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
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.
Claim(s) 1-16, and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoneyama (US-20200411816-A1 as provided in the IDS dated 12/21/2022) in view of Lim (US-20140193685-A1) and Etou (US-20010014417-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Yoneyama discloses:
Battery module, comprising the following (battery pack 10, see [0018] and Fig. 1):
a plurality of galvanic cells (a plurality of battery cells 13, see [0022] and Figs. 1 and 3),
in particular a plurality of prismatic cells or a plurality of pouch cells (see Fig. 3),
which are arranged in a stacking direction (y-axis, see Fig. 3);
one or more connecting bodies (pack case 20, case body 21, side-frames 30, side-binding bars 40, and/or bottom plate 22, see [0018] and Fig. 1),
wherein the one or more connecting bodies connect the galvanic cells to one another in the stacking direction (see Figs. 1-3),
wherein the one or more connecting bodies are arranged on a long secondary side of the galvanic cells or on a short secondary side of the galvanic cells (the peripheral wall 23 of case body 21 are shown to be arranged on the cell’s long secondary side, see Figs. 1-3),
wherein at least one connecting body of the one or more connecting bodies comprises a one-piece receiving body (case body 21, see Fig. 1-3),
wherein the one-piece receiving body comprises a plurality of spacer elements being integral with the one-piece receiving body and having, parallel to the stacking direction of the battery module… wherein one or more of the plurality of spacer elements extend into spaces between immediately adjacent galvanic cells ones of the plurality of galvanic cells, wherein a receiving region for receiving at least a portion of a one of the plurality of galvanic cells is defined by immediately adjacent spacer elements which are displaced relative to each other along the stacking direction. (insulating spacer having a planar shape in-between each of the battery cells 13 in the Y-direction (i.e., stacking direction), see [0022]),
However, Yoneyama is silent toward the insulating spacers being integrated with the case body 21, see [0022].
It is noted, that there is no significant difference acknowledged in the instant specification between an integrated verse separated insulating spacer. Further, insulating spacers between battery cells that are integrated to a case were known in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention (as shown by Etou, see Fig. 4 and [0042]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the battery pack of Yoneyama to have insulating spacers between battery cells that are integrated to a case, as such modification would involve a mere change in configuration. It has been held that 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).
Yoneyama is silent toward the width/thickness of the insulating spacers and, therefore, does not teach:
a plurality of spacer elements which have… a width of approximately 1 to 5 mm,
To solve the same problem of providing an insulating spacer between adjacent battery cells suitably used for a vehicle (see [0005], [0037], and Fig. 2), Lim teaches providing an insulating member 150 with a thickness of about 0.5 mm to about 2 mm, which significantly overlaps the claimed range, see [0038]. Lim further teaches the range of 0.5 mm or greater helps to sufficiently reduce and/or prevent thermal conduction between adjacent battery cells, while 2 mm or less helps the volume of the battery module per unit capacity may not be undesirably increased , see [0038].
Absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the insulating spacers of Yoneyama with a width/thickness of 0.5-2 mm to balance the considerations of reducing thermal conduction between adjacent battery cells yet retaining volume of the battery module per unit capacity. Overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.05, I).
Regarding Claim 2, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the battery module comprises a plurality of connecting bodies which are arranged in parallel with one another and/or in parallel with a stacking direction of the battery module (side-frames 30 are shown to be arranged in parallel to each other and to the y axis, see Fig. 1-3).
Regarding Claim 3, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the at least one connecting body each comprise comprises a connecting material body made of a connecting material wherein the connecting material body is received in the receiving body of the connecting body (the side-frames 30 elastically press battery modules 12, see [0031]),
Regarding Claim 4, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the galvanic cells of the battery module or cell housings of the galvanic cells, the connecting material of the connecting material body, and the receiving body together form a composite component (each battery cell 12 includes a cell case 14, see [0023]), the connecting material of the connecting material body (side-frames 30), and the receiving body (case body 21) together form a composite component (see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 5, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein a) the connecting material is a flowable and/or castable material (“Each side-frame 30 may be made of a metal such as iron, steel, aluminum alloy, or stainless alloy. When each side-frame 30 is made of steel, the steel may be a high-strength steel. For example, each side-frame 30 may be formed by bending a metal or by extruding a metal. Alternatively, each side-frame 30 may be made of a resin material such as polycarbonate resin,” see [0029]);
and/or b) the connecting material is a two-component material (optional limitation).
Regarding Claim 6, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein a) the galvanic cells are spaced apart from one another in the stacking direction (“a plurality of battery cells 13 disposed side by side in lengthwise direction Y with lengthwise-interspace spacers,” see [0022]),
the galvanic cells being arranged substantially in parallel with one another; and/or (see Fig. 3)
b) an intermediate space is in each case arranged between adjacent galvanic cells (“the plurality of battery cells 13 in each battery module 12 are disposed side by side in lengthwise direction Y with the insulating members such as the lengthwise-interspace spacers in-between,” see [0024]).
Regarding Claim 7, Yoneyama in view of Lim renders obvious:
the width of the spacer element is 2 mm to approximately 4 mm, or approximately 2 mm (Lim teaches providing an insulating member 150 with a thickness of about 0.5 mm to about 2 mm, which overlaps the end point of the claimed range, see [0038].).
Overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.05, I).
Regarding Claim 8, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein each connecting material body of the one or more connecting bodies is integrally or form-fittingly connected to the galvanic cells of the battery module (“Each side-frame 30 is disposed between battery modules 12 disposed adjacent to each other in lateral direction X, and two side-walls 31 elastically press side-surfaces of battery modules 12,” see [0031]).
Regarding Claim 9, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the galvanic cells of the battery module connect the one or more connecting bodies of the battery module to one another in a load-bearing manner (the battery cells 13 are shown to rest on the bottom plate 22 in Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 10, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein an electrical insulation film is arranged at least partly or only partly on a surface of the galvanic cells or, on a surface of the cell housings of the galvanic cells (lengthwise-interspace spacers between each of battery cells 13 serves as an insulating which may be made of an insulating material such as a resin, see [0022]).
Regarding Claim 11, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein a receiving body of each connecting body comprises two side wall elements and a base wall element, the side wall elements of the receiving body each comprising one or more receiving regions in which a galvanic cell of the battery module is received in each case (partition plate 21 a and side-frames 30 define a plurality of spaces inside case body 21, and the plurality of battery modules 12 are disposed in the respective space, additionally side binding bars 40 are fixed into the corresponding side-frames 30, see [0021], [0034], and Figs. 1 and 3).
Regarding Claim 12, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the side wall elements of the receiving body comprise one or more sealing elements for providing a seal between each side wall element and a galvanic cell (“Side-binding bars 40 are fixed to corresponding side-frames 30, with insertion section 41 pushed in and disposed between the other edges, or the upper edges, of two side-walls 31 of side-frames 30. As a result, two flanges 44 are pushed against one edges, or the upper edges, of battery cells 13,” see [0035]).
Regarding Claim 13, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein one or more sealing elements are arranged at edges of the side wall elements (“Side-binding bars 40 are fixed to corresponding side-frames 30, with insertion section 41 pushed in and disposed between the other edges, or the upper edges, of two side-walls 31 of side-frames 30,” see [0035] and Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 14, Yoneyama discloses:
a battery device comprising the following: one or more battery modules according to Claim 1 (“each of the plurality of battery modules 12 includes a plurality of battery cells 13 disposed side by side,” see [0022]).
Regarding Claim 15, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the battery device comprises a temperature control device which comprises one or more temperature control elements (bottom plate 22 of pack case 20 functions as a cooling plate to cool battery modules 12 with coolant passages, see [0026]),
one or more temperature control elements of the temperature control device being arranged between two adjacent battery modules of the battery device (the bottom plate 22 functions as cooling plate which extends between each of the battery modules 12, see [0026] and Figs. 1-3)
and/or one or more temperature control elements being arranged on a side of each battery module facing away from the cell poles of the galvanic cells of the one or more battery modules (the bottom plate 22 is on the side of the battery module 12 facing away from the electrode terminals (i.e., cell poles) 17/18, see [0026] and Figs. 1-3).
Regarding Claim 16, Yoneyama discloses:
battery modules which are adjacent perpendicularly to a stacking direction of the battery modules are connected to one another by means of a common connecting body (Fig. 3 shows that the side-binding bars 40 connect adjacent battery modules 12 arranged perpendicular to the Y axis).
Regarding Claim 26, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the galvanic cells comprise cell poles (electrode terminals 18, see Fig. 3),
wherein the long secondary side of the galvanic cells or the short secondary side of the galvanic cells on which the one or more connecting bodies are arranged, faces away from the cell poles of the galvanic cells (at least the side frames face away from the electrode terminals 18, see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 27, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the galvanic cells comprise prismatic cells or wherein the galvanic cells are prismatic cells (each battery cell 13 is prismatic, see [0023]).
Regarding Claim 28, Yoneyama with the following modification in view of Lim:
a connecting body for arranging a plurality of galvanic cells in a battery module in a stacking direction (pack case 20, case body 21, side-frames 30, side-binding bars 40, and/or bottom plate 22, see [0018] and Fig. 1),
wherein the connecting body comprises a one-piece receiving, wherein a receiving region for receiving at least a portion of a galvanic cell of the plurality of galvanic cells body (the area of the case body 21 where the battery cells are disposed, see Fig. 1-3)
Yoneyama is silent toward the insulating spacers being integrated with the case body 21, see [0022], and does not teach:
wherein the one-piece receiving body comprises a plurality of spacer elements which being integral with the one-piece receiving body and having,
It is noted, that there is no significant difference acknowledged in the instant specification between an integrated verse separated insulating spacer. Further, insulating spacers between battery cells that are integrated to a case were known in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention (as shown by Etou, see Fig. 4 and [0042]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the battery pack of Yoneyama to have insulating spacers between battery cells that are integrated to a case, as such modification would involve a mere change in configuration. It has been held that 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).
parallel to the stacking direction of the battery module, is defined by immediately adjacent spacer elements which are displaced relative to each other along the stacking direction, wherein a receiving region for receiving at least a portion of a galvanic cell of the plurality of galvanic cells is defined by immediately adjacent spacer elements which are displaced relative to each other along the stacking direction, wherein one or more of the plurality of spacer elements extend into spaces between immediately adjacent receiving regions which are displaced relative to each other along the stacking direction. (insulating spacers having a planar shape in-between each of the battery cells 13 in the Y-direction (i.e., stacking direction), see [0022]).
Yoneyama is silent toward the width/thickness of the insulating spacers and, therefore, does not teach:
a plurality of spacers…having… a width of approximately 1 to 5 mm,
To solve the same problem of providing an insulating spacer between adjacent battery cells suitably used for a vehicle (see [0005], [0037], and Fig. 2), Lim teaches providing an insulating member 150 with a thickness of about 0.5 mm to about 2 mm, which significantly overlaps the claimed range, see [0038]. Lim further teaches the range of 0.5 mm or greater helps to sufficiently reduce and/or prevent thermal conduction between adjacent battery cells, while 2 mm or less helps the volume of the battery module per unit capacity may not be undesirably increased , see [0038].
Regarding Claim 29, Yoneyama discloses:
wherein the receiving body comprises two side wall elements and a base wall element, wherein the side wall elements of the receiving body each comprise one or more of the receiving regions (partition plate 21 a and side-frames 30 define a plurality of spaces inside case body 21, and the plurality of battery modules 12 are disposed in the respective space, additionally side binding bars 40 are fixed into the corresponding side-frames 30, see [0021], [0034], and Figs. 1 and 3).
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoneyama (US-20200411816-A1 as provided in the IDS dated 12/21/2022) in view of Lim (US-20140193685-A1) as applied to Claim 27 above in further view of Nishino et al. (US-20090186266-A1).
Regarding Claim 30, Yoneyama teaches that several of the pack case can suitably be made of resin (see [0022], [0029], [0034], and [0040]) however, Yoneyama does not teach:
wherein the receiving body comprises or is formed from a fiber-reinforced plastic material.
To solve the problem of designing a battery unit for a vehicle (see [0038]), Nishino teaches using synthetic resin reinforced with fiber for a tray member 51 and a cover member 52 of the battery unit, see [0072] and [0074]. This disclosure teaches synthetic resin reinforced with fiber is a conventional and successful material for battery casings used in vehicles.
Absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have used synthetic resin reinforced with fiber for the case body 21 of Yoneyama with the reasonable expectation of success based on the disclosure of Nishino.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/01/2026 have been fully considered and are addressed below.
Claim Rejections Under 35 USC §§ 102 and 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-16 and 26-30 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument except for the argument given below.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Maskew et al. (WO-2013188680-A1)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kayla E Clary whose telephone number is (571)272-2854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00 (PT).
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684. 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.
/K.E.C./
Kayla E. ClaryExaminer, Art Unit 1721
/SADIE WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights