Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
This office action is in response to the amendment and remarks submitted 1/2/2026.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-10, 14, 17, 19 and 20 have been amended; support for claim 1 and 17 is found in the figures.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Zong et al. (CN 215008485 U, machine translation is provided).
As to claims 1 and 17, Zhong et al. discloses a battery system, comprising a battery cell module [0016], comprising
a plurality of battery cells [0016] and a plurality of end covers (1-bracket),
wherein an end of each of the battery cells is provided with one of the end covers [0016], and,
any two adjacent ones of the end covers are detachably connected to each other [0017], so that the plurality of battery cells are relatively fixed into a group [0017],
wherein each of the end covers comprises a cover plate and a plurality of side plates (figure 3),
the cover plate is a polygonal plate with an even number of side edges (figure 3), and each side edge of the cover plate is connected to a respective one of the plurality of side plates (figure 3): and
wherein the plurality of side plates are consecutively connected the plurality of side plates comprise a first subset of consecutively connected side plates in which each side plate is provided with a clamping block, and a second subset of consecutively connected side plates in which each side plate is provided with a clamping slot. (figure 2, see annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
440
722
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 2, Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 1, wherein each of the end covers is provided with an accommodating slot, and an end of the battery cell corresponding to the end cover is fixed in the accommodating slot [0017].
As to claim 3. Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 2, wherein two opposite side plates in adjacent any two adjacent ones of the end covers are engaged with each other (figures 1-3).
As to claim 4, Zong et al. discloses the cell module of claim 3, wherein the clamping block and the clamping slot opposite to each other on any two adjacent ones of the end covers are engaged with each other (figure 1-3).
As to claim 5, Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 4, wherein a width of the clamping slot is gradually increased towards inside of the accommodating slot along a radial direction of a battery cell corresponding to the clamping slot, and a shape of the clamping block is matched with a shape of the clamping slot (the dovetail shape fulfills this shape and as seen in figure 1 the end pieces interconnect).
As to claim 6, Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 3, wherein the cover plate is a regular hexagon plate (figure 2, [002]).
As to claim 7, Zong et al. the battery cell module of claim 3, wherein the plurality of battery cells are cylindrical [0002,0016], a side surface of each of the plurality of side plates facing one of the battery cells corresponding to the side plate is an arc-shaped surface matched with an outer wall of the battery cell (figure 3), and
a side surface of the side plate away from the battery cell is a plane (figure 3- outer side is flat, inner side is curved).
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) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zong et al. (CN 215008485 U, machine translation is provided) in view of Lu et al. (CN 109119556 A).
As to claim 8, Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 7, but does not disclose a middle portion of each of the plurality of side plates is provided with a notch with an opening facing downward toward another end of the battery cell corresponding to the side plate.
Lu et al. discloses an end cover (splicing module -100) with sides and notches included into the side plates. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed in order to use less material and save weight.
As to claim 9, Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 3, and teaches the lithium batteries are inserted into the brackets but is silent on the plurality of side plates are fixedly bonded with the battery cells corresponding to the side plates.
Lu discloses an end cover (100) and teaches that the battery is fixed in the endplate (100) [0097].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to ensure the end cover is fixed to the battery cell so that it is held in place.
As to claim 10, Modified Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 9, an discloses the contact area between the plurality of side plates and the battery cell but is silent to a bonding area between the plurality of side plates and the battery cells corresponding to the side plates ranges from 50% to 80% of a contact area between the plurality of side plates and the battery cells.
It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Also see MPEP 2144.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zong et al. (CN 215008485 U, machine translation is provided).
As to claim 11, Zong discloses the battery cell module of claim 2, but is silent to wherein each accommodating slot is correspondingly disposed in clearance fit with one of the battery cells, and a fit clearance therebetween ranges from 1 mm to 2 mm.
It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Also see MPEP 2144.
In this case, an ordinary artisan would want a clearance to ensure the battery can be installed in the end cover but not too loose that it would fall off.
As to claim 12, Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 2, but is silent to wherein a depth of the accommodating slot ranges from 5 mm to 20 mm.
It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Also see MPEP 2144.
Claim(s) 13-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zong et al. (CN 215008485 U, machine translation is provided) in view of Shao et al. (CN 206163563 U, machine translation provided by applicant).
As to claims 13-16 and 18-20, Zong et al. discloses each of the end covers is sleeved at an end of one of the battery cells and provided with a via hole (2) (figure 1, and 3) (for claim 13); Zong et al. discloses the battery cell module of claim 14, wherein each of the end covers is provided with a flange surrounding the via hole (generally numbered 1 in figure 3) (for claim 15); Zong discloses the battery cell module of claim 1, wherein each of the end covers is provided with an accommodating slot, and an end of the battery cell corresponding to the end cover is fixed in the accommodating slot [0017];
each of the end covers is sleeved at an end of one of the battery cells and provided with a via hole (welding hole 2), ( for claim 18)
wherein each of the end covers (1) is provided with an accommodating slot (generally where 3 is numbered is where the battery is inserted), and an end of the battery cell corresponding to the end cover is fixed in the accommodating slot two opposite side plates in any two adjacent ones of the end covers are engaged with each other (figure 1, 3);
each of the end covers is sleeved at an end of one of the battery cells and provided with a via hole (welding hole 2) (for claim 19),
wherein each of the end covers is provided with an accommodating slot (generally where 3 is numbered is where the battery is inserted), and an end of the battery cell corresponding to the end cover is fixed in the accommodating slot [0016];
two opposite side plates in adjacent any two adjacent ones of the end covers are engaged with each other (figure 1, 3); and
the clamping block and the clamping slot opposite to each other on any two adjacent ones of the end covers are engaged with each other (figure 1);
each of the end covers is sleeved at an end of one of the battery cells and provided with a via hole (welding hole 2) (for claim 20),
but is silent to
an electrode column of each of the battery cells is extended out of a respective one of the end covers from the via hole of the respective end cover (claims 13 and 18-20).
wherein each of the end covers is made of an insulating material and configured to support a busbar connected to the electrode column. (claim 14)
wherein the flange is configured to support the busbar connected to the electrode column (claim 15).
wherein each of the end covers end cover or flange is provided with a position column matched with the busbar (claim 16).
Shao et al. discloses a battery module and discloses end covers (20 bracket set) along with busbar (30) and the electrode column/pole of the battery is connected to the busbar/connection piece (abstract). The external end face of the two bracket groups respectively provided with connecting piece, connecting piece is respectively welded to the battery monomer opposite to end part of each single battery of the pole; the bracket group is composed of multiple monomer bracket, the bracket monomer is regular hexagon, and the middle part is provided with an annular battery box, an annular battery box bottom is equipped with supporting part, several simple body brackets through outer side matched with the bumps and grooves alternately spliced together.
Shao et al. further teaches the utility model adopts modularized spliced and large degree of freedom of the installation, bracket monomers spliced without interference, there is no gap, and can ensure the joining strength and the stability of the structure, each single battery even interval and good radiation; the staggered mounting improves space utilization, and has strong commonality and improves the product competitive power, single component failure can be dismantled and changed, and time and cost are saved.
Thus the battery would extend beyond the end of the end cover in order for the welding to occur (applies to claims 13 and 18-20). The bracket monomers of Shao would be insulated in order to prevent short circuiting since the connection is done by the welding of the connector piece/busbar to the poles of the battery, Shao teaches that the connecting piece/bus bar sits on top of the bracket monomers/end covers ("the assembled bracket group 20 are respectively sleeved on the set side by side battery monomer 10 two ends, then the connecting sheet 30 covered on the bracket group (20), ") (applies to claim 14).
Shao et al. discloses the opening and discloses protrusions around the opening/supporting plate 25 are also the position column (see figure 2) thus is configured to support the busbar (see figure 1) (applies to claim 15 and 16).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have the pole extending further from the end cover; made of insulating material for the end covers and flanges with a position column matched with the busbar because further teaches the utility model adopts modularized spliced and large degree of freedom of the installation and can ensure the joining strength and the stability of the structure.
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 any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MARIA J LAIOS whose telephone number is (571)272-9808. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-6pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727