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 Status
Claims 1, 9, and 11 have been amended. Claims 1-12 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Joye et al. (WO 2011134828, Espacenet machine translation provided for reference) in view of De Paoli et al. (U.S. 20130122341).
With respect to claim 1, Joye discloses a battery pack (1) (Fig. 1) comprising:
a pack housing (2 – external casing) structured to enclose an internal space (3 – reception chamber) (Fig. 1 and 2);
at least one cell stack body (43 – battery packs) accommodated in the internal space (3) of the pack housing (2) (Fig. 3);
at least one electronic component (67 – electrical devices) accommodated in the internal space (3) of the pack housing (2) (Fig. 3, [0075]);
a connecting member (68 – electrical connection cables and wires) electrically connected to at least one of the at least one cell stack body (43) and the at least one electronic component (67) (Fig. 3, [0095]); and
a partition wall (33 – partitioning) partitioning the internal space (3) and accommodating at least a portion of the connecting member (68) disposed along a length direction of the partition wall (33) (Fig. 3 and 6, [0095]).
Joyce does not disclose that at least a portion of the electrical connectors extends within the partition wall in the length direction of the partition wall, instead disclosing the connectors extend along a width of the wall.
De Paoli discloses a partition wall (450 - holders) which separate adjacent cell stacks (S1-S4 - segments) (Fig. 1) and teaches the partition wall (450) accommodates at least a portion of connecting members (105 – wire) along a length direction of the partition wall (450) (Fig. 13). De Paoli further teaches that this arrangement allows for the connection of the connecting member (105) to electrical components within the battery pack (1) ([0088]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed that the connecting members disclosed by Joye could extend in a length direction of the partition wall as taught by De Paoli in order to allow for the connection of the connecting member to electrical components within the battery pack.
With respect to claim 2, Joye discloses the partition wall (33) includes a void (labeled, internal space formed by wedging lugs 48) in the partition wall (33) (Fig. 6 - below), and the connecting member (68) is accommodated in the void (formed by 48) (Fig. 6, [0095]).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Void (internal space formed by 48) )][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Lower frame)][AltContent: textbox (Upper frame)]
PNG
media_image1.png
405
282
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3, Joye disclose the partition wall (33) includes a lower frame (labeled) and an upper frame (labeled) coupled to the lower frame (labeled) (Fig. 6 – below), and the void (formed by 48) is formed between the lower frame (labeled) and upper frame (labeled) (Fig. 6 – below).
With respect to claim 4, Joye discloses the partition wall (33) includes a recess (41 – notches) in a (upper) side surface (Fig. 6), and the connecting member (68) is accommodated in the recess (Fig. 6, [0095]).
With respect to claim 5, Joye discloses the connecting member (68) includes a conductive member and an insulating member surrounding the conductive member (insulated electrical cable) ([0076]).
With respect to claim 7, Joye discloses the at least one electrical component (67) is a battery management system (device for managing the battery) ([0075]), and the connecting member is a low voltage harness (electrical voltage measuring wires) connected to the battery management system (67) ([0082]).
It is noted that applicant’s definition of “low voltage harness” is wires which “obtain information on a plurality of battery modules included in the pack,” ([0005]). Based on this definition, Joye’s description of the cables (68) being electrical voltage measuring wires which connect the batteries (43) to the BMS (67) reads on “low voltage harness.”
With respect to claim 8, Joye discloses the partition wall (33) includes a void (labeled, formed by 48) and a recess (41) (Fig. 6- above), each accommodating the connection member (68) ([0095]), and the void (formed by 48) and the recess (41) are spatially separated from each other (Fig. 6- above).
With respect to claim 9, Joye discloses a battery pack (1) (Fig. 1) comprising:
a housing (2) structured to enclose an internal space (3) (Fig. 1 and 2);
partition walls (36) located in the internal space (3) of the housing (2) and engaged to the housing (2) to separate the internal space (3) into an array of separate accommodation spaces (34 – secondary compartment) (Fig. 2);
a plurality of battery modules (43) disposed inside the separate accommodation spaces (34) (Fig. 2), respectively, one battery module (43) per accommodating space (34) (Fig. 2), each battery module (43) including one or more battery cells (electrical accumulator assemblies) ([0061]);
one or more electronic components (67) located in the internal space (3) of the housing (3) (Fig. 3); and
electrical connectors (68) electrically coupled to provide electrical connections to the battery modules (43) and the one or more electronic components (67) (Fig. 3 and 6, [0079]),
wherein one or more partition walls (33) are structured to accommodate at least a portion of one or more of the electrical connectors (68) disposed along a length direction of the partition wall (33) (Fig. 3 and 6, [0095]).
Joyce does not disclose that at least a portion of the electrical connectors extends within the partition wall in the length direction of the partition wall, instead disclosing the connectors extend along a width of the wall.
De Paoli discloses a partition wall (450 - holders) which separate adjacent cell stacks (S1-S4 - segments) (Fig. 1) and teaches the partition wall (450) accommodates at least a portion of connecting members (105 – wire) along a length direction of the partition wall (450) (Fig. 13). De Paoli further teaches that this arrangement allows for the connection of the connecting member (105) to electrical components within the battery pack (1) ([0088]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed that the connecting members disclosed by Joye could extend in a length direction of the partition wall as taught by De Paoli in order to allow for the connection of the connecting member to electrical components within the battery pack.
With respect to claim 10, Joye discloses the partition wall (33) includes a void (labeled, internal space formed by wedging lugs 48) in which the one or more electrical connectors (68) is located (Fig. 6 - above, [0095]).
With respect to claim 11, Joye discloses at least one of the partition walls (33) includes a lower frame (labeled) and an upper frame (labeled) coupled to the lower frame (labeled) to form a void (formed by 48) is formed between the lower frame (labeled) and upper frame (labeled) for accommodating a portion of one or more of the electrical connectors (68) (Fig. 6 – above, [0095]).
With respect to claim 12, Joye discloses the partition wall (33) includes a recess (41 – notches) in a (upper) side surface (Fig. 6), and the portion of the one or more of the electrical connectors (68) is accommodated in the recess (Fig. 6, [0095]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joye et al. in view of De Paoli et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. 20190181405).
With respect to claim 6, Joye discloses the connecting member is an insulated electrical wire, not a bus bar.
Kim discloses a partition wall (180 - partition block) separating adjacent battery modules (110) (Fig. 2) and teaches that the partition wall (180) can be configured to allow a cable for electrical connection or a bus bar to pass therethrough ([0059]). Kim further teaches that both the cable and bus bar allow for power connection between the modules (110) ([0059]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively files to use either cables or a bus bar as taught by Kim to pass through the partition of Joye in order to electrically connect adjacent modules.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11 of response, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to the specification objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The specification objection has been withdrawn in light of the amendment to the title.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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. The new limitations which limits at least a portion of the connecting member extend in a length direction inside the partition wall was referenced by new prior art, De Paoli et al.
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 JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)272-1330. 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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727