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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/18/2026 has been entered.
This office action addresses pending claims 1, 3-6, and 8-16. Claims 1 and 3 were amended, claims 2 and 7 were cancelled, and claim 16 was added in the response filed 2/18/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 8-11 all depend from cancelled claim 7, and therefore the scope of these claims are unclear and indefinite. It is recommended to change the dependencies to depend on claim 1, which incorporated all the subject matter of cancelled claim 7. Because the dependencies of claims 8-11 are unclear, these claims have not been treated on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 13-14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasebe (JP 2020-002979, see Applicant supplied machine translation) in view of Han (US 2016/0308186), Takahata et al. (JP 2017-084550, see Applicant supplied machine translation), and Park et al. (US 2021/0194041, which was effectively filed 12/20/2019).
Regarding claim 1, Hasebe discloses a heat insulating sheet (separator) or a heat insulating layer comprising a resin and expandable graphite ([0001]). In an embodiment, the heat insulating material includes a three layer structure, where the two outer layers 11,13 comprise the resin and graphite and the middle layer is an intermediate layer 12 ([0010], [0034], Fig 1). The resin can be synthetic rubber, including acrylic, urethane, silicone, polystyrene, latex ([0016]); and therefore the outer layers are considered to be elastomer layers. The material of the intermediate layer can be a urethane foam, polyethylene foam, polypropylene ([0021]); therefore the intermediate layer is a plastic foam.
While Hasebe teaches that the heat insulating sheet is used with batteries and battery modules and in electric vehicles ([0001]-[0002]), Hasebe does not explicitly disclose a power supply device comprising: a battery block including a plurality of battery cells stacked in a thickness with a separator interposed between the plurality of battery cells; a pair of end plates disposed on both end surfaces of the battery block; and a binding bar connected to the pair of end plates and configured to fix the battery block in a pressurized state via the end plates.
Han discloses a battery module 100 (battery block) including a plurality of battery cells 10 stacked in a stacking direction with end plates 60 disposed at the ends in the stacking direction (abstract, Fig 1). Spacers 50 (separator) are disposed between adjacent battery cells ([0055]), and said spacers absorb pressure between cells while going under elastic deformation ([0056]-[0058]) as well as provide heat-dissipating structures ([0065]). End plates 60 are coupled to each other through the side plates 40 (binding bars) ([0050], Fig 1). Because the spacers 50 absorb pressure between the battery cells ([0055]) and because the side plates 40 are fixed to the end plates, the side plates 40 (binding bars) have to fix the battery module in a pressurized state via the end plates in order for the spacers to absorb the pressure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the heat insulating sheets of Hasebe in a battery module as taught by Han for the purpose of absorbing pressure and dissipating heat of the battery cells.
However, modified Hasebe does not explicitly disclose wherein the elastomer layer comprises a plurality of parallel ridges and a plurality of parallel grooves on a surface thereof, and wherein the elastomer layer includes a comb-teeth-shaped cross-sectional shape by alternately disposing the plurality of rows of parallel ridges and the plurality of rows of parallel grooves on the surface of a plate-shaped part, the surface facing each of the plurality of battery cells.
Takahata discloses a battery pack including a plurality of batteries 20 arranged in a predetermined direction [stack], and spacers 40 interposed between the batteries 20 (abstract). The spacers have plural protrusions 41 [parallel ridges] formed on a spacer body 42 that are in contact with the side wall 51 of batteries (abstract). The protrusions 41 may be formed on both surfaces of the spacer, and the protrusions have a height H, and, as an example is about 1 to 30 mm ([0024]). As seen in Figures 2-4, the spacers 40 with protrusions 41 create a comb-teeth-shaped cross-sectional shape by alternately disposing a plurality of rows of parallel ridges (protrusions) and a plurality of rows of parallel grooves. Takahata teaches the protrusions suppress increase of the resistance of the battery (abstract).
Takahata further teaches that the spring constant of the spacer can be adjusted by the widths (W1) [width of parallel ridge] and the intervals (W2) of the protrusions 41 ([0026]). The width of the protrusions W1 and widths of the grooves W2 therebetween are provided in Table 1, where W1 ranges from 2-5 mm, and W2 ranges from 2-6 mm. As seen by the third column of Table 1, the spring constant can be increased as the W1 between the projections is increased and as the W2 between the projection is decreased ([0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the protrusions formed on the side(s) of the spacer (which create a comb-teeth-shaped cross-sectional shape by alternately disposing the plurality of rows of parallel ridges) as taught by Takahata with the outer elastomer layers of the heat insulating sheet of Hasebe for the purpose of suppressing increase of the resistance of the battery.
However, modified Hasebe does not explicitly disclose wherein the elastomer layer (outer layers 11,13) is a non-foamed synthetic rubber.
Park discloses a pressure regulation system for an energy storage device 100 including a plurality of lithium ion cells 102 ([0021]). A spring member is positioned between each of the adjacent cells ([0021], Fig 1). The spring member/layer may be a polymeric material or an elastic material ([0024]). The spring layer may contain silicone, polyolefin (such as polyethylene and polypropylene), cross-linked polyolefin, polyester, polyurethane, EPDM (ethylene propylene diene monomer) rubber, natural rubber, or synthetic rubber. The spring layer should exhibit good recovery or spring back behavior ([0024]). Because Park alternatively describes the use of foams ([0025]), Park therefore reasonably suggests the spring layer as being a foam or as being one of the aforementioned materials that is non-foamed. In addition, Park teaches that in some embodiments, the spring layer may be a non-porous pad, and may be a solid EPDM rubber piece [synthetic rubber] ([0027]). Because Park teaches the spring layer can be a non-porous pad, Park reasonably suggests the material as non-foamed because there are no pores.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a non-foamed rubber synthetic rubber [non-porous pad of solid EPDM rubber] as taught and suggested by Park with the outer elastomer layers of Hasebe for the purpose of providing the structure that exhibits good recovery or spring back behavior (Park at [0024]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hasebe teaches that the resin (outer elastomer layers) can be synthetic rubber, including acrylic, urethane, silicone, polystyrene, latex ([0016]). Additionally, Park teaches that the spring layer can be a solid EPDM rubber piece [an ethylene propylene diene rubber] ([0027]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the EPDM rubber material of the spring layer of Park with the outer elastomer layer of Hasebe for the purpose of providing the structure that exhibits good recovery or spring back behavior (Park at [0024]).
Regarding claims 4-5, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Hasebe teaches that the intermediate layer can be a foam including urethane foam, polyethylene foam, polypropylene ([0021]), modified Hasebe does not explicitly disclose whether the foam layer is (claim 4) open-cell or (claim 5) closed-cell plastic foam.
Park discloses a pressure regulation system for an energy storage device 100 including a plurality of lithium ion cells 102 ([0021]). A spring member is positioned between each of the adjacent cells ([0021], Fig 1). The spring member/layer can be foam of either an open pore or closed pore type foam ([0025]), and the foam may comprise silicone foam, low-density polyethylene (LDPE) foam, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) foam, crosslinked polyethylene (PE) foam, polypropylene (PP) foam, natural rubber foam, polyester foam, polyurethane foam, neoprene, PVC/NBR (polyvinyl chloride/nitrile butyl rubber), styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), EPDM rubber foam, or latex foam ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use either an open pore or closed pore foam as taught by Park with the intermediate foam layer of Hasebe for the purpose of providing the structure that exhibits good recovery or spring back behavior (Park at [0024]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hasebe teaches that the plastic foam layer can be a urethane foam ([0021]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hasebe teaches an embodiment where the heat insulating sheet has a three-layer structure (two outer layers 11,13 and intermediate layer 12) in which the elastomer layers are stacked on both surfaces of the plastic foam layer, the plurality of the elastomer layers each being the elastomer layer (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 14, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hasebe teaches that batteries can be used in an electric vehicle or hybrid car for a means of transport ([0002]). As an electric vehicle or hybrid car being powered by a battery for a means of transport would need a motor, vehicle body, and wheels driven by the motor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the battery module in an electric vehicle or hybrid car having a motor, vehicle body, and wheels in order to power the car as a means of transport.
Regarding claim 16, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hasebe discloses that the intermediate layer 12 (plastic foam layer) has a thickness of 0.5 to 3 mm ([0021]-[0022]; the translation does not provide the units, however the original document lists the unit as mm). Therefore, Hasebe discloses a thickness range (0.5-3 mm) of the intermediate layer 12 (plastic foam layer) entirely within the claimed range of 0.2 mm to 7 mm.
However, modified Hasebe does not explicitly disclose the apparent density of the intermediate layer (plastic foam layer) in a range from 150 kg/m3 to 750 kg/m3.
Park teaches that that foam layers (including polyethylene, polypropylene and polyurethane foam which are taught by Hasebe at [0021]) can have densities between 0.05 g/cc to about 1 g/cc [50 kg/m3 to 1,000 kg/m3], and preferably about 0.1 g/cc to about 0.55 g/cc [100 kg/m3 to 550 kg/m3] ([0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select and use a foam having a density in the range of 150-750 kg/m3 as taught by Park in the intermediate layer (plastic foam layer) of Hasebe for the purpose of providing the structure that exhibits good recovery or spring back behavior (Park at [0024]).
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize, by routine experimentation, the density of the intermediate layer (plastic foam layer) [including in the range of 150 kg/m3 to 750 kg/m3] of Hasebe to obtain the desired balance between good recovery, spring back behavior, and pressure within the housing (Park at [0024], [0031], Fig 3).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasebe (JP 2020-002979, see Applicant supplied machine translation) in view of Han (US 2016/0308186), Takahata et al. (JP 2017-084550, see Applicant supplied machine translation), and Park et al. (US 2021/0194041, which was effectively filed 12/20/2019), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fujiwara et al. (WO 2018/101079).
Regarding claim 12, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Hasebe teaches an embodiment where the heat insulating sheet has a three-layer structure (two outer layers 11,13 and intermediate layer 12) in which the elastomer layers are stacked on both surfaces of the plastic foam layer (Fig 1), Hasebe does not explicitly disclose wherein the separator includes a two-layer structure of the elastomer layer and the plastic foam layer.
Fujiwara discloses a cell pack 10 including a plurality of secondary cells and a plurality of spacers interposed between the secondary cells (abstract). The spacers 22,27 include a core member 23,28 and elastic members 24,29 that are attached to the core member (Fig 1). As seen in Figure 1, the spacers 22 between two adjacent cells has two elastic members, with one elastic member on each side of the core 23, where the spacers 27 disposed at the ends have one elastic member that is between the core and the cell.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a two-layer structure of the spacer as taught by Fujiwara with the heat insulating sheet of Hasebe for the purpose of a heat insulating sheet disposed at the end plate to have one surface that faces the battery cells.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasebe (JP 2020-002979, see Applicant supplied machine translation) in view of Han (US 2016/0308186), Takahata et al. (JP 2017-084550, see Applicant supplied machine translation), and Park et al. (US 2021/0194041, which was effectively filed 12/20/2019), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Newman et al. (US 2018/0316071).
Regarding claim 15, modified Hasebe discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hasebe teaches that batteries can be used in an electric vehicle or hybrid car for a means of transport ([0002]). However, Hasebe does not explicitly disclose the battery within a power storage device having the battery (power supply device) and a power supply controller that controls charging and discharging to the power supply device, wherein the power supply controller enables charging to the secondary battery cell by electric power from an outside, and performs control to charge the secondary battery cell.
Newman discloses a vehicle 100 including power source 208A,B (comprising one or more power cells/batteries) ([0019]). The power source 208 includes a charge controller 224 that may be configured to determine charge levels of the power source 208, control a rate at which charge is drawn from the power source 208 (controls discharging), control a rate at which charge is added to the power source 208 (controls charging, and enables charging by electric power from an outside), and/or monitor a health of the power source 208 (e.g., one or more cells, portions, etc.) ([0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the charge controller 224 of the power source of Newman with the battery module of modified Hasebe for the purpose of controlling the charge and discharge of the battery.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, with regards to amended claim 1, that Park does not disclose a non-foamed synthetic rubber for the spring layer.
This is not considered persuasive. Park teaches that in some embodiments, the spring layer may be a non-porous pad, and may be a solid EPDM rubber piece [synthetic rubber] ([0027]). Because Park teaches the spring layer can be a non-porous pad, Park reasonably suggests the material as non-foamed because there are no pores.
Applicant argues that the cited references (Hasebe, Han, Takahata, Park) do not provide a rationale prompting a skilled artisan to specifically combined a non-foamed synthetic rubber elastomer layer with a comb-teeth-shaped ridge/groove structure within the specific multi-layer separator stack of Hasebe.
This is not considered persuasive. With regards to the non-foamed synthetic rubber elastomer layer, Park teaches that the spring layer [elastomer layer] may be a non-porous pad, and may be a solid EPDM rubber piece [synthetic rubber] ([0027]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a non-foamed rubber synthetic rubber [non-porous mad of solid EPDM rubber] as taught and suggested by Park with the intermediate foam layer of Hasebe for the purpose of providing the structure that exhibits good recovery or spring back behavior (Park at [0024]).
With regards to the comb-teeth-shaped ridge/groove structure, Takahata discloses a battery pack including a plurality of batteries 20 arranged in a predetermined direction [stack], and spacers 40 interposed between the batteries 20 (abstract), wherein the spacers have plural protrusions 41 [parallel ridges] formed on a spacer body 42 that are in contact with the side wall 51 of batteries (abstract). As seen in Figures 2-4, the spacers 40 with protrusions 41 create a comb-teeth-shaped cross-sectional shape by alternately disposing a plurality of rows of parallel ridges (protrusions) and a plurality of rows of parallel grooves. Takahata teaches the protrusions suppress increase of the resistance of the battery (abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the protrusions formed on the side(s) of the spacer (which create a comb-teeth-shaped cross-sectional shape by alternately disposing the plurality of rows of parallel ridges) as taught by Takahata with the outer elastomer layers of the heat insulating sheet of Hasebe for the purpose of suppressing increase of the resistance of the battery.
Therefore, the prior art provides rationale for the combination within the specific multi-layer separator stack of Hasebe.
In response to applicant's argument that the use of the non-foamed synthetic rubber for the elastomer layer and the ridge geometry prevent buckling of the ridges and maintains the fluidity of the electrolyte solution, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
In addition, Takahata teaches that strain and expansion affects the electrolyte solution in the active material layer, and the electrolyte can be pushed out from the active material layer under the strain ([0009]). That is, Takahata appears directed to providing the same effects as alleged.
Even further, while Applicant alleges a synergy of the specific material and specific integrated cross-sectional shape, Applicant has not provided any data of the alleged synergy. Applicant has merely stated that there is synergy and cited “as evidenced per the specification” without referring to a specific section (arguments page 10). Argument does not replace evidence where evidence is necessary (MPEP 2145(I)). Therefore, the arguments that the combination has a synergy that is not recognized by the prior art is not considered persuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BUCHANAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM (ET).
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/JACOB BUCHANAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights