa, thereby making obvious a thickness of 1 mm, reading upon the limitation of the instant claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN W ESTES whose telephone number is (571)272-4820. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 5:30.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 5712721453. 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.
/J.W.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725