DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the January 14th, 2026 arguments and remarks (“Remarks”). The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 14th, 2026 has been entered.
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 1-2, 4-12, and 14-18 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.
"A claim, although clear on its face, may also be indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty. In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235-36, 169 USPQ 236, 239 (CCPA 1971); In re Cohn, 438 F.2d 989, 169 USPQ 95 (CCPA 1971); In re Hammack, 427 F.2d 1378, 166 USPQ 204 (CCPA 1970)" (see MPEP 2173.03).
Applicant amends Claims 1, 7, and 15 to recite “wherein the second opening portion is configured so that the energy storage device is visually recognizable from an outside.” On pg. 6 of the “Remarks,” applicant cites Figs. 4-6 of the original specification for support. However, the amendment is not adequately supported by Figs. 4-6. Figure 5 appears to show that the adhesive layer 79 is not provided in the sensor region 72 comprising the first opening portion 723 and the second opening portion 724. In contradiction, Figure 6 appears to show that the adhesive layer is disposed entirely below the second opening portion 724. Further, [0088] of the specification describes that the adhesive intrudes into the second opening portions 724. The specification does not clarify whether the adhesive layer is partially or entirely disposed below the second opening portion. As applicant’s specification does not provide antecedent basis for the amended claim terminology, it is unclear how the surface of the energy storage device can be visually recognizable from an outside if the adhesive layer intrudes below the second opening portion. Applicant should clearly indicate support for the amended claim language and ensure consistency between the claims and specification. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-12, 14, and 16-18 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendments received on January 14th, 2026:
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 15-14 are pending in the current application. Claims 1, 7, 15, and 18 are amended.
Claim 1 is amended to recite that the second portion is configured so that the energy storage device is visually recognizable from the outside.
Claims 7 and 15 are amended similarly to Claim 1 and further include limitations previously presented in Claim 1 describing a holding member including a first opening portion and a second opening portion; and further describes that the adhesive layer is spaced from the first opening portion with respect to the second opening portion.
Claim 18 is amended to remove limitations describing an opening portion.
Support for the amendment is not clearly found in applicant’s disclosure (see rejection under U.S.C. § 112 (b) above).
Status of Claims
Claims 1-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as described below:
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1) as further evidenced by Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1) and Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U). The rejections are maintained.
Claims 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1), and further in view of Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U) as further evidenced by Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1). The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment to Claim 7.
Claims 15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1), and further in view of Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U). The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment to Claim 15.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1), and further in view of Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U) as further evidenced by Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1). The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment to Claim 15.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed in the “Remarks” dated January 14th, 2026 have been fully considered as described below:
Regarding Claims 1, 7, and 15 (see pg. 4-8 of the “Remarks”), applicant’s arguments are based on the claims as amended in which applicant suggests that the newly amended limitations overcome the prior art of record. Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of the amendment.
"A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle." Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d 1397. Office personnel may also take into account "the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ" Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. (see MPEP 2141.03.I).
Additionally, applicant argues that a high number of references are used in the rejection of Claims 1 and 7 (see pg. 8 of the “Remarks”). In response to applicant's argument that the examiner has combined an excessive number of references, reliance on a large number of references in a rejection does not, without more, weigh against the obviousness of the claimed invention. See In re Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 18 USPQ2d 1885 (Fed. Cir. 1991). Further, applicant suggests a teaching away within the applied references but does not provide any citations or additional arguments as support (see pg. 8 of the “Remarks”).
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are deemed unpersuasive.
Examiner recommends amending Claims 1, 7, and 15 to specify that the energy storage device is a battery module as shown in para. 31 of the specification.
Cited Prior Art
Previously Cited Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) (“Tononishi”)
Previously Cited Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1) (“Tsuruta et al.”)
Previously Cited Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1) (“Nishikawa”)
Previously Cited Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U) (“Son et al.”)
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Figures included in previous office actions may have been omitted.
[AltContent: textbox (Tononishi (Fig. 2))]
PNG
media_image1.png
641
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Tononishi (Fig. 25A-25B))]
PNG
media_image2.png
810
687
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1) as further evidenced by Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1) and Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U).
Regarding Claim 1, Tononishi teaches an energy storage apparatus comprising an energy storage device and a sensor mounted on the energy storage device (para. 2). A holding member (holder (30), bus bar frame (600)) is disposed on the energy storage device (100) to hold the sensor (50) (Fig. 25A para. 64-65, 126). The sensor is held in a state where a detection surface (52b) is exposed toward the energy storage device (100) (Fig. 25A, para. 302). The energy storage apparatus (1) comprises an outer casing (11, 12) accommodating the energy storage device (100), the sensor (50), and the holding member therein (Fig. 2, para. 115). As shown in annotated Fig. 25A, Tononishi teaches the holding member including portions analogous to a wall portion, first opening, and second opening; the wall portion is disposed between a first opening of the holding member, in which the sensor is disposed, and a second opening portion of the holding member at a periphery of the first opening portion (see annotated Fig. 25A). Tononishi teaches a space formed between the indicated wall portion and the energy storage device (100) in which is occupied by spacers (310).
Tononishi does not teach an adhesive layer that joins the holding member and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device, the adhesive layer disposed at a position where the adhesive layer does not overlap with the detection surface of the sensor as viewed in a plan view, and wherein the adhesive layer is not disposed at a position between the wall and the energy storage device as viewed in a plan view.
Tsuruta et al. teaches an adhesive region (48) in which an adhesive is applied forming an adhesive layer that joins the holding member (40) and the energy storage element (device) to each other and is interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device (para. 36, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include an adhesive layer that joins the holding member and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device as described by Tsuruta et al. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to exclude application of the adhesive layer beneath any openings or accommodated space as taught by Tsuruta et al. (para. 35 of “Description of the Preferred Embodiments”); as applied, the adhesive layer would avoid the space beneath the thermistor opening of the holding member of Tononishi and would not overlap the detection surface of the sensor as viewed in plan view. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification by Tsuruta et al. to provide an effective method of adhering parts of an energy storage device to avoid displacement and positional deviation (Tsuruta et al., para. 15).
Further, when performing the described modification, it would be obvious to use an adhesive suitable for bonding components of a battery module in which are well known in the field of endeavor such as tape as further evident by Nishikawa (para. 105); additionally, it would be obvious to include an adhesive in which comprises a thermally conductive material (heat conductive adhesive) to bond the temperature sensor element to the battery cell as evident by Son et al. to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, enabling a more accurate temperature measurement (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to avoid applying the adhesive layer (as taught by Tsuruta et al.) between the indicated wall portion and the energy storage housing to avoid contact between the adhesive (in which is not thermally conductive) and temperature sensor in which may hinder the accuracy of temperature readings. Therefore all claim limitations are met and obvious over the existing prior art.
Regarding Claim 2, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As applied to Claim 1, the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. to include an adhesive layer interposed between and joining the holding member and the energy storage device disposed at a position where the adhesive layer does not overlap with the detection surface of the sensor; as applied, the adhesive layer would avoid the space beneath the thermistor opening of the holding member of Tononishi and would avoid a periphery detection surface of the sensor. The detection surface (52b) of the sensor protrudes from the holding member toward the energy storage device as shown in Fig. 25A. Although, the prior art is silent to a thickness of the adhesive layer as claimed, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 4 7 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the protruding amount within a thickness equal to or more than a thickness of the adhesive layer to ensure sufficient contact between the detection surface and energy storage device. If the thickness of the adhesive layer is greater than the protruding portion of the detection surface, the contact between the detection surface and energy storage device may be reduced.
Regarding Claim 3, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Tononishi teaches the holding member (600) including opening portions (820) formed on a surface of the holding member that would face the adhesive layer as modified (Fig. 25A, para. 250). The opening portion (820) can be formed outward the detection surface of the sensor and can be consider to extend through the opening of the spacer (310) as indicated by annotated Figure 24A. The use of a one-piece, integrated construction instead of the structure disclosed or taught in the prior art would have been within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968, 144 USPQ 347,349 (CCPA 1965) (see MPEP § 2144.04). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to integrate the holding member (600) and spacer (310) to reduce positional deviation between components and improve sensor measurements.
Regarding Claim 4, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Tononishi teaches the holding member (600) holding bus bars (200) in which are connected to the energy storage device (100) (para. 151, Fig. 3). The bus bars are disposed at an end portion of the holding member (600) in recessed portions (660) and the sensors are disposed at a middle or inside portion of the holding member through holes (670) (para. 174-175, Fig. 7). Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 5, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Tononishi teaches the sensor including a pair of projection portions (52 a) (support portions) that sandwich the detection surface (52 b). The pair of support portions can be supported by the holding member (30, 600) (Fig. 25A-B, para. 265-267).
Regarding Claim 6, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As applied to Claim 1, the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. to include an adhesive layer interposed between and joining the holding member and the energy storage device disposed at a position where the adhesive layer does not overlap with the detection surface of the sensor; as applied the adhesive layer would avoid the space beneath the thermistor opening of the holding member of Tononishi and would avoid a periphery detection surface of the sensor.
Claims 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1), and further in view of Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U) as further evidenced by Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Tononishi teaches an energy storage apparatus comprising an energy storage device and a sensor mounted on the energy storage device (para. 2). A holding member (holder (30), bus bar frame (600)) is disposed on the energy storage device (100) to hold the sensor (50) (Fig. 25A para. 64-65, 126). The sensor is held in a state where a detection surface (52b) is exposed toward the energy storage device (100) (Fig. 25A, para. 302). The energy storage apparatus (1) comprises an outer casing (11, 12) accommodating the energy storage device (100), the sensor (50), and the holding member therein (Fig. 2, para. 115). As shown in annotated Fig. 25A, Tononishi teaches the holding member including portions analogous to a first opening and second opening; the sensor is disposed in a first opening of the holding member and a second opening portion of the holding member is located at a periphery of the first opening portion (see annotated Fig. 25A).
Tononishi does not teach an adhesive layer that joins the holding member and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device and is disposed at a position spaced from the first opening portion with respect to the second opening portion.
Tsuruta et al. teaches an adhesive region (48) in which an adhesive is applied forming an adhesive layer that joins the holding member (40) and the energy storage element (device) to each other and is interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device (para. 36, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include an adhesive layer that joins the holding member and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device as described by Tsuruta et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification by Tsuruta et al. to provide an effective method of adhering parts of an energy storage device to avoid displacement and positional deviation (Tsuruta et al., para. 15). Further, when performing the described modification, it would be obvious to use an adhesive suitable for bonding components of a battery module in which are well known in the field of endeavor such as tape as further evident by Nishikawa.
Tononishi does not teach a heat conductive adhesive layer that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device wherein a thermal conductivity of the heat conductive adhesive layer is higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer.
Son et al. teaches an adhesive layer used to join a temperature sensor and a battery cell (energy storage device) comprising a thermally conductive material (forming a heat conductive adhesive layer) to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, in which is interposed between a bottom detection surface of the sensor and the battery cell (energy storage device) (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include a heat conductive adhesive layer that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other in which is interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device as taught by Son et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide optimal heat transfer between the temperature sensor and energy storage device as described above.
Further, when performing the described modification as taught by Tsuruta et al., it would be obvious to use an adhesive suitable for bonding components of a battery module in which are well known in the field of endeavor such as tape as further evident by Nishikawa (para. 105); additionally, when performing the described modification as taught by Son et al., it would be obvious to include an adhesive in which comprises a thermally conductive material (heat conductive adhesive) to bond the temperature sensor element to the battery cell to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, enabling a more accurate temperature measurement (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”). Therefore, the thermal conductivity of the heat conductive adhesive layer is inherently higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer (in which does not comprise a thermally conductive material). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Further, when performing the described modification, it would have been obvious to dispose the adhesive layer at a position spaced from the first opening portion with respect to the second opening of Tononishi to avoid interference between the adhesive layer as modified by Tsuruta et al. and the heat conductive adhesive layer as modified by Son et al. as described above; and to further provide improved use of materials (avoiding application of the adhesive between openings prevents wasted materials as the adhesive functions to adhere two materials).
Regarding Claim 8, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Tononishi teaches the sensor (thermistor (50)) including a sensor body (51) and a mounting member (cover body (52)) accommodating the sensor body (para. 263, Fig. 22A, 25A).
Tononishi does not teach a heat conductive sheet disposed on the mounting member, and wherein the heat conductive sheet is brought into contact with the energy storage device.
Son et al. teaches an adhesive layer (synonymous to a sheet in context) used to join a temperature sensor and a battery cell (energy storage device) comprising a thermally conductive material (forming a heat conductive adhesive layer or sheet) to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, in which is interposed between a bottom detection surface of the sensor and the battery cell (energy storage device) (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include a heat conductive adhesive sheet that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other in which is interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device (in which the heat conductive sheet is brought into contact with the energy storage device) as taught by Son et al. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to correspond the bottom detection surface of the sensor of Son et al. to the bottom surface of the mounting member (52) of Tononishi in which the heat conductive sheet would be disposed on the mounting member and brought into contact with the energy storage device. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide optimal heat transfer between the temperature sensor and energy storage device as described above.
Regarding Claims 9, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above.
Tononishi does not teach a heat conductive sheet that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device, and wherein a thermal conductivity of the heat conductive adhesive layer sheet is higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer.
Son et al. teaches an adhesive layer (synonymous to a sheet in context) used to join a temperature sensor and a battery cell (energy storage device) comprising a thermally conductive material (forming a heat conductive adhesive layer or sheet) to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, in which is interposed between a bottom detection surface of the sensor and the battery cell (energy storage device) (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include a heat conductive adhesive sheet that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other in which is interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device as taught by Son et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide optimal heat transfer between the temperature sensor and energy storage device as described above.
Further, when performing the described modification as taught by Tsuruta et al. as applied to Claim 1, it would be obvious to use an adhesive suitable for bonding components of a battery module in which are well known in the field of endeavor such as tape as further evident by Nishikawa (para. 105); additionally, when performing the described modification by Son et al., it would be obvious to include an adhesive in which comprises a thermally conductive material (heat conductive adhesive) to bond the temperature sensor element to the battery cell to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, enabling a more accurate temperature measurement (Son et al., para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”). Therefore, the thermal conductivity of the heat conductive adhesive layer is inherently higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer (in which does not comprise a thermally conductive material). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 10, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 8 above.
Tononishi does not teach a heat conductive sheet that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other is interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device, and wherein a thermal conductivity of the heat conductive adhesive layer sheet is higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer.
Son et al. teaches an adhesive layer (synonymous to a sheet in context) used to join a temperature sensor and a battery cell (energy storage device) comprising a thermally conductive material (forming a heat conductive adhesive layer or sheet) to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, in which is interposed between a bottom detection surface of the sensor and the battery cell (energy storage device) (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include a heat conductive adhesive sheet that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other in which is interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device as taught by Son et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide optimal heat transfer between the temperature sensor and energy storage device as described above.
Further, when performing the described modification as taught by Tsuruta et al. as applied to Claim 1, it would be obvious to use an adhesive suitable for bonding components of a battery module in which are well known in the field of endeavor such as tape as further evident by Nishikawa (para. 105); additionally, when performing the described modification by Son et al., it would be obvious to include an adhesive in which comprises a thermally conductive material (heat conductive adhesive) to bond the temperature sensor element to the battery cell to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, enabling a more accurate temperature measurement (Son et al., para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”). Therefore, the thermal conductivity of the heat conductive adhesive layer is inherently higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer (in which does not comprise a thermally conductive material). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 11, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. Tononishi teaches the sensor (thermistor (50)) including a sensor body (51) and a mounting member (cover body (52)) accommodating the sensor body (para. 263, Fig. 22A, 25A). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 12, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. As applied to Claim 7, the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. to include an adhesive layer interposed between and joining the holding member and the energy storage device disposed at a position where the adhesive layer does not overlap with the detection surface of the sensor; as applied, the adhesive layer would avoid the space beneath the thermistor opening of the holding member of Tononishi and would avoid a periphery detection surface of the sensor. The detection surface (52b) of the sensor protrudes from the holding member toward the energy storage device as shown in Fig. 25A. Although, the prior art is silent to a thickness of the adhesive layer as claimed, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 4 7 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the protruding amount within a thickness equal to or more than a thickness of the adhesive layer to ensure sufficient contact between the detection surface and energy storage device. If the thickness of the adhesive layer is greater than the protruding portion of the detection surface, the contact between the detection surface and energy storage device may be reduced. Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 13, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. Tononishi teaches the holding member (600) including opening portions (820) formed on a surface of the holding member that would face the adhesive layer as modified (Fig. 25A, para. 250). The opening portion (820) can be formed outward the detection surface of the sensor and can be consider to extend through the opening of the spacer (310) as indicated by annotated Figure 24A. The use of a one-piece, integrated construction instead of the structure disclosed or taught in the prior art would have been within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968, 144 USPQ 347,349 (CCPA 1965) (see MPEP § 2144.04). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to integrate the holding member (600) and spacer (310) to reduce positional deviation between components and improve sensor measurements. Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 14, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. and further evidenced by Nishikawa teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. Tononishi teaches the holding member (600) holding bus bars (200) in which are connected to the energy storage device (100) (para. 151, Fig. 3). The bus bars are disposed at an end portion of the holding member (600) in recessed portions (660) and the sensors are disposed at a middle or inside portion of the holding member through holes (670) (para. 174-175, Fig. 7). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
PNG
media_image3.png
512
440
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1), and further in view of Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U).
Regarding Claim 15, Tononishi teaches an energy storage apparatus comprising an energy storage device and a sensor mounted on the energy storage device (para. 2). A holding member (holder (30), bus bar frame (600)) is disposed on the energy storage device (100) to hold the sensor (50) (Fig. 25A para. 64-65, 126). The sensor is held in a state where a detection surface (52b) is exposed toward the energy storage device (100) (Fig. 25A, para. 302). The energy storage apparatus (1) comprises an outer casing (11, 12) accommodating the energy storage device (100), the sensor (50), and the holding member therein (Fig. 2, para. 115). Tononishi teaches the sensor (thermistor (50)) including a sensor body (51) and a mounting member (cover body (52)) accommodating the sensor body (para. 263, Fig. 22A, 25A). As shown in annotated Fig. 25A, Tononishi teaches the holding member including portions analogous to a first opening and second opening; the sensor is disposed in a first opening of the holding member and a second opening portion of the holding member is located at a periphery of the first opening portion (see annotated Fig. 25A).
Tononishi does not teach an adhesive layer that joins the holding member and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device, the adhesive layer disposed at a position where the adhesive layer does not overlap with the detection surface of the sensor as viewed in a plan view.
Tsuruta et al. teaches an adhesive region (48) in which an adhesive is applied forming an adhesive layer that joins the holding member (40) and the energy storage element (device) to each other and is interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device (para. 36, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include an adhesive layer that joins the holding member and the energy storage device to each other interposed between the holding member and the energy storage device as described by Tsuruta et al. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to exclude application of the adhesive layer beneath any openings or accommodated space as taught by Tsuruta et al.; as applied, the adhesive layer would avoid the space beneath the thermistor opening of the holding member of Tononishi and would not overlap the detection surface of the sensor as viewed in plan view. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification by Tsuruta et al. to provide an effective method of adhering parts of an energy storage device to avoid displacement and positional deviation (Tsuruta et al., para. 15).
Tononishi does not teach a heat conductive sheet disposed on the mounting member, and wherein the heat conductive sheet is brought into contact with the energy storage device.
Son et al. teaches an adhesive layer (synonymous to a sheet in context) used to join a temperature sensor and a battery cell (energy storage device) comprising a thermally conductive material (forming a heat conductive adhesive layer or sheet) to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, in which is disposed on and interposed between a bottom detection surface of the sensor and the battery cell (energy storage device) (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi to include a heat conductive adhesive sheet that joins the sensor and the energy storage device to each other in which is disposed on and interposed between the detection surface of the sensor and the energy storage device (in which the heat conductive sheet is brought into contact with the energy storage device) as taught by Son et al. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to correspond the bottom detection surface of the sensor of Son et al. to the bottom surface of the mounting member (52) of Tononishi in which the heat conductive sheet would be disposed on the mounting member and brought into contact with the energy storage device. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide optimal heat transfer between the temperature sensor and energy storage device as described above.
Further, when performing the described modification, it would have been obvious to dispose the adhesive layer at a position spaced from the first opening portion with respect to the second opening of Tononishi to avoid interference between the adhesive layer as modified by Tsuruta et al. and the heat conductive adhesive layer as modified by Son et al. as described above; and to further provide improved use of materials (avoiding application of the adhesive between openings prevents wasted materials as the adhesive functions to adhere two materials).
Regarding Claim 17, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 15 above. As applied to Claim 15, the energy storage apparatus of Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. to include an adhesive layer interposed between and joining the holding member and the energy storage device disposed at a position where the adhesive layer does not overlap with the detection surface of the sensor; as applied, the adhesive layer would avoid the space beneath the thermistor opening of the holding member of Tononishi and would avoid a periphery detection surface of the sensor. The detection surface (52b) of the sensor protrudes from the holding member toward the energy storage device as shown in Fig. 25A. Although, the prior art is silent to a thickness of the adhesive layer as claimed, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 4 7 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the protruding amount within a thickness equal to or more than a thickness of the adhesive layer to ensure sufficient contact between the detection surface and energy storage device. If the thickness of the adhesive layer is greater than the protruding portion of the detection surface, the contact between the detection surface and energy storage device may be reduced. Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 18, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 15 above. Tononishi teaches the holding member (600) including opening portions (820) formed on a surface of the holding member that would face the adhesive layer as modified (Fig. 25A, para. 250). The opening portion (820) can be formed outward the detection surface of the sensor and can be consider to extend through the opening of the spacer (310) as indicated by annotated Figure 24A. The use of a one-piece, integrated construction instead of the structure disclosed or taught in the prior art would have been within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968, 144 USPQ 347,349 (CCPA 1965) (see MPEP § 2144.04). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to integrate the holding member (600) and spacer (310) to reduce positional deviation between components and improve sensor measurements. Tononishi teaches the holding member (600) holding bus bars (200) in which are connected to the energy storage device (100) (para. 151, Fig. 3). The bus bars are disposed at an end portion of the holding member (600) in recessed portions (660) and the sensors are disposed at a middle or inside portion of the holding member through holes (670) (para. 174-175, Fig. 7). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tononishi (U.S. Pat. No. 20170244139 A1) in view of Tsuruta et al. (W.O. Pat. No. 2018230523 A1), and further in view of Son et al. (K.R. Pat. No. 20100006491 U) as further evidenced by Nishikawa (U.S. Pat. No. 20170092911 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, Tononishi is modified by Tsuruta et al. and Son et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 15 above. Further, when performing the described modification as taught by Tsuruta et al. as applied to Claim 15, it would be obvious to use an adhesive suitable for bonding components of a battery module in which are well known in the field of endeavor such as tape as further evident by Nishikawa (para. 105); additionally, when performing the described modification by Son et al. as applied to Claim 15 above, it would be obvious to include an adhesive in which comprises a thermally conductive material (heat conductive adhesive sheet) to bond the temperature sensor element to the battery cell to reduce the amount of heat dissipated to the outside during the conduction of heat from the battery cell to the temperature sensor, enabling a more accurate temperature measurement (para. 1 of “Technical-Field,” para. 12 of “Tech-Solution”). Therefore, the thermal conductivity of the heat conductive sheet is inherently higher than a thermal conductivity of the adhesive layer (in which does not comprise a thermally conductive material). Therefore all claim limitations are met.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA RENEE DAULTON whose telephone number is (703)756-5413. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, ULA RUDDOCK can be reached at (571) 272-1481. 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.
/C.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729