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 .
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-17, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshitake et al. (US PGPub 2012/0052359 A1, cited on the IDS dated March 24, 2023), and further in view of Yamashita (US PGPub 2019/0157729 A1) and Lim et al. (US PGPub 2015/0214583 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, 8, 10, and 21, Yoshitake discloses in Figs. 1-2 and 5-6 a battery module ([0043]) comprising:
a plurality of battery cells (1) ([0043]);
end plates (5, 6) covering outer surfaces of outermost battery cells of the plurality of battery cells (1), wherein each of the end plates (5, 6) comprises:
an inner plate (52, 62) configured to come into contact with the outer surface of a corresponding one of the outermost battery cells (1) ([0051]);
an outer plate (51, 61) configured to cover an outer surface of the inner plate (52, 62) ([0051]).
Yoshitake further discloses in Figs. 2 and 5-6 wherein temperature sensors (7), configured to measure temperatures of the plurality of battery cells (1), are embedded in a lower end of the inner plates (52, 62) of the end plates (5, 6) ([0050], [0056]-[0058], wherein the temperature sensors 7 are provided at a distance from the top edge of the respective end plates 5, 6 and therefore are provided at a lower end of the inner plates 52, 62 of the end plates 5, 6).
Therefore, modified Yoshitake suggests wherein an installation space is provided at a lower end of each of the end plates (5, 6), wherein the temperature sensors (7) are disposed in the installation spaces at the lower ends of the respective end plates (5, 6), wherein an installation hole is provided in a lower end of the inner plate (52, 62), and wherein one of the temperature sensors (7) is provided in a corresponding one of the installation spaces through the installation hole in order to successfully measure the temperatures of the outermost battery cells of the plurality of battery cells (1) (Figs. 2, 5-6 and [0050], [0056]-[0058]).
Lim teaches a battery module which can improve safety by precisely measuring the temperature of a battery cell ([0007]).
Specifically, Lim teaches in Fig. 3 temperature sensor (143, 145) configured to measure the temperature of a battery cell (110), wherein the temperature sensor (143, 145) is in direct contact with the battery cell (110) so that an exact temperature measurement can be performed ([0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an installation space at a lower end of each of the end plates of Yoshitake, wherein the temperature sensors of Yoshitake are disposed in the installation spaces at the lower ends of the respective end plates, such that an installation hole is provided in a lower end of the inner plate of Yoshitake, wherein one of the temperature sensors is provided in a corresponding one of the installation spaces through the installation hole, as suggested by Yoshitake, so that each of the temperature sensors is in direct contact with a battery cell of the plurality of battery cells of Yoshitake so that an exact temperature measurement can be performed, as taught by Lim, in order to improve safety of the battery module of Yoshitake.
Modified Yoshitake remains silent regarding the structure of the temperature sensors and consequently does not disclose sensor covers combined with outer surfaces of the end plates at points respectively provided with the temperature sensors installed therein, wherein the sensor covers include a lower end bent to cover a lower surface of a corresponding one of the temperature sensors.
Lim further teaches in Fig. 3 a sensor cover (146), wherein the sensor cover (146) includes a lower end bent to cover a lower surface of the temperature sensor (143, 145) ([0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form a sensor cover on each of temperature sensors of modified Yoshitake, wherein the sensor covers include a lower end bent to cover a lower surface of a corresponding one of the temperature sensors, as further taught by Lim, as such is a known structure in the art and therefore the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such would successfully form a temperature sensor suitable for use in a battery module, as desired by modified Yoshitake.
Thus, modified Yoshitake discloses sensor covers (146 of Lim) combined with outer surfaces of the end plates (5, 6 of Yoshitake) respectively provided with the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake, corresponding to 143, 145 of Lim) installed therein (Fig. 2 of Yoshitake and Fig. 3 of Lim).
Modified Yoshitake further discloses a desire to cool the plurality of battery cells (1) ([0081] of Yoshitake).
However, modified Yoshitake does not disclose a cooling channel disposed below the plurality of battery cells and a heat transfer material disposed between the plurality of battery cells and the cooling channel.
Yamashita teaches a battery module comprising a cooling channel configured to cool down a plurality of battery cells in the battery module ([0002]).
Specifically, Yamashita teaches in Figs. 1-2 a battery module (1) comprising a plurality of battery cells (21), a cooling channel (60) disposed below the plurality of battery cells (21), and a heat transfer material (70) disposed between the plurality of battery cells (21) and the cooling channel (60) ([0043], [0054], [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to dispose a cooling channel below the plurality of battery cells of modified Yoshitake and to dispose a heat transfer material between the plurality of battery cells and the cooling channel, as taught by Yamashita, in order to cool down the plurality of battery cells in the battery module of modified Yoshitake, as desired by modified Yoshitake.
Regarding Claims 4, 15, and 17, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein each of the temperature sensors (143, 145 of Lim) is covered with a lower end of a corresponding one of the sensor covers (146 of Lim) (Fig. 3 of Lim) and is spaced apart from the cooling channel (60 of Yamashita) or the heat transfer material (70 of Yamashita) (Fig. 2 of Yoshitake and Fig. 2 of Yamashita, wherein the temperature sensor 7 of Yoshitake corresponding to 143, 145 of Lim is positioned corresponding to a middle of the plurality of cells 1 of Yoshitake and wherein the cooling channel 60 of Yamashita and heat transfer material 70 of Yamashita are disposed below the plurality of cells 1 of Yoshitake, corresponding to 21 of Yamashita).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “wherein the sensor covers are configured to prevent thermal interference due to the cooling channel or the heat transfer material” is intended use and therefore is not given any patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because each of the temperature sensors (143, 145 of Lim) is covered with a lower end of a corresponding one of the sensor covers (146 of Lim) (Fig. 3 of Lim) and is spaced apart from the cooling channel (60 of Yamashita) or the heat transfer material (70 of Yamashita) (Fig. 2 of Yoshitake and Fig. 2 of Yamashita), such reads on the limitation “wherein the sensor covers are configured to prevent thermal interference due to the cooling channel or the heat transfer material”, as evidenced by [0012] of the instant specification.
Regarding Claims 3 and 16, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein:
each of the installation spaces comprises an installation hole configured to receive a corresponding one of the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake) in the lower end of each of the end plates (5,6 of Yoshitake) (Figs. 5-6, [0050], [0058] of Yoshitake, [0050] of Lim); and
each of the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake) is located in the installation space and pressed against a lower end of a side surface of a corresponding one of the outermost battery cells (1 of Yoshitake) opposite the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake) (Figs. 5-6, [0050], [0058] of Yoshitake and [0050] of Lim).
Regarding Claims 7 and 20, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a lower plate (60a of Yamashita) combined with lower ends of the plurality of battery cells (1 of Yoshitake, corresponding to 21 of Yamashita) through the heat transfer material (70 of Yamashita), wherein the lower plate (60a of Jung) is configured to define an upper end of the cooling channel (60 of Yamashita) (Figs. 1-2, [0043], [0054], [0056] of Yamashita).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the inner plate (52, 62 of Yoshitake) comprises a molded insulation material configured to insulate the plurality of battery cells (1 of Yoshitake) from an outside ([0051], [0053], [0015], [0065] of Yoshitake), and the outer plate (51, 61 of Yoshitake) comprises a molded metal ([0051], [0053], [0015] of Yoshitake).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “configured to reinforce rigidity” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because modified Yoshitake discloses wherein the outer plate (51, 61 of Yoshitake) comprises a molded metal ([0051], [0053], [0015], [0065] of Yoshitake), such reads on the limitation “configured to reinforce rigidity” as evidenced by [0053] of the instant specification.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein each of the installation spaces is provided in the inner plate (52, 62 of Yoshitake) and wherein the outer plate (51, 61 of Yoshitake) covers an outer surface of the temperature sensor (7 of Yoshitake) provided in the inner plate (52, 62 of Yoshitake) (Figs. 2 and 5-6, [0056]-[0058] of Yoshitake).
PNG
media_image1.png
621
1208
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 12-13, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein each of the sensor covers (146 of Lim) covers an outer surface of a portion of the outer plate (51, 61 of Yoshitake) provided with a corresponding one of the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake) installed therein (Figs. 2 and 5-6, [0056]-[0058] of Yoshitake, Fig. 3, [0050] of Lim).
PNG
media_image2.png
621
1208
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The Examiner notes that the limitation “wherein the sensor covers are configured to prevent thermal interference with the temperature sensor due to external environments” is intended use and therefore is not given any patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because modified Yoshitake discloses wherein each of the sensor covers (146 of Lim) covers an outer surface of a portion of the outer plate (51, 61 of Yoshitake) provided with a corresponding one of the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake) installed therein (Figs. 2 and 5-6, [0056]-[0058] of Yoshitake, Fig. 3, [0050] of Lim), such reads on the limitation “wherein the sensor covers are configured to prevent thermal interference with the temperature sensor due to external environments”, as evidenced by [0020] of the instant specification.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein each of the sensor covers (146 of Lim) is adhered to the outer plate (51, 61 of Yoshitake) (Figs. 2 and 5-6, [0056]-[0058] of Yoshitake) and is provided with the lower end bent to be adhered to a lower end of the corresponding one of the temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake, corresponding to 143, 145 of Lim) (Fig. 3, [0050] of Lim).
Claims 5-6 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshitake et al. (US PGPub 2012/0052359 A1, cited on the IDS dated March 24, 2023) in view of Yamashita (US PGPub 2019/0157729 A1) and Lim et al. (US PGPub 2015/0214583 A1), as applied to Claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Lee (KR 2000-0066690 A, see also the English translation obtained from Global Dossier provided with the Office Action dated September 26, 2025).
Regarding Claims 5-6 and 18-19, modified Yoshitake discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the sensor covers (146 of Lim) comprise a resin ([0050] of Lim).
However, modified Yoshitake does not disclose wherein the sensor covers comprise a polymer or nonwoven fabric that is a thermal insulation material.
Lee teaches wherein a cover for a battery comprises a polymer resin that is a thermal insulation material ([0031]-[0032], e.g. polyimide, polyurethane, polyamide, polyethylene, polystyrene, polycarbonate, polyester, polyvinyl chloride, and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene).
Specifically, Lee teaches that polymer resin has excellent moldability to easily be molded into any shape while having high strength ([0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the sensor covers of modified Yoshitake from a polymer resin, as taught by Lee, as such has excellent moldability to easily be molded into any shape while having high strength and therefore the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such could successfully be used to form the sensor covers desired by modified Yoshitake.
The Examiner notes that the limitation “configured to prevent indirect thermal interference with the temperature sensors due to the cooling channel or the heat transfer material” is intended use and therefore is not given any patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because modified Yoshitake discloses wherein the sensor covers (146 of Lim) comprise a thermal insulation material ([0032] of Lee), such reads on the limitation “configured to prevent indirect thermal interference with the temperature sensors due to the cooling channel or the heat transfer material” as evidenced by [0014] of the instant specification.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 24, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding independent Claims 1, 8, and 21, the Applicant argues that nothing in Yoshitake discloses, teaches, or suggests a sensor cover as claimed. Consequently, Yoshitake cannot disclose, teach, or suggest “sensor covers combined with other surfaces of the end plates” and “sensor covers [that] include a lower end bent to cover a lower surface of a corresponding one of the temperature sensors” as required by the claims.
The Examiner notes that Yoshitake was not relied on to disclose a sensor cover and therefore the arguments directed to such are moot.
Next, the Applicant argues that nothing in Yamashita discloses, teaches, or suggests a sensor cover as claimed. Consequently, Yamashita cannot disclose, teach, or suggest “sensor covers combined with other surfaces of the end plates” and “sensor covers [that] include a lower end bent to cover a lower surface of a corresponding one of the temperature sensors” as required by the claims.
The Examiner notes that Yamashita was not relied on to disclose a sensor cover and therefore the arguments directed to such are moot.
The Applicant argues that the resin portion (146) of Lim forms the second surface (142) of the temperature sensor (140a) (Fig. 3, [0050]). Even assuming that the “resin portion” is a sensor cover (a point which the Applicant does not concede), the “resin portion” of Lim is coupled to an outer surface of a battery cell (110) that is located between other battery cells (Fig. 3 of Lim). In contrast, the sensor covers recited by the claims further specifies that the “end plates” to which the claimed sensor covers are combined “cover outer surfaces of outermost battery fells of the plurality of battery cells…”. Lim cannot disclose these features given the placement of Lim’s “resin portion” on an outer wall of a battery cell in the middle of a plurality of batteries.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that Lim teaches wherein the resin portion (146) covers a head portion (143)/a metal portion (145) that measure a temperature of a battery cell (110) (Fig. 3, [0050]) and therefore the resin portion (146) functions as a sensor cover that covers a temperature sensor (143, 145).
In other words, the Examiner notes that the Applicant has not provided any evidence or reasoning as to why the resin cover (146) taught by Lim is not a sensor cover.
Furthermore, the Examiner notes that Lim alone was not relied on to teach the location of the sensor cover (i.e. combined with outer surfaces of the end plates).
Specifically, modified Yoshitake discloses temperature sensors (7 of Yoshitake) disposed in the installation spaces at the lower ends of the respective end plates (5, 6 of Yoshitake) (Figs. 2, 5-6 and [0050], [0056]-[0058] of Yoshitake).
Lim was relied on to teach a sensor cover for a temperature sensor (Fig. 3, [0050]).
Therefore, upon modifying the temperature sensor of modified Yoshitake to comprise a sensor cover, as taught by Lim, the sensor cover would be combined with outer surfaces of the end plate of modified Yoshitake.
The Examiner notes that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Thus, the arguments are not found to be persuasive.
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 KIMBERLY WYLUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 AM - 3 PM 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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Examiner, Art Unit 1725