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 .
Response to Amendment
This is a final Office action in response to Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed on 03/11/0226. Claims 1, 4, and 18 are amended. Claim 1 – 20 are pending in the current Office action.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn.
With respect to independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2 – 9, the 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 rejections set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn. A new grounds of rejection, necessitated by applicant’s amendment is presented below.
With respect to independent claim 10 and dependent claims 11 – 12 and 15 – 18, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections set forth in the previous Office action are maintained.
Claims 6, 13 – 14, and 19, indicated as allowable in the previous Office action, remain objected to due to being dependent upon rejected base claim. Claim 20, as established in the previous Office action remains allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in instant rejection thereof {i.e. new prior art combination where Hara is primary reference}.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/11/2026 with respect to independent claim 10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant argues that because Hara teaches away from having traditional cross members that are separate from the battery modules {i.e. Hara’s endplate and load transmission member 50e are mean to serve as a cross-member like structure}, one with ordinary skill in the art would not modify Hara to include a traditional cross, such as the one in Smith, as established in the Office mailed 12/11/2025.
Examiner acknowledges that load transmission member 50e in Hara is meant to like a cross member (Hara: [0057];[0064]); however, the examiner respectfully disagrees that such a configuration necessarily teaches away from having a cross member that is separate from the battery module, especially since in alternative embodiments for the following reasons:
As noted in the non-final Office action Hara is concerned with obtaining a battery mounting structure having enhanced rigidity against impact loads (Hara: [0005]). Smith teaches that including ross-members that extend longitudinally along a respective cross-member axis and between batter modules of the battery pack help enhance the overall structural integrity of the battery pack and to support the battery modules (Smith: [0030 – 0032]; [0037 – 0038]). Hara II teaches that low cross-beam are already known in the art for separating battery modules battery packs for vehicles (Hara II: Figs. 2 and 7, 10a; ([0040 – 0041];[0050]). As such, based on the teaches of Hara, Smith, and Hara II, in the interest of further improving upon the structure stability/further increasing the rigidity of Hara’s battery pack structure, one would necessarily be motivated to include an additional cross beam, as established in the non-final Office action (See pgs. 14 – 15 of OA).
Furthermore, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In the instant case, as both Hara and Smith teach battery pack structures that function to increase rigidity/structural stability and indicates a desire to obtain a battery structure with increased rigidity between battery modules. The inclusion of a cross beam structure in Hara’s Fig. 12 embodiment would not negatively impact the structural stability/rigidity of the battery pack, and per MPEP 2144.06(II) it is still prima facie obvious to combine equivalents known for the same purpose.
Therefore, in light of the above discussion, applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive and the rejections of independent claim 10 set forth in the previous Officed action is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 1, 3 – 5, and 7 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (US PG Pub. 2017/0313170 A1) in view of Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes) {Examiner note: All prior art was cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025}.
Regarding Claim 1, Hara discloses a battery structure for an electric vehicle (battery pack; [0045 – 0046]), the battery structure comprising a first battery array (left battery module 9 in Fig. 12; [0064]) comprising a plurality of first walls that are secured together to form a first unitized structure that is configured to house a first cell stack (Refer to end plates 16/17 and tension plates 18/19 in Figs. 2 – 3; [0047 – 0048]) and a second battery array (right battery module 9 in Fig. 12; [0064]) comprising a plurality of second walls that are secured to each other to form a second unitized structure that is configured to house a second cell stack (Refer to end plates 16/17 and tension plates 18/19 in Figs. 2 – 3; [0047 – 0048]).
In Fig. 12 Hara discloses a particular embodiment of first end plate 16, the end plate of the corresponding first batter array, and second end plate 17, the end plate of the corresponding second battery array. Through Fig. 12, Hara further discloses one first wall of the plurality of first walls (Fig. 12, 16; [0064]) including a first vertical portion, a first upper portion, and a first lower portion (Refer to portions in annotated Fig. 12 below), the first vertical portion including an inner surface and an outer surface (Refer to left inner surface of 16 in Fig. 12 and right outer surface of 16 in Fig. 12); and one second wall (Fig. 12, 17; [0064]) of a plurality of second walls including a second vertical portion and a second upper portion (Refer to portions in annotated Fig. 12 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
565
1380
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing portions of the one first wall and one second wall in Hara.
PNG
media_image2.png
560
859
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing portions of the one first wall and one second wall in Hara.
Furthermore, as shown in annotated Fig. 12 above, the second vertical portion is spaced apart from the first vertical portion; the second upper portion extends toward the first vertical portion from an upper end of the second vertical portion; the first upper portion extends toward the second vertical portion from an upper end of the first vertical portion; and the first lower portion extends toward the second vertical portion from a lower end of the first vertical portion.
Hara does not disclose wherein the second upper portion is secured to the first upper portion and wherein the first lower portion is connected to the one second wall.
Chi, also directed to vehicle battery pack structures including a plurality of battery modules, teaches coupling engaging portions of opposing battery module walls in order to secure the battery module together and form a common wall between the battery modules ([0002];[0089];[0056 – 00547]). The common walls are taught by Chi to function as a crash beam and allow for sufficient mechanical stiffness between the battery modules ([0072]). Chi further teaches additionally using coupling protrusions and grooves to secure the battery modules together and teaches that such coupling structure provides further reinforced coupling force between the battery modules ([0075]).
Chi, also directed to vehicle battery pack structures including a plurality of battery modules, teaches coupling engaging portions of opposing battery module walls in order to secure the battery module together and form a common wall between the battery modules ([0002];[0089];[0056 – 00547]). The common walls are taught by Chi to function as a crash beam and allow for sufficient mechanical stiffness between the battery modules ([0072]). Ch further teaches additionally using coupling protrusions and grooves to secure the battery modules together and teaches that such coupling structure provides further reinforced coupling force between the battery modules ([0075]).
Since Hara is concerned with obtaining a battery mounting structure having enhanced rigidity against impact loads ([0005]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to secure the engaging portions of Hara’s side plate together, as taught by Chi, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining greater mechanical stiffness/coupling force between the battery modules in Hara.
Furthermore, because it is the first upper portion and first lower portion that contact and engage with the second end plate, one with ordinary skill in the art would find it further obvious to particularly secure the first and second upper portion together and the first lower portion and second plate lower portion together to achieve the desired coupling, and thus obtain the claimed structure of wherein the second upper portion is secured to the first upper portion and wherein the first lower portion is connected to the one second wall.
PNG
media_image2.png
560
859
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing portions of the one first wall and one second wall in Hara.
Regarding Claims 3 – 4, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. As shown in annotated Fig. 12 above, Hara teaches a battery module end plate configuration where first and second wall have portions that protrude toward one another. Furthermore, in modified Hara the first lower portion is connected to the one second wall.
Modified Hara does not explicitly/particularly disclose an interlock assembly securing the first lower portion of the one first wall to the second wall (Claim 3) or wherein the interlock assembly includes: a flange defining a recess and extending from either one of a lower end of the second vertical portion or an end of the first lower portion; and a protrusion received in the recess of the flange and projecting from the other one of the lower end of the second vertical portion or the end of the first lower portion (Claim 4).
Chi further teaches securing an engaging bottom portion battery modules by forming a recess H1 in an overlapping portion of the first side plate and a hole in the protruding portion of the second side plate H2 and inserting a coupling member B through the hole and into the recess to secure the structures together and to the bottom of the battery pack tray (FIGS. 6 – 7; [0064 – 0069]). By securing the modules in this manner, Chi teaches obtaining a common wall between the battery modules that allows for more mechanical stiffness ([0072]).
Since the lower portion of the end plates in Hara have a similar structure to that of Chi’s end plates, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the bottom portion of Hara’s plate to have an interlocking configuration similar to the one taught in Chi, with a reasonable expectation of success in further securing the battery modules together and achieving more mechanical stiffness within the battery pack.
By having the interlocking configuration similar to Chi, the flange extending from the first lower portion would be overlapped with the lower protruding wall portion of second end plate 17 and the lower protruding wall portion of second end plate 17 would include a hole for a coupling member to run through into the recess of the flange. Thus, modified Hara, would include the claimed interlock assembly that secures the first lower portion of the one first wall to the second wall (Claim 3) and comprises flange defining a recess and extending from an end of the first lower portion (Refer to flange shown in annotated Fig. 12 above and Chi: Fig. 7, H1} and a protrusion (Refer to Chi: coupling member B in Fig. 6) received in the recess of the flange and projecting from a lower end of the second vertical portion (Refer to Figs. 6 – 7 in Chi and how coupling member B projects from H2 and thus necessarily project from a lower portion of the second side plate 222) (Claim 4).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. As shown in annotated Fig. 12 below, Hara further discloses wherein the one second wall further includes a pair of flanges extending perpendicular from respective ends of the second vertical portion toward the first vertical portion, that is the upper and lower ends of the middle vertical portion of the second end plate include protruding structures that extend in a direction toward the first vertical portion.
PNG
media_image3.png
540
689
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing corresponding pair of flanges.
PNG
media_image4.png
549
813
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 exemplifying portions of the corresponding another third wall in Hara.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. Hara further discloses wherein another first wall is opposite the one first wall (Refer to end plate 17 of left battery module that is shown in Fig. 3; [0048 – 0050];[0064]) and includes a third vertical portion, a third upper portion, and a second lower portion (Refer to portions in annotated Fig. 12 above), the third upper portion and second lower portion extend from a third vertical portion in a direction away from the one first wall (Refer to annotated Fig. 12 above and how in Fig. 3 of end plate 17 of the left battery module extends in direction away from end plate 16).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. Hara further discloses a third battery array, that is Hara teaches/shows having more than two battery modules arranged in the battery pack (Fig. 18; [0044];[0073]).
Hara does not particularly show an embodiment in which the third battery array is adjacent to the first battery array and connected to the another first wall of the first battery array; however, in Fig. 18, Hara shows three battery modules arranged in a row.
Therefore based on the way in which Hara teaches securing the battery modules together and Fig. 18, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the third battery module adjacent to the first battery module, and thus obtain the claimed configuration, because such a modification is an obvious rearrangements of parts that would reasonably be expected to provide the battery pack structure desired by Hara since all the battery modules have the same end plate configuration [See MPEP 2144.04(VI)].
Regarding Claim 9, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. In modified Hara, the upper first portion and second upper portion are secured together (Refer to rejection of claim 1 above).
Modified Hara does not explicitly disclose a plurality of chemical fasteners extending through the first upper portion and second upper portion to each other.
Chi further teaches securing engaging portions of battery modules by forming a recess H1 in an overlapping portion of the one side plate and a hole in the protruding portion of the another side plate H2 and inserting a coupling member B through the hole and into the recess to secure the structures together and to the bottom of the battery pack tray (FIGS. 6 – 7; [0064 – 0069]). By securing the modules in this manner, Chi teaches obtaining a common wall between the battery modules that allows for more mechanical stiffness ([0072]).
Since the upper portion of the end plates in Hara have a similar structure to that of Chi’s end plates, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the upper portion of Hara’s plate to have an interlocking and bolted configuration similar to the one taught in Chi, and thus obtain the claimed configuration of plurality of mechanical fasteners extending through the first upper portion and through the second upper portion (Refer to the uppermost coupling members B shown in Figs. 5 – 6; [0057];[0065]), with a reasonable expectation of success in further securing the battery modules together and achieving more mechanical stiffness within the battery pack.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (US PG Pub. 2017/0313170 A1) and Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mausolf (DE102012010673A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. Hara further discloses wherein the one first wall further includes a first rib extending from the first vertical portion from a location between the first upper portion and the first lower portion (Refer to fixing plate 30 in Fig. 2); and the one second wall further includes a second rib extending from the second vertical portion (Refer to fixing plates 31 in Fig. 2).
The fixing plates in Hara are taught to fix the battery module to the casing ([0052]).
Modified Hara does not explicitly disclose the second rib secured to the first rib.
Mausolf teaches a battery pack comprising a multiple battery assemblies and further teaches the assemblies including frame arrangements with functional side parts ([0047 – 0048]). The functional side parts are taught to include fastening structures for allowing the battery assemblies to be secured together ([0056]). Mausolf particularly shows using fastening elements in the butting/overlapping area of side parts of the battery modules to secure the modules together and further uses the overlapping fasteners to secure the battery modules together to the receptacle of the battery pack ([0050 – 0052];[0056]). Mausolf further teaches that such a fastening configuration is multifunctional and allows for stable and versatile mounting of the batteries ([0014]).
Since the fixing plates in Hara are also protruding fastening structures included on each individual module that have a purpose of fixing the modules to the battery pack casing (Hara: [0053]), it would to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the fixing plates in Hara {i.e. correspond to claimed ribs} overlap and also be secured together, as taught by Mausolf with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a multifunctional fastening element in modified Hara that allows for more stable and versatile mounting of the battery modules.
Claim(s) 10, 11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (US PG Pub. 20170313170 A1) in view of Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), Smith (US PG Pub. 2021/0229541 A1) and Hara (US PG Pub. 2015/0243950 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025), hereinafter Hara II.
Regarding Claim 10, Hara discloses a battery structure for an electric vehicle (battery pack; [0045 – 0046]) comprising a battery tray (bottom of casing; Fig. 12, 34; [0054]), a plurality of arrays disposed within the battery tray, that is Fig. 1 shows a plurality of battery modules 9 included within the casing ([0044]), the plurality of battery arrays comprising a first battery array (left battery module 9 in Fig. 12; [0064]) comprising a plurality of first walls that are secured together to form a first unitized structure that is configured to house a first cell stack (Refer to end plates 16/17 and tension plates 18/19 in Figs. 2 – 3; [0047 – 0048]) and a second battery array (right battery module 9 in Fig. 12; [0064]) comprising a plurality of second walls that are secured to each other to form a second unitized structure that is configured to house a second cell stack (Refer to end plates 16/17 and tension plates 18/19 in Figs. 2 – 3; [0047 – 0048]).
PNG
media_image1.png
565
1380
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing portions of the one first wall and one second wall in Hara.
In Fig. 12 Hara discloses a particular embodiment of first end plate 16, the end plate of the corresponding first batter array, and second end plate 17, the end plate of the corresponding second battery array. Through Fig. 12, Hara further discloses one first wall of the plurality of first walls (Fig. 12, 16; [0064]) including a first vertical portion, a first upper portion, and a first lower portion (Refer to portions in annotated Fig. 12 above); and one second wall (Fig. 12, 17; [0064]) of a plurality of second walls including a second vertical portion and a second upper portion (Refer to portions in annotated Fig. 12 above).
PNG
media_image2.png
560
859
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing portions of the one first wall and one second wall in Hara.
Furthermore, as shown in annotated Fig. 12 above, the second vertical portion in is spaced apart from the first vertical portion; the second upper portion extends toward the first vertical portion from an upper end of the second vertical portion; the first upper portion and first lower portion extend toward the second vertical portion from the first vertical portion.
Hara does not disclose wherein the second upper portion is secured to the first upper portion and wherein the first lower portion is connected to the one second wall.
Chi, also directed to vehicle battery pack structures including a plurality of battery modules, teaches coupling engaging portions of opposing battery module walls in order to secure the battery module together and form a common wall between the battery modules ([0002];[0089];[0056 – 00547]). The common walls are taught by Chi to function as a crash beam and allow for sufficient mechanical stiffness between the battery modules ([0072]). Ch further teaches additionally using coupling protrusions and grooves to secure the battery modules together and teaches that such coupling structure provides further reinforced coupling force between the battery modules ([0075]).
Since Hara is concerned with obtaining a battery mounting structure having enhanced rigidity against impact loads ([0005]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to secure the engaging portions of Hara’s side plate together, as taught by Chi, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining greater mechanical stiffness/coupling force between the battery modules in Hara.
Furthermore, because it is the first upper portion and first lower portion that contact and engage with the second end plate, one with ordinary skill in the art would find it further obvious to particularly secure the first and second upper portion together and the first lower portion and second plate lower portion together to achieve the desired coupling, and thus obtain the claimed structure of wherein the second upper portion is secured to the first upper portion and wherein the first lower portion is connected to the one second wall.
Hara further does not explicitly disclose a plurality of cross beams supported by the battery try and spaced apart from each other along a longitudinal direction of the electric vehicle, each cross beam extending in a transverse direction.
Smith, also directed to battery assembly structures for electric vehicles, teaches including cross-members that extend longitudinally along a respective cross-member axis and between batter modules of the battery pack ([0030 – 0032];[0037]). The cross members are taught to help enhance the overall structural integrity of the battery pack and to support the battery modules ([0030];[0038]).
Since Hara is concerned with obtaining a battery mounting structure having enhanced rigidity against impact loads ([0005]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the battery pack of Hara to include transverse cross beams between the plurality of battery modules, and thus obtain the claimed plurality of cross beams, as taught by Smith, with a reasonable expectation of success in further improving the structural integrity of the battery pack.
PNG
media_image5.png
540
818
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing cross beam area for modified Hara.
It would have been further obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to particularly modify the crossbeams such that they fit in the space under the first lower portion of Hara (Refer to annotated Fig. 12 above), because such a modification would be an obvious change in shape necessary to include the cross beam structure in the battery pack of Hara, and further is a cross beam shape that is known in the art to be used for separating battery modules in battery pack for a vehicle as shown by Hara II (Refer to Figs. 2 and 7, 10a; ([0040 – 0041];[0050]) [See MPEP 2144.04(IV)].
Modified Hara does not explicitly disclose the first lower portion connected to one cross beam of the plurality of cross beams.
Smith further teaches securing the battery modules to the cross members using mechanical fasteners for the purpose of securing the battery modules ([0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed Invention, to connect the protruding portion first lower portion to the cross beam, and thus have the first lower portion connected to one cross beam of the plurality of cross beams, with a reasonable expectation of success in further securing the first battery module in the battery pack casing.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. As shown in Fig. 12, the battery module is lifted from the bottom panel of the battery tray 34 through spacer 46; thus, in Hara, the one first wall and the one second wall are spaced apart from the bottom panel of the battery tray.
PNG
media_image3.png
540
689
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing corresponding pair of flanges.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. As shown in annotated Fig. 12 above, Hara further discloses wherein the one second wall further includes a pair of flanges extending perpendicular from respective ends of the second vertical portion toward the first vertical portion, that is the upper and lower ends of the middle vertical portion of the second end plate include protruding structures that extend in a direction toward the first vertical portion.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. Hara further discloses a flange extending from an end of the first lower portion (Refer to annotated Fig. 12 below), which is within the claimed selection of one of a lower end of the second vertical portion and an end of the first lower portion. In modified Hara the first lower portion is connected to the one second wall.
PNG
media_image6.png
540
708
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12 showing corresponding flange of claim 18.
Modified Hara does not particularly disclose; however, the flange defining a recess and a protrusion received in the recess of the flange and projecting from one of the lower end of the second vertical portion.
Chi further teaches securing an engaging bottom portion battery modules by forming a recess H1 in an overlapping portion of the first side plate and a hole in the protruding portion of the second side plate H2 and inserting a coupling member B through the hole and into the recess to secure the structures together and to the bottom of the battery pack tray (FIGS. 6 – 7; [0064 – 0069]). By securing the modules in this manner, Chi teaches obtaining a common wall between the battery modules that allows for more mechanical stiffness ([0072]).
Since the lower portion of the end plates in Hara have a similar structure, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the bottom portion of Hara’s plate to have an interlocking configuration similar to the one taught in Chi, with a reasonable expectation of success in further securing the battery modules together and achieving more mechanical stiffness within the battery pack.
By having the interlocking configuration similar to Chi, the flange extending from the first lower portion would be overlapped with the lower protruding wall portion of second end plate 17 and the lower protruding wall portion of second end plate 17 would include a hole for a coupling member to run through into the recess of the flange. Thus, modified Hara, would include the claimed interlock assembly comprising a flange defining a recess and extending from an end of the first lower portion (Refer to flange shown in annotated Fig. 12 above and Chi: Fig. 7, H1} and a protrusion (Refer to Chi: coupling member B in Fig. 6) received in the recess of the flange and projecting from a lower end of the second vertical portion (Refer to Figs. 6 – 7 in Chi and how coupling member B projects from H2 and thus necessarily project from a lower portion of the second side plate 222).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (US PG Pub. 20170313170 A1), Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), Smith (US PG Pub. 2021/0229541 A1) and Hara II (US PG Pub. 2015/0243950 A1), as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Qu (CN215771343U, cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025)
Regarding Claim 12, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. Hara further discloses wherein the one first wall further includes a first rib extending from the first vertical portion from a location between the first upper portion and the first lower portion (Refer to fixing plate 30 in Fig. 2); and the one second wall further includes a second rib extending from the second vertical portion (Refer to fixing plates 31 in Fig. 2). {Examiner Note: In [0042] of the instant specification 48a and 48b of Fig. 7 are referred to as the pair or ribs/tabs and fixing plates 30/31 appear to have similar structure to the ribs/tabs shown in Fig. 7.}
The fixing plates in Hara are taught to fix the battery module to the casing ([0052]).
Hara does not disclose the second rib engaging the first rib; however, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the corresponding ribs to be of a shape that allows the ribs to engage with one another {i.e. fit together like puzzle pieces}, because such a modification would be change in shape and further is a configuration known in the art to be used for tabs that secure battery modules to vehicle battery case structures as shown by Qu (Refer to Qu: annotated and enlarged Fig. 1; [03];[43];[47 – 48]).
PNG
media_image7.png
382
784
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 showing engaging side tab structure on battery modules of Qu.
Claim(s) 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (US PG Pub. 20170313170 A1), Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), Smith (US PG Pub. 2021/0229541 A1), Hara II (US PG Pub. 2015/0243950 A1) and Mausolf (DE102012010673A1), as applied to claims 10 and 15 above, and further in view of Liao (CN213026326U, cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025).
Regarding Claims 16 – 17, modified Hara discloses all limitations as set forth above. As established above, the battery structure in Hara includes the claimed pair of flanges (Refer to rejection of claim 15 above).
Modified Hara does not does not explicitly disclose the battery structure further comprising a pair of energy absorbing structures, each energy absorbing structure secured to a respective flange of the of the pair flanges and extending outboard toward a respective wall of the battery tray (Claim 16).
Liao, also directed toward battery pack structures for vehicles, teaches including multiple energy absorbing members 30 arranged between the tray and the battery arrays of the battery pack (Figs. 1 – 3;[03][35]). The energy absorbing member is installed in at installation grooves 102 on the wall and serve to absorb expansion forces of the battery array and thus assist in improving the structural strength of the battery pack ([35];[37]). The energy absorbing members are further taught to be secured to the groove through welding ([41]).
Since Hara is concerned with obtaining a battery mounting structure having enhanced rigidity against impact loads ([0005]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include at least two of the energy absorbing members taught by Liao, and thus obtaining the claimed pair of energy absorbing members, with a reasonable expectation of success in further improving the structural strength of the battery pack.
Furthermore, since the pair of flanges, due to their shape, necessarily form an inner groove for the energy absorbing members to be mounted on, it would have further been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to weld the energy absorbing members to the pair of flanges of the battery module endplates, and thus obtain the claimed structure of each energy absorbing structure secured to a respective flange of the of the pair flanges (Claim 16 cont.), with a reasonable expectation of success since Liao teaches installing the structures in wall grooves.
The energy absorbing member would extend along the end plate (Refer to position of energy absorbing members in Fig. 3 of Liang), as such, the energy absorbing members of modified Hara would necessarily be extending outboard toward a respective wall of the battery tray {i.e. in a direction toward an outer side wall} (Claim 16 cont.) and further each energy absorbing structure, due to be positioned in the groove formed by the flanges, would be spaced apart from the respective wall of the battery tray (Claim 17).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 6 would be allowable for requiring the third battery array stacked on the first battery array to have a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall.
Hara in view of Chi, as established above, discloses/renders obvious all limitation of claim 1 and, further teaches including a third battery module, which corresponds to claimed third battery array. Hara and Chi do not; however teach/suggest stacking the battery modules on top of one another. Furthermore, based on the structure of the side plates and the way in which Hara and Chi teach housing the battery modules, there is no prior art combinable with Hara and Chi that would render obvious the claimed third battery array structure {i.e. the second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall}.
Kong (US11342623B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2020/0287182 A1 used for citation purposes), additional relevant prior art, discloses a battery structure for an electric vehicle (battery pack; [0034]), the battery structure comprising: a first battery array (first battery module; Fig. 2, 100; [0035 – 0036]) comprising a plurality of first walls that are secured to each other to form a first unitized structure that is configured to house a first cell stack (Refer to walls of battery module 100 shown in Fig. 2; [0036]), and one first wall of the plurality of first walls includes a first vertical portion, a first upper portion, and a first lower portion (Refer to corresponding portions shown in annotated Fig. 2 above), the first vertical portion including an inner surface and outer surface, that is by being a wall portion, the corresponding first vertical portion of Kong would necessarily and inherently include an inner surface and outer surface)
PNG
media_image8.png
544
1089
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 showing corresponding first vertical, first upper, and first lower portions in Kong.
PNG
media_image9.png
618
718
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6 showing corresponding second vertical and second upper portions in Kong.
Kong further discloses second battery array (Refer to second battery module shown in Figs 5 – 8, 100; [0066 – 0067]) comprising a plurality of second walls that are secured to each other to form a second unitized structure that is configured to house a second cell stack, that is like the first battery module, the second battery module in Fig. 5 of Kong is shown to include a plurality of walls (Refer to walls of battery module 100 shown in Fig. 2; [0036]), one second wall of the plurality of second walls includes a second vertical portion and second upper portion (Refer to left side surface of the right-most battery module in Fig. 5 and corresponding portions shown in annotated Fig. 6 above).
Since the first vertical portion and second vertical portions are inner vertical surfaces of the adjacent battery modules (Refer to annotated Figs. 2 and 6 above), in Kong, the second vertical portion is necessarily spaced apart from the first vertical portion.
Furthermore, the second upper portion extends towards the first vertical portion from an upper end of the second vertical portion and is secured to the first upper portion of the first battery array, that is in annotated Figs. 6 below, the upper portion is shown to protrude from an upper portion of the second vertical portion in a direction toward the first vertical portion and further is secured to the first upper portion through sliding protrusion 122 (Also refer to Fig. 5; [0066]).
PNG
media_image10.png
580
678
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6 showing the second upper portion and first upper portion connection.
PNG
media_image11.png
543
942
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 showing corresponding first vertical, first upper, and first lower portions in Kong.
Kong further discloses wherein the first upper portion extends toward the second vertical portion from an upper end of the first vertical portion and wherein the first lower portion extends toward the second vertical portion from a lower end of the first vertical portion, that is, referring to annotated Fig. 2 and 6 above, the corresponding first upper portion and first lower portion of the right side wall of the left-most battery module are shown to extend from the inner vertical surface {i.e. corresponds to first vertical portion} from an upper and lower end of the first vertical surface and are shown to extend in direction toward the left side wall of the right-most battery module, and thus by extension, the second vertical portion. Furthermore, through 122, the first lower portion is shown to be connected to the one second wall (Refer to annotated Figs. 2 and 6 above and [0066]).
In the figures Kong only shows two battery modules; therefore, Kong does not disclose a particular embodiment in which a third battery array is stacked on the first battery array.
Kong further teaches that additional battery modules can be added by sliding, specifically that another battery module can be coupled by sliding on at least one of the top, bottom, left, and right sides of the battery modules 100 of FIG. 5 ([0066 – 0067]).
Chi, directed toward a battery pack structure similar to Kong {i.e. battery packs where battery modules connect with one another to save space within the battery pack} teaches that the number of battery modules in a battery pack can be increased according to the demanded size of the battery pack ([0008];[0011 – 0012];[0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include an additional battery module 100 on top of the first battery module in Kong for the purpose of meeting a specific battery pack size demand, and thus obtain the claimed third battery array, with a reasonable expectation of success that such a position would be suitable for the battery module in Kong.
PNG
media_image12.png
543
942
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 showing corresponding third vertical and second lower portions in Kong.
The third battery module in Hong would have the same structure of battery module 100, and thus would have a plurality of third walls secured to each other to form a third unitized structure that is configured to house a third cell stack (Refer to walls of battery module 100 shown in Fig. 2; [0036]), one third wall of the plurality of third walls includes a third vertical portion and a second lower portion (Refer to corresponding portions shown in annotated Fig. 2 above).
However, when included on top of the first battery module, the side plate structure of the battery pack would only be secured to the top wall of the first battery module through sliding protrusion 122 and further would not overlap the second upper portion of the corresponding one second wall in Kong; therefore, Kong which teaches stacking battery modules in a battery pack vertically and horizontally does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Additional prior art relevant to stacking battery modules in battery packs include:
Popovski (US20210083239A1), which teaches stacking battery modules utilizing posts 200/100; however the posts are independent structures that are not included with the battery modules; thus, Popovski does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Lee (US20110117419A1) teaches stacking battery modules using the frames of the battery module; however the frame structures of the upper battery modules do not overlap with both frame structures of the battery modules included below them (Figs. 4 – 6; [0059 – 0061]); thus, Lee does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Liang (CN111916611A, Machine translation provided) teaches stacking battery modules using connectors that run through grooves included in the end plates of the battery modules (Fig. 1; [38 – 39]). The adjacent battery modules; however, do not contact one another (Refer to Fig. 1); therefore Liang does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
As such, because none of the cited prior art teach/suggest a battery array wall structure capable of providing the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall when stacking battery modules vertically and adjacent to one another, no combination of the cited prior art above would render obvious the battery structure of claim 6.
Therefore, because all of the cited prior art teach structure for stacking battery modules that do not require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array, one with ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious/be motivated to stack and secure battery arrays as claimed and disclosed by the applicant (Instant Specification: [0010];[0048]).
Claims 13 – 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 13 would be allowable for requiring the battery structure to comprise a pair of gussets that are each secured to a respective side wall of the battery try and secured to the first and second ribs.
As established above, Hara in view of Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), Smith (US PG Pub. 2021/0229541 A1) and Hara II (US PG Pub. 2015/0243950 A1) discloses/renders obvious all the limitations of claims 10 and 12 (Refer to rejections of claim 10 and 12 above).
As established above, Hara includes the claimed first rib extending from the first vertical portion from a location between the first upper portion and the first lower portion (Refer to fixing plate 30 in Fig. 2); and the claimed second rib extending from the second vertical portion (Refer to fixing plates 31 in Fig. 2). The fixing plates in Hara are taught to secure the battery module to the casing ([0052]).
Modified Hara does not explicitly disclose a pair of gussets, each gusset secured to a respective side wall of the battery tray and secured to the first and second ribs.
Chi teaches directly securing lower protruding portions of battery module side plates to secure the battery modules to a bottom tray wall (Fig. 6; [0068]); therefore, Chi fails to teach/suggest a pair of gussets, each gusset secured to a respective side wall of the battery tray and secured to the first and second ribs.
Smith was relied upon by the examiner to teach in claimed plurality of cross members and does not teach/suggest the claimed gusset and rib structure.
Hara II teaches tray members 40 that support a plurality of battery modules, the tray members include sheet metal flanges on the sides that include holes for securing the flanges to thick portions 17 included on the battery pack tray wall (Fig. 3:[0035];[0047]). The thick portion are formed on the side wall of the battery pack tray 10 ([0037]). The thick portions are not gussets thus, Hara II fails to teach/suggest a pair of gussets, each gusset secured to a respective side wall of the battery tray and secured to the first and second ribs.
Additional prior art relevant to gussets in battery structures include (all cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025):
Drabon (US20180062224A1) teaches a battery holder 1 for an electric vehicle comprising a pan 3 with a partitioning web 6 and the batteries of the battery holder are included between the partitioning webs (Fig.5; [0050]). In Fig. 11, Drabon shows a corner of the partitioning web 6 that includes a structure formed by flanges that are coupled together through a thermal joint seam, and the structure is meant to be secured to a protruding part of the battery through a screw (Figs. 11 – 12; [0056]). The flange structure; however, is not a gusset; thus Drabon fails to teach/suggest a pair of gussets, each gusset secured to a respective side wall of the battery tray and secured to the first and second ribs.
Nan (CN111740051A. Machine translation provided) teaches a power battery connection structure, including a battery module 1, a battery box 2 and a gusset 3 ([09]). The gusset is used in Nan to restrict movement of the battery module, furthermore the gusset is attached to a mounting beam include in the battery box and the battery module (Fig. 4; [33];[37 – 39]). The gusset in Nan; however, is attached to the battery module through a clasp groove 13 rather than a rib/tab, as such the gusset structure taught in Nan does not read on the claimed structure, because the gusset is not secured to a rib extending from the battery module. As such while Nan teaches a pair of gussets, Nan fails to teach/suggest securing such gussets to a first and second rib of the battery module to secure the battery modules to the battery box.
As such, because all of the cited prior art teach gusset and/or rib battery structure that do not require the claimed structure of a pair of gussets secured to a respective side wall of the battery tray and secured to the first and second ribs to achieve securing battery modules to the tray/housing of a battery pack, one with ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious/be motivated to include a pair of gussets as claimed and disclosed by the applicant (Instant Specification: [0010];[0048]).
Claims 19 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 19 would be allowable for requiring the third battery array stacked on the first battery array to have a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall.
As established above, Hara in view of Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), Smith (US PG Pub. 2021/0229541 A1) and Hara II (US PG Pub. 2015/0243950 A1) discloses/renders obvious all the limitations of claim 10 (Refer to rejection of claim 10 above).
Hara, Chi, Smith, and Hara II, while teaching battery packs including more than two battery modules, does not teach/suggest vertically stacking the battery modules in the battery
Additional prior art relevant to stacking battery modules in battery packs include (all cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025):
Popovski (US20210083239A1), which teaches stacking battery modules utilizing posts 200/100; however the posts are independent structures that are not included with the battery modules; thus, Popovski does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Lee (US20110117419A1) teaches stacking battery modules using the frames of the battery module; however the frame structures of the upper battery modules do not overlap with both frame structures of the battery modules included below them (Figs. 4 – 6; [0059 – 0061]); thus, Lee does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Liang (CN111916611A) teaches stacking battery modules using connectors that run through grooves included in the end plates of the battery modules (Fig. 1; [38 – 39]). The adjacent battery modules; however, do not contact one another (Refer to Fig. 1); therefore Liang does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array. Liang further teaches that increasing the number of battery modules to increase the energy density of the battery pack.
Therefore, while it would be obvious, based on the prior art above to modify Hara to include a third battery array stacked on the first battery array to obtain a battery pack with increased energy density, due to the structure of the side plates taught in Hara and the stacking structure taught in the prior art cited above, not requiring/teaching/suggesting the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall, no combination of the cited prior art above would render obvious the battery structure of claim 19.
As such, because all of the cited prior art teach structure for stacking battery modules that do not require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array, one with ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious/be motivated to stack and secure battery arrays as claimed and disclosed by the applicant (Instant Specification: [0010];[0048]).
Claim 20 is allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 20 is allowable for requiring the third battery array stacked on the first battery array to have a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall.
Hara in view of Chi (US11264670B2, US PG Pub. version: US 2019/0326569 A1 used for citation purposes), Smith (US PG Pub. 2021/0229541 A1), Hara II (US PG Pub. 2015/0243950 A1) and Liao (CN213026326U, Machine translation provided) discloses/renders obvious all the limitations of claim 20 (refer to rejections of claims 10 and 15 – 16) except for a third battery array stacked on the first battery array and comprising a plurality of third walls secured to each other to form a third unitized structure that is configured to house a third cell stack, one third wall of the plurality of third walls includes a third vertical portion and a second lower portion, the second lower portion extends toward the second vertical portion from the third vertical portion and is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall.
Hara, Chi, Smith, and Hara II, while teaching battery packs including more than two battery modules, do not teach/suggest vertically stacking the battery modules in the battery
Additional prior art relevant to stacking battery modules in battery packs include (all cited in previous Office action mailed 12/11/2025):
Popovski (US20210083239A1), which teaches stacking battery modules utilizing posts 200/100; however the posts are independent structures that are not included with the battery modules; thus, Popovski does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Lee (US20110117419A1) teaches stacking battery modules using the frames of the battery module; however the frame structures of the upper battery modules do not overlap with both frame structures of the battery modules included below them (Figs. 4 – 6; [0059 – 0061]); thus, Lee does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array.
Liang (CN111916611A) teaches stacking battery modules using connectors that run through grooves included in the end plates of the battery modules (Fig. 1; [38 – 39]). The adjacent battery modules; however, do not contact one another (Refer to Fig. 1); therefore Liang does not teach/suggest/require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array. Liang further teaches that increasing the number of battery modules to increase the energy density of the battery pack.
Therefore, while it would be obvious, based on the prior art above to modify Hara to include a third battery array stacked on the first battery array to obtain a battery pack with increased energy density, due to the structure of the side plates taught in Hara and stacking structure taught in the prior art cited above, not requiring/teaching/suggesting the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall, no combination of the cited prior art above would render obvious the battery structure of claim 19.
As such, because all of the cited prior art teach structure for stacking battery modules that do not require the claimed structure of a second lower portion that is secured to the first upper portion of the one first wall and secured to the second upper portion of the one second wall to achieve mounting a third battery array on a first battery array, one with ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious/be motivated to stack and secure battery arrays as claimed and disclosed by the applicant (Instant Specification: [0010];[0048]).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/A.Y.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights