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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action regarding Application No. 17/911,921 to Sasaki et al., assigned to GS Yuasa International Ltd., Japan, filed 09/15/2022 and published as U.S.PG Publication 2023/0138950A1 on 05/04/2023, is in response to applicant’s arguments / remarks and claims amendment filed 10/16/2025. Applicant’s response is fully considered.
This application is a 35 U.S.C. § 371 National Stage entry of International Patent Application PCT/JP2021/009157 filed 03/09/2021. It claims foreign priority from Japanese Patent Application JP2020-048226 filed 03/18/2020.
Status of the Claims
In the response filed 10/16/2025 Applicant has amended the claims of the application and added new claims. Claim 1 has been amended by adding limitation of a reinforcing member, and bolt to fix the reinforcing member to the outer case, also incorporating limitation of claim 2. New independent claim 8 includes limitation of claim 1 but without the reinforcing member. New independent claim 14 includes features of independent claim 8, but without the bolt. It also includes features of dependent claim 3 and 9, claim 6 and 12, claim 7 and 13. The status of the claims stand as follows:
Currently amended 1, 3
Canceled 2
Previously presented 4
4.4 New 5-15
Claims 1, 3-15 are currently pending in this application.
Withdrawal of Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 03
The rejection of claim 1-4 under 103 over Katayama et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2015/0044538) in view of Tsuruta et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2017/0237057) as presented in the previous non-Office action dated 06/16/2025 has been overcome by the amendment of claim 1. Therefore, it has been withdrawn. Upon further consideration and search the previous rejection has been modified by the new reference of Hidaka and presented in this Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in this section can be found in the prior Office Action.
Claim 1, 3-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katayama et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2015/0044538) in view of Tsuruta et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2017/0237057) and Hidaka (U.S. PG Publication 2021/0143505)
Regarding claim 1, 8, 14 Katayama discloses a battery module 13 in which a plurality of battery cells 14 are stacked with a holder 15 held therebetween (Katayama Fig. 2, paragraph 0013); the battery module is equivalent to the energy storage apparatus, and the stacked plurality of battery cells are equivalent to the energy storage device; and the holder is equivalent to the spacer disposed adjacent to the energy storage device.
Katayama discloses end holders 17 at the end of the plurality of stacked battery cells (Katayama Fig.2, paragraph 0062), a lower cooling plate 12 (Katayama Fig. 2, paragraph 0068), and a top cover 20 (Katayama Fig. 2, paragraph 0067), forming an outer structure that holds the battery module. Katayama, however, is silent about an outer case and an outer case which accommodates the energy storage device and the spacer.
Tsuruta discloses an energy storage apparatus provided with an energy storage device (Tsuruta paragraph 0006). Tsuruta discloses the energy storage apparatus 1 is provided with an outer case 10 including a first outer case 11 (cover) and a second outer case 12 (box shaped with an opening covered by the cover); and an energy storage unit 30 and an electric device 40 which are housed in the outer case 10 (Tsuruta Fig. 1, 2, paragraph 0060, 0061). Tsuruta discloses the outer case 10 locates the energy storage unit 30 and the electric device 40 at predetermined positions and protects the energy storage unit 30 and the electric device 40 from shocks and the like (Tsuruta paragraph 0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the battery module of Katayama by the teaching of Tsuruta (Tsuruta Fig. 1, 2, paragraph 0060) and made the end plates, lower plate and cover plate of Katayama into an integral outer casing to protect the battery module from shocks and the like as disclosed by Tsuruta (Tsuruta paragraph 0061). According to the MPEP such a modification is the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 I C).
Katayama is silent about the energy storage apparatus comprising a reinforcing member disposed outward from the outer case. Hidaka discloses an energy storage apparatus including plurality of energy storage devices (Hidaka paragraph 0007), accommodated in an outer casing 12, 13 (Hidaka Fig. 1). Hidaka discloses reinforcing plates 52 configured to increase rigidity of the container are disposed at the end of the stack of battery cells along the long side surface (Hidaka Fig. 1, paragraph 0043, 0044). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the energy storage apparatus of Katayama by the reinforcing plate disclosed by Hidaka in order to increase the rigidity of the container. Such a modification is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 I C). Hidaka discloses the reinforcing plate is disposed inward from the outer case. However, disposing it outward of the outer case instead of inward from the outer case would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art since it would only constitute a mere change in position of the reinforcing plate, and according to the MPEP shifting the position of parts within a device will not render the device patentable if the position change does not alter the device’s operation (see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); MPEP § 2144.04 VI. C.).
Katayama discloses the holder 15, equivalent to the spacer, includes a lower part projecting from a bottom surface of the energy storage device, and the projecting lower part include a flange 15c protruding from the lower edge of the holder and projects from a bottom surface of the battery module 13 (Katayama Fig. 13), considered equivalent to the projecting portion which projects from a bottom surface of the energy storage device. The flange 15c includes a restricting portion (the sides of the flange) which is in contact with the bottom surface of the battery cells 14 (Katayama Fig. 13), and the flanges, equivalent to the restricting portion restrict the position of the bottom surface into which it is fitted (Katayama Fig. 13, 17).
The outer case in the battery module of Katayama as modified by Tsuruta, has the lower plate 21, which faces the bottom surface of the energy storage device, is provided with positioning grooves 21b (Katayama Fig. 13, paragraph 0016) considered equivalent to the accommodating portion which accommodates the projecting portion, i.e., the flanges 15c (Katayama Fig. 13, 17), , and the body of the lower plate upon which the battery module rest is considered equivalent to a placement surface portion which is disposed adjacent to the accommodating portion in an arrangement direction of the spacer and the energy storage device and on which the bottom surface of the energy storage device is placed (Katayama Fig. 13).
Regarding the fixing of the reinforcing member to the outer case Hidaka discloses the reinforcing member is fixed to the casing of the battery cell along the long side surface by welding (Hidaka paragraph 0045). However, while modifying its position outward from the outer case it would have been obvious to have used a different fixing mechanism than laser welding such as by bolt since such a change constitutes the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 I C).
The positioning groove 21b (Takayama Fig. 13, paragraph 0016) considered equivalent to the accommodating portion, accommodates the flange 15c sides considered equivalent to the restricting portion and the center part of the flange considered the portion not including the restricting portion; the accommodating portions of the flange and the projection portion are equivalent the first accommodating portion and the second accommodating portion recited in claim 14. The width of the accommodating portion in the center is greater than the width in the side in the arrangement direction of the spacer and the energy storage device (Katayama Fig. 13) as recited in claim 14.
Regarding claims 3, 9, Katayama discloses the positioning groove 21b (Katayama Fig. 13, paragraph 0016) considered equivalent to the accommodating portion, accommodates the flange 15c sides considered equivalent to the restricting portion and the center part of the flange considered the portion not including the restricting portion; the accommodating portions of the flange and the projection portion are equivalent the first accommodating portion and the second accommodating portion.
Regarding claim 4, 5, 10, 11, and 15 the lower part of holder 15, equivalent to the projecting portion, extend along a peripheral edge of the bottom of the surface of the battery cell 14 (Katayama Fig. 13), and the positioning groove 21b, considered equivalent to the accommodating portion extend along the projecting portion (i.e. the flanges) on the inner surface of the outer casing (Katayama Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 6 and 12 the accommodating portions of the flange and the projection portion, considered equivalent the first accommodating portion and the second accommodating portion, are disposed adjacent to each other intersecting with the direction of the holder 15 and the energy storage device 14 (Katayama Fig.13).
Regarding claim 7 and 13 the accommodating portions of the flange and the projection portion are equivalent the first accommodating portion and the second accommodating portion, and the width of the accommodating portion in the center is greater than the width in the side in the arrangement direction of the spacer and the energy storage device (Katayama Fig. 13).
Response to Argument
As noted above in this Office action in the response filed 10/16/2025 applicant has amended claims 1 ad 3 and added new claims 5-15, new claims 8 and 14 being independent claims. Limitations of claim 2 has been incorporated into claim 1 and claim 2 has been canceled. Independent claim 8 includes features of claim 1 without the limitation of the reinforcing member. Independent claim 14 includes features of claim 1 in addition to the first accommodating portion and second accommodating portion of claim 3, now also recited in claim 9, in addition to the disposition direction of the accommodating portions and their relative width also recited in claims 6, 7, 12, 13. Claims 1, 3-15 are currently pending in this application.
Applicant traverses the rejection of claims 1-4 presented in the previous non-final Office action dated 06/16/2025. Applicant after stating the ground for determining obviousness rejection under 103 as presented in the MPEP, presents the text of amended claim 1 and notes that amendment is supported by original claim 1 and 2, Fig.7A and paragraph [0038] of original specification. Applicant then argues that the claim amended with Option 2 discussed in the last interview dated 09/15, 2025, would overcome the rejection, Option 2 being claim 1 as currently amended.
Examiner notes that the amendment of claim 1 overcomes the previously presented rejection of claim 1-4 under 103 over Katayama et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2015/0044538) in view of Tsuruta et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2017/0237057) since none of Katayama and Tsuruta discloses a reinforcing member and a bolt for fixing the reinforcing member. Therefore, upon further consideration and search the previous rejection under 103 over Katayama and Tsuruta is now modified by newly applied reference of Hidaka (U.S. PG Publication 2021/0143505) and presented above in this Office action. The new claims are also rejected underv103 over Katayama in view of Tsuruta and Hidaka. The Office action is made final.
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 OMAR M KEKIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-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, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at 571-272-3433. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR M KEKIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722