DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/3/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In the amendment dated 3/3/26, the following has occurred: Claims 1 and 9 have been amended; Claims 18-19 are cancelled.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-14, and 16-17, and 20 are pending. This communication is a Non-Final Rejection in response to the "Amendment" and "Remarks" filed on 3/3/26.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9, 11-14, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 214542426 U (CN’426) in view of CN 215989052 U (CN’052) and US 20210351455 A1 (US’455).
As to Claim 1:
CN’426 discloses a battery pack shell, comprising a bottom guard plate, a bottom heat exchange plate and a frame disposed on the bottom guard plate in sequence (Abstract; Fig. 1; pp. 1, 5–6; CN’426 discloses a frame 1, a hydrocooling plate 2 fixedly connected to the bottom of the frame, and a bottom guard plate 3 detachably fixed below the hydrocooling plate 2);
wherein a first sealing strip is disposed between the bottom heat exchange plate and the frame, and the first sealing strip is configured to seal a connection between the bottom heat exchange plate and the frame (Abstract; pp. 1, 5–6; CN’426 discloses a sealing structure 4 consisting of a structural adhesive layer set between the hydrocooling plate 2 and the frame 1);
the bottom heat exchange plate and the frame are fixed by a plurality of first fasteners, the bottom guard plate and the frame are fixed by a plurality of second fasteners, and the bottom heat exchange plate is sandwiched between the bottom guard plate and the frame (Abstract; pp. 1, 5–6; CN’426 teaches that the hydrocooling plate 2 is secured to the frame via a first set of fasteners like flow drill screws or bolts 6, and the bottom guard plate 3 is separately fixedly connected via a second set of fasteners like mounting bolts 7, sandwiching the cooling plate in between);
each of the first fasteners and each of the second fasteners are disposed around a same circle along the frame (Fig. 1 trace a uniformly distributed perimetric configuration along the outer peripheral boundaries of the lower-case assembly; pp. 5–6);
wherein a first distance between a center of any one of the first fasteners and a center of one of the second fasteners adjacent to the any one of the first fasteners is 100 mm to 600 mm, a distance between an edge of the first sealing strip facing the first fasteners and a center of one of the first fasteners closest to the edge of the first sealing strip is a second distance, the second distance is 4 mm to 25 mm, and a product of the first distance and the second distance is 400 mm² to 15000 mm² (pp. 2, 5–6, 8; CN’426 explicitly discloses setting perimetric structural hardware spacing pitches from 30 mm to 150 mm based on changing casing parameters to achieve an optimal connection effect, rendering routine design scaling of these overlapping geometric boundaries obvious);
wherein a second sealing strip is disposed between the bottom guard plate and the bottom heat exchange plate, and the second sealing strip is configured to seal a connection between the bottom guard plate and the bottom heat exchange plate (Abstract; pp. 1, 5–6; CN’426 discloses a distinct perimetric sealing strip 5 provided between the bottom guard plate 3 and the hydrocooling plate 2 to form an environmental sealed cavity);
wherein a distance between an edge of the second sealing strip facing the second fasteners and a center of one of the second fasteners closest to the edge of the second sealing strip is a third distance, a fourth distance between centers of any two adjacent second fasteners is 200 mm to 1000 mm, the third distance is 6 mm to 20 mm, and a product of the third distance and the fourth distance is 1200 mm² to 20000 mm² (pp. 2, 5–6, 8; CN’426 explicitly teaches a uniform perimetric distribution of adjacent hardware pitches up to 150 mm to balance connection strength, rendering the routine scaling of these result-effective structural variables obvious).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that each of the second fasteners is disposed between adjacent first fasteners, wherein the first fasteners and the second fasteners are alternately disposed around the same circle.
CN’052 discloses a perimetric layout for a battery box assembly wherein an edge of a bottom plate corresponding to a fastening piece is provided with a staggered row arrangement containing a fastening member 400 and a connecting piece 500 along a substantially straight perimetric line direction (Abstract; Fig. 1; Fig. 2; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 5). CN’052 explicitly specifies that this perimetric alignment pattern utilizes a strictly staggered, alternating hardware layout where two adjacent containing parts are interleaved with a connecting piece along the outer edge rim (Fig. 2; CN’052, p. 5). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing specialized structural mating surfaces, grooves, or slots 376 on a top surface of a battery module support part or cooling block 300 to securely seat and receive sealant layers 600, while ensuring that the corresponding component plate portions match uneven cooling paths and protrusion profiles to establish clean water-tight contact across the casing boundaries ([0161]–[0167], [0171]–[0177], [0183]–[0185], [0190]–[0191]).
CN’426, CN’052, and US’455 are all in the analogous art field of automotive battery pack containment and thermal management structures, as each reference explicitly addresses the same field of endeavor and solves the common technical problem of structurally maximizing sealing efficiency and optimizing internal casing spaces for vehicular battery shells (CN’426, pp. 1–3; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 5–6; US’455 [0001]–[0009], [0038]–[0043], [0161]–[0167], [0185], [0191]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the parallel concentric hardware tracks of CN’426 by arranging the first fasteners (flow drill screws 6) and second fasteners (bolts 7) to follow the space-saving, single-row alternating boundary layout explicitly taught by CN’052, because CN’052 explicitly states that utilizing a staggered, alternating perimetric hardware configuration is done to “save the space needed... [and] improve the space utilization rate” along the rim boundaries of the enclosure (CN’052, p. 5). One would further be motivated to integrate the complementary perimetric groove and protrusion contours taught by US’455 to ensure that the multiple structural plate layers of CN’426 interlock reliably to optimize localized fluid sealing and “increase adhesion” across the container sections (US’455 [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0183]–[0185], [0190]–[0191]).
As to Claim 2:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); wherein the first distance is 200 mm to 400 mm (CN’426 discloses configuring perimetric structural fastener spacing pitches from 30 mm to 150 mm based on changing casing requirements to optimize connection effects, rendering routine geometric scaling of these spacing limits obvious; CN’426, pp. 2, 4, 6, 8); and the product of the first distance and the second distance is 2000 mm² to 8000 mm² (CN’426 teaches varying adjacent perimetric structural hardware pitches up to 150 mm to maximize connection tight effect, rendering the mathematical selection of these result-effective structural variables obvious; CN’426, pp. 2, 4, 6, 8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose the exact narrow ranges wherein the first distance is 200 mm to 400 mm and the product of the first distance and the second distance is 2000 mm² to 8000 mm².
CN’052 and US’455 disclose the underlying perimetric track architectures, alternating layout distributions, and specialized interlocking sealing configurations that establish the geometric parameters of the structural envelope (see the rejection of claim 1). Specifically, CN’052 discloses a perimetric boundary configuration for a battery box layout combining a perimetric fastening member 400 and a perimetric connecting piece 500 staggered along a perimetric tracking line to maximize space utilization, and US’455 discloses structural blocking contours, grooves, or slots 376 paired with matching protrusion surfaces to guide sealant placement and provide reliable watertight contact surfaces across the casing limits (CN’052, pp. 4–5, 7; US’455 [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0183]–[0185], [0190]–[0191]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to optimize the specific dimensional intervals and calculated area products of the first distance and the second distance to fall within the narrow limits of 200 mm to 400 mm and 2000 mm² to 8000 mm² respectively, because CN’426 explicitly teaches that its hardware layout pitch ranges scale dynamically to match standard electric vehicle design choices and sizing parameters for the purpose of achieving an “optimal connection effect”, and modifying these variable pitch spans represents a routine design optimization of result-effective variables based on the overall perimetric footprints taught by CN’052 and US’455.
As to Claim 3:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); wherein the bottom heat exchange plate has an edge region in contact with the frame, and an orthographic projection of the first fasteners on the bottom heat exchange plate is located in the edge region (Fig. 1; Fig. 2; CN’426 discloses that the hydrocooling plate 2 has peripheral edge portions 12 that directly contact the cross beams 101 of the frame 1, and the flow drill screws 6 are located at these outer peripheral edges of the hydrocooling plate 2; pp. 1–2, 4–6); and the bottom guard plate has a portion in contact with at least part of the edge region of the bottom heat exchange plate (Fig. 1; Fig. 2; CN’426 discloses that the peripheral parts 32 of the bottom guard plate 3 are located directly below and in contact with the peripheral edge portions 12 of the hydrocooling plate 2 to form a surface contact pressing arrangement; pp. 1–2, 4–6).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that the bottom guard plate has a bent portion, and the bent portion is bent toward the frame and in contact with at least part of the edge region of the bottom heat exchange plate.
US’455 discloses a battery case for an electric car where a support layer or a lower protective plate 500/503 has a structural sidewall 530 formed on an edge portion thereof configured to extend and bend upwards to enclose, support, and establish watertight contact with the edge portions of the adjacent cooling block and frame structures (Summary; Fig. 12; [0028]–[0037], [0152]–[0158], [0186]–[0191]). Furthermore, CN’052 teaches that the peripheral edge of a bottom protection plate 300 can be configured with perimetric bent contours such as a step structure or convex hull 310 to securely interface with an adjacent heat exchange plate 100 while optimizing space utilization and preventing structural interference with fasteners along the perimetric tracking line (Fig. 3; Fig. 5; CN’052, pp. 3–6).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the bottom guard plate 3 of CN’426 to include a bent portion that is bent toward the frame 1 and in contact with at least part of the edge region of the bottom heat exchange plate 2, because US’455 explicitly teaches that forming an upwardly extending or bent perimetric sidewall structure on a lower protective layer is done to “enhance productivity,” provide a “robust assembly structure,” and ensure that the “stability of a battery module can be maintained even if external force is applied due to a multilayered structure”, which would directly improve the perimetric reinforcement and side-impact collision safety of the battery pack shell assembly in CN’426 (US’455 [0006]–[0009], [0038]–[0043], [0152]–[0158], [0186]–[0191]).
As to Claim 5:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); and a side surface of the bottom heat exchange plate facing the frame (Abstract; Fig. 1; Fig. 2; CN’426 teaches that the hydrocooling plate 2 has an upper side surface facing toward the cross beams 101 and the main body of the frame 1; pp. 1, 5–6, 8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that a side surface of the bottom heat exchange plate facing the frame has a groove, and the first sealing strip is located in the groove.
US’455 discloses a battery case for an electric car where a side surface of a battery support part or cooling block 300 has a specialized structural groove, seating slot, or perforation 376 formed directly on a top surface thereof facing an inner frame layer, wherein a first perimetric sealant layer 600 is received and located within said groove to create a tight structural fluid path boundary ([0112], [0117], [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0201]–[0209], [0227]–[0232]). Furthermore, CN’052 teaches that mating plates within a battery module housing can be modified with localized containing parts such as indented paths, recesses, or groove gaps 320 formed directly on an interface edge surface to securely align structural materials and accommodate component features along a perimetric tracking line while optimizing internal casing spaces (Abstract; Fig. 3; Fig. 5; CN’052, pp. 1, 4–7).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide a groove on the side surface of the bottom heat exchange plate 2 facing the frame 1 in CN’426 and locate the first sealing strip 4 within the groove, because US’455 explicitly teaches that forming a specialized groove or recessed slot on a plate surface to receive a sealant material is done to guide adhesive placement, protect the sealing material from displacement during assembly, and “increase adhesion” to ensure a robust, reliable fluid boundary across the distinct casing sections (US’455 [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0201]–[0209], [0227]–[0232]).
As to Claim 6:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 5 (see the rejection of claim 5); and a side surface of the bottom heat exchange plate facing the bottom guard plate (Abstract; Fig. 1; Fig. 2; CN’426 teaches that the hydrocooling plate 2 has a lower side surface facing toward the bottom protective/guard plate 3; pp. 1–2, 4, 6, 8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that a side surface of the bottom heat exchange plate facing the bottom guard plate has a protrusion disposed opposite to the groove and the second sealing strip is located on the protrusion.
US’455 discloses a battery case for an electric car where a support block or cooling plate 300 combines an uneven cooling path plate body featuring a continuous profile of localized mating projections or protrusion shapes formed across its surface that face toward a lower protective cover plate layer ([0112], [0117]–[0119], [0171]–[0177], [0201]–[0209]). US’455 teaches that a second sealing element or structural adhesive fluid ribbon is directly positioned on and interfaces with these extending protrusion contours to optimize a watertight path boundary, while the opposite side surface contains complementary recessed slots or grooves 376 to safely seat separate sealant layers 600 ([0112], [0117], [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0201]–[0209]). Furthermore, CN’052 teaches that internal plates within a battery housing can feature structural matching contours, step surfaces, or convex hulls 310 formed opposite to perimeter containing parts to securely interlock plate regions and receive seal pads while optimizing internal case volume (Abstract; Fig. 3; Fig. 5; CN’052, pp. 1–6).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form a protrusion on the lower side surface of the bottom heat exchange plate 2 facing the bottom guard plate 3 opposite to the groove of CN’426 and locate the second sealing strip 5 on the protrusion, because US’455 explicitly teaches that forming matching groove profiles and opposing protrusion contours across stacked plate structures is done to ensure flush mechanical tracking, guide adhesive layer compression uniformly, and “increase adhesion” to provide highly reliable, robust environmental seals across the container boundaries (US’455 [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0201]–[0209]).
As to Claim 9:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); and wherein first fasteners and second fasteners are uniformly distributed along the perimetric frame structure (CN’426 discloses that the flow drill screws 6 and the bottom plate mounting bolts 7 are arranged at regular, uniform spacing intervals along the frame 1 to ensure a balanced connection tight effect; pp. 5–6, 8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that each of the second fasteners is located at a central position between two adjacent first fasteners.
CN’052 discloses a perimetric boundary layout for a battery box assembly wherein an outer edge rim of a bottom plate features a single-row staggered configuration combining a perimetric fastening member 400 and a perimetric connecting piece 500 interleaved uniformly along a straight tracking line (Abstract; Fig. 1; Fig. 2; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7). CN’052 teaches that the alternating positioning requires the two distinct classes of structural components to directly alternate or step sequence positions symmetrically along the same shared boundary perimeter to maximize the compact casing footprint and enhance local space utility rates (Fig. 2; CN’052, pp. 4–5). Furthermore, US’455 discloses structural blocking contours, grooves, or slots 376 paired with matching protrusion surfaces to guide fluid sealant paths and ensure robust, evenly balanced mechanical contact surfaces across casing limits ([0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0172], [0201]–[0209]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to arrange the first fasteners and second fasteners of CN’426 such that each of the second fasteners is located at a central position between two adjacent first fasteners, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that utilizing a symmetric, staggered row interface along a perimetric edge is done to “save the space needed... [and] improve the space utilization rate”, and when collapsing the separate tracks of CN’426 into a single space-saving alternating path as taught by CN’052, distributing the pre-existing, uniformly spaced fasteners of CN’426 in an interleaved manner inherently and predictably centers each secondary fastener at the exact mathematical midpoint between adjacent primary fasteners to establish uniform clamping pressure across the casing seals (CN’052, p. 5; US’455 [0161]–[0169], [0201]–[0209]).
As to Claim 11:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); and wherein the lower perimetric casing components are configured with geometric clearance borders (CN’426 discloses that the bottom plate reinforcing ribs and associated structural hardware can feature optimized margins to ensure structural tightening along the perimetric frame structure; CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped.
CN’052 discloses a battery pack case where an outer side edge of a bottom guard plate 300 corresponding to the spatial tracking position of a fastener is provided with a specialized containing part, clearance notch, gap, or through-hole 320/330 configured to completely encompass the perimetric fastening elements (Abstract; Fig. 1; Fig. 2; Fig. 5; CN’052, pp. 1, 4–5, 7). CN’052 teaches that the containing part is structural clear space arranged directly along the perimetric line to entirely “avoid the interference of the plate and the fastener” and optimize localized structural tightness across the casing margins (Abstract; Fig. 2; CN’052, pp. 1, 4–5). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing a multi-layered battery module support assembly with specialized fastening holes, clearance seats, and continuous alignment block margins to guarantee that distinct hardware groups cleanly bypass specific plate boundaries without layer obstruction ([0019]–[0026], [0156]–[0165], [0212]–[0217], [0240]–[0242]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to arrange the second fasteners and the bottom heat exchange plate 2 of CN’426 such that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate 3 are not overlapped, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that establishing clear-space notches, openings, or non-overlapping structural boundaries for perimetric hardware is done to “avoid the interference” between the plate layers and the fasteners, which allows the second fasteners (mounting bolts 7) of CN’426 to directly connect the bottom guard plate 3 to the frame 1 without structurally penetrating, crushing, or interfering with the operational fluid layers of the intermediate hydrocooling plate 2 (CN’052, pp. 4–5, 7; US’455 [0156]–[0165], [0212]–[0217], [0240]–[0242]).
As to Claim 12:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 11 (see the rejection of claim 11); and wherein the bottom heat exchange plate comprises an avoidance structure (CN’426 discloses that its bottom plate reinforcing rib or plate segments can feature an avoiding structure 3010 concavely formed on the part body to accommodate surrounding structural interfaces; CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that each of the second fasteners passes through the avoidance structure.
CN’052 discloses a battery pack case where an outer side edge of a bottom plate or heat exchange plate corresponding to the spatial tracking position of a fastener is provided with a specialized containing part, clearance notch, gap, or through-hole 320/330 configured to completely encompass and let the perimetric fastening elements pass through (Abstract; Fig. 1; Fig. 2; Fig. 5; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7). CN’052 teaches that the fastener passes directly through the space yielded by the containing part or clearance opening to entirely “avoid the interference of the plate and the fastener” and optimize localized structural tightness across the casing margins (Abstract; Fig. 2; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing a multi-layered battery module support assembly with specialized fastening holes and clearance paths to guarantee that distinct hardware groups cleanly pass through specific component boundaries without layer obstruction ([0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure the avoidance structure 3010 of the bottom heat exchange plate 2 of CN’426 such that each of the second fasteners passes through the avoidance structure, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that utilizing clearance openings, through-holes, or notches to let perimetric hardware pass through an adjacent plate layer is done to “avoid the interference” between the components, which allows the second fasteners (mounting bolts 7) of CN’426 to pass through the space yielded by the avoidance structure 3010 to directly connect the bottom guard plate 3 to the frame 1 without structurally penetrating, crushing, or breaking the fluid layers of the intermediate hydrocooling plate 2. Confidentiality and mechanical safety are thus maintained while easing assembly difficulty (CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7; US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
As to Claim 13:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 2 (see the rejection of claim 2); and wherein the casing components are configured with protective clearance limits along the frame structure (CN’426 discloses that the bottom plate reinforcing ribs and structural hardware sets feature designated perimetric alignments to ensure secure mechanical tightening; CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped.
CN’052 discloses a battery pack case where an outer side edge of a bottom guard plate corresponding to the spatial location of a fastener is provided with a specialized containing part, clearance notch, gap, or through-hole configured to completely encompass and receive the perimetric fastening elements. CN’052 teaches that this containing part is structural clear space arranged directly along the tracking line to entirely “avoid the interference of the bottom plate and the fastener” and optimize localized structural tightness across the casing margins (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing a multi-layered battery module support assembly with specialized fastening holes, clearance paths, and alignment margins to guarantee that distinct hardware groups cleanly bypass specific plate boundaries without layer obstruction (US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to arrange the second fasteners and the bottom heat exchange plate of CN’426 as applied to claim 2 such that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that establishing clear-space notches or non-overlapping structural boundaries for perimetric hardware is done to “avoid the interference” between the plate layers and the fasteners, which allows the second fasteners (mounting bolts) of CN’426 to directly connect the bottom guard plate to the frame structure without structurally penetrating, crushing, or breaking the functional fluid layers of the intermediate hydrocooling plate (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7; US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
As to Claim 14:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 3 (see the rejection of claim 3); and wherein the lower perimetric casing components are configured with protective clearance limits along the frame structure (CN’426 discloses that the bottom plate reinforcing ribs and associated structural hardware sets feature designated perimetric alignments to ensure secure mechanical tightening along the frame structure; CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped.
CN’052 discloses a battery pack case where an outer side edge of a bottom plate or bottom guard plate corresponding to the spatial location of a fastener is provided with a specialized containing part, clearance notch, gap, or through-hole configured to completely encompass and receive the perimetric fastening elements. CN’052 teaches that this containing part is structural clear space arranged directly along the tracking line to entirely “avoid the interference of the bottom plate and the fastener” and optimize localized structural tightness across the casing margins (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing a multi-layered battery module support assembly with specialized fastening holes, clearance paths, and alignment margins to guarantee that distinct hardware groups cleanly bypass specific plate boundaries without layer obstruction (US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to arrange the second fasteners and the bottom heat exchange plate of CN’426 as applied to claim 3 such that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that establishing clear-space notches or non-overlapping structural boundaries for perimetric hardware is done to “avoid the interference” between the plate layers and the fasteners, which allows the second fasteners (mounting bolts) of CN’426 to directly connect the bottom guard plate to the frame structure without structurally penetrating, crushing, or breaking the functional fluid layers of the intermediate hydrocooling plate (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7; US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
As to Claim 16:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 5 (see the rejection of claim 5); and wherein the lower perimetric casing boundaries are configured with designated physical margins to provide secure structural tightening along the frame (CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped.
CN’052 discloses a battery pack case where an outer side edge of a bottom plate or bottom guard plate corresponding to the spatial layout position of a fastener is provided with a specialized containing part, clearance notch, gap, or through-hole configured to completely encompass and receive the perimetric fastening elements. CN’052 teaches that the containing part is structural clear space arranged directly along the tracking line to entirely “avoid the interference of the bottom plate and the fastener” and optimize localized structural tightness across the casing margins (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing a multi-layered battery module support assembly with specialized fastening holes, clearance paths, and alignment margins to guarantee that distinct hardware groups cleanly bypass specific plate boundaries without layer obstruction (US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to arrange the second fasteners and the bottom heat exchange plate of CN’426 as applied to claim 5 such that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that establishing clear-space notches or non-overlapping structural boundaries for perimetric hardware is done to “avoid the interference” between the plate layers and the fasteners, which allows the second fasteners (mounting bolts) of CN’426 to directly connect the bottom guard plate to the frame without structurally penetrating, crushing, or breaking the functional fluid layers or the perimetric groove features of the intermediate hydrocooling plate (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7; US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
As to Claim 17:
CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 6 (see the rejection of claim 6); and wherein the lower perimetric casing components are configured with designated clearance margins along the frame structure to ensure secure mechanical tightening (CN’426, pp. 4, 6–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped.
CN’052 discloses a battery pack case where an outer side edge of a bottom plate or bottom guard plate corresponding to the spatial layout position of a fastener is provided with a specialized containing part, clearance notch, gap, or through-hole configured to completely encompass and receive the perimetric fastening elements. CN’052 teaches that the containing part is structural clear space arranged directly along the tracking line to entirely “avoid the interference of the bottom plate and the fastener” and optimize localized structural tightness across the casing margins (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7). Furthermore, US’455 teaches providing a multi-layered battery module support assembly with specialized fastening holes, clearance paths, and alignment margins to guarantee that distinct hardware groups cleanly bypass specific plate boundaries without layer obstruction (US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to arrange the second fasteners and the bottom heat exchange plate of CN’426 as applied to claim 6 such that an orthographic projection of any of the second fasteners and an orthographic projection of the bottom heat exchange plate on the bottom guard plate are not overlapped, because CN’052 explicitly teaches that establishing clear-space notches or non-overlapping structural boundaries for perimetric hardware is done to “avoid the interference” between the plate layers and the fasteners, which allows the second fasteners (mounting bolts) of CN’426 to directly connect the bottom guard plate to the frame without structurally penetrating, crushing, or breaking the functional fluid layers or the mating protrusion profiles taught by US’455 across the intermediate hydrocooling plate (CN’052, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 7; US’455 [0156]–[0158], [0175]–[0179], [0182]–[0185], [0212]–[0217]).
As to Claim 20:
CN’426 discloses a battery pack, comprising the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); and a battery pack assembly built to accommodate vehicular battery cells (CN’426 teaches an electric automobile casing shell structure containing internal dimensions and layout lines optimized specifically to securely accept battery unit structures; CN’426, pp. 1–3, 5–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose the finished combination containing a battery disposed within the battery pack shell.
CN’052 discloses a complete battery pack configuration combining internal electrical battery components or modules seated natively inside a specialized battery pack box body or casing shell assembly to provide full operational vehicle power while optimizing tightness across the peripheral casing lines (Abstract; Claim 10; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 6–7). Furthermore, US’455 teaches a battery case for an electric car engineered directly for a finished automotive system integration where multi-layered battery cells, cooling blocks, and matching support frames are structurally unified into a single vehicular battery box containment device (Summary; Fig. 12; [0012]–[0028], [0104]–[0123], [0180]–[0191], [0274]–[0285]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide a battery disposed within the battery pack shell of CN’426 as applied to claim 1, because CN’426 explicitly teaches that its structural casing sequence is built for the specific operational purpose of accepting automobile battery units, and disposing the intended battery elements within the lower shell assembly of CN’426 follows the baseline configuration guidelines taught by CN’052 and US’455 to arrive at a finished, working automotive battery pack power system (CN’426, pp. 1–3, 5–8; CN’052, pp. 1–2, 6–7; US’455 [0104]–[0123], [0274]–[0285]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 214542426 U (CN’426) in view of CN 215989052 U (CN’052) and US 20210351455 A1 (US’455), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of WO 2020135153 A1 (WO’153).
As to Claim 10:CN’426 discloses the battery pack shell according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1); wherein a sealant is disposed between the frame and the bottom heat exchange plate (teaches that a sealing structure 4 consisting of a structural adhesive layer or sealant is set between the hydrocooling plate 2 and the frame 1; CN’426, pp. 1–3, 5–8); and a first sealing strip is disposed between the bottom heat exchange plate and the frame (teaches a distinct perimetric seal track baseline assembly to block external water vapor; CN’426, pp. 1–3, 5–8).
However, CN’426 does not explicitly disclose that there is a distance between the sealant and the first sealing strip.
WO’153 discloses a battery box structure where a sealant or structural adhesive fluid track is applied at a designated structural clearance distance from an alternative first sealing member 4A to leave an open gap, spacing interval, or fluid-clearance channel G1 giving space for the materials without overlapping (Description; Claims 1, 9, 10; WO’153, pp. 1–10). WO’153 teaches that the uncured sealing material spreads and flows under compression during plate assembly, and maintaining a clear distance or gap between separate sealant lines prevents unwanted contact between fluid adhesive and solid sealing strips to avoid failure of the seal track boundaries (Description; WO’153, pp. 2–9). Furthermore, CN’052 and US’455 disclose underlying multi-layered perimetric box tracks and interlocking grooves built to receive, guide, and isolate distinct categories of sealant tracks to maintain robust environmental bounds across the casing edges (see the rejection of claim 1; CN’052, pp. 1–7; US’455 [0161]–[0169], [0171]–[0177], [0201]–[0209], [0227]–[0232]).
CN’426, CN’052, US’455, and WO’153 are all in the analogous art field of automotive battery pack containment and thermal management structures, as each reference explicitly addresses the same field of endeavor and solves the common technical problem of structurally maximizing sealing efficiency, controlling material compression expansion, and optimizing internal casing spaces for vehicular battery shells (CN’426, pp. 1–4, 6–8; CN’052, pp. 1–7; US’455 [0001]–[0009], [0038]–[0043], [0161]–[0169], [0201]–[0209]; WO’153, pp. 1–10).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure the sealant 4 and the first sealing strip of CN’426 as applied to claim 1 such that there is a distance between the sealant and the first sealing strip, because WO’153 explicitly teaches that leaving a clear distance gap or fluid isolation space between an applied fluid adhesive sealant and an adjacent solid sealing strip is done to provide adequate space for the routine spread of the sealant during pressing, which “fundamentally solves the problem of sealing strip” failure by preventing the fluid sealant from expanding directly into the solid seal ribbon track and destroying the integrity of the watertight casing boundaries (WO’153, pp. 2–10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant contends that Huang et al. (CN'426) does not anticipate or render obvious the claimed "same circle" arrangement because Huang utilizes two separate, nested fastener tracks, whereas the claim requires a staggered, alternating perimetric arrangement on a single line. The Office respectfully disagrees. The rejection is not based on anticipation by Huang alone. The rejection is now maintained under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Jin et al. (CN'052). Jin et al. explicitly teaches a perimetric boundary configuration for a battery shell wherein a fastening member (400) and a connecting piece (500) are interleaved in a staggered, alternating single-row arrangement. The motivation to combine this with Huang is explicitly provided by the art, as Jin states this configuration is chosen to "save space" and "improve space utilization". It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Huang's nested fastener tracks into a single, space-saving alternating ring to optimize the casing footprint.
The Applicant asserts that the dimensional ranges and the calculated area products are critical to achieving the disclosed sealing effect and are not merely arbitrary design choices. The Office respectfully disagrees. The Applicant has failed to provide objective evidence that these specific numerical ranges yield "unexpected results" that are commensurate in scope with the claimed breadth. Huang et al. already teaches that fastener pitch must be scaled dynamically based on casing dimensions and vehicle parameters to achieve an "optimal connection effect". Therefore, the claimed ranges represent the routine optimization of result-effective variables rather than an inventive discovery. Without evidence showing that the invention fails outside these narrow bounds, the ranges remain obvious design choices within the skill of an automotive engineer.
The Applicant argues that the groove and protrusion geometries, as well as the sealant isolation, provide specific structural benefits not taught by the prior art. The Office respectfully disagrees. The rejection now incorporates Kim et al. (US'455) and Wang et al. (WO'153). Kim et al. teaches that complementary groove and protrusion contours are essential for guiding adhesive placement and increasing adhesion across multi-layered plate structures. Wang et al. teaches that maintaining a clear distance between distinct sealant lines is necessary to prevent fluid adhesive from contaminating solid seal ribbons. These are established, known techniques in the art of battery pack assembly, and applying them to Huang's battery shell is a predictable application of known sealing techniques to solve a known problem (sealing integrity).
For the reasons above, applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights