DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group 1: Claims 1-6, 10 in the reply filed on 2/23/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gonzales et al (PGPUB 2020/0194766).
Claim 1: Gonzales teaches a busbar assembly that is formed as a mesh and capable of electrically connecting a first and second component together [Abstract] wherein it is further defined to be capable of electrically coupling electrical terminals of individual batteries within an array [0043]. The busbar is substantially bar-shaped [Fig 4]. The busbar is formed as a woven structure whereby holes capable of ventilating the body of the bar or present [Fig 5-6]. The structure of the busbar allows air to communicate therethrough [0046].
Claim 2: Gonzales teaches a bar [Fig 4] which has the inherent properties of a length, thickness, and width. The ventilation holes of the bar comprise air flow access on the upper surface, lower surface, left side surface, right side surface, front surface, and back surface of the body and provide communication with each other through the inner portion of the body [Fig 4-5].
Claim 10: Gonzales teaches the battery pack for use in an electric vehicle to comprise the invention [0002-0003].
Claim(s) 1-3, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uk (KR10-2018-001163).
Claim 1: Uk teaches a busbar assembly to facilitate the cooling efficiency increase of an electrical terminal part and venting of the electrode terminal part through a mesh structure [Abstract]. Wires of a first direction (110) are overlayed with wires of a second direction (120) in a vertical stacking direction [Fig 2-3]. The three dimensional lattice structure is capable of allowing air to ventilation and forms a plurality of holes [Description of Embodiments].
Claim 2: Uk teaches a structure that allows ventilation holes of the bar to have air flow access on the upper surface, lower surface, left side surface, right side surface, front surface, and back surface of the body and provide communication with each other through the inner portion of the body [Fig 3-5].
Claim 3: Uk teaches the wires to be rectilinear wires, which reads on applicants “plates”, and is formed such that lengthwise direction layers are stacked on widthwise direction layers and form a plurality of ventilation holes by the alternating stacking structure in the vertical direction [Fig 3-5; Description of Embodiment].
Claim 10: The busbar of Uk is utilized in a battery pack [Abstract].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gonzales et al (PGPUB 2020/0194766) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Panasonic (JP 4466156).
Claim 3: Gonzales teaches the strands (80) to be metal or metal alloy wires, exemplified to be copper [0045] for the purposes of facilitating the exchange of thermal energy [0031], but is silent to teach alternating and repeating bars.
Panasonic teaches a heat exchanger with ventilation [Technical Field]. Primary ventilation directions are shown as direction (A) and (B) in Figure 2 and formed by stacking plates in a vertical direction whereby the orientation of plates are rotated 90degrees in the stacking direction [Figure 1]. The directions (A) and (B) determine lengthwise stacking and widthwise stacking. The elements are arranged at predetermined intervals between each other as pre-designed by the sheet. The structure of the stacked heat exchanger [Best-Mode] is utilized for its fundamental teaching as to mechanisms to create heat exchanging bodies. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would have been motivated to modify the metal wire assembly mechanism of Gonzales for a pre-determined plate with support ribs to form heat exchanging features as taught by Panasonic in order to improve manufacturing processes whereby plates can be created and then stacked instead of weaving or individually laying metal fibers.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gonzales et al (PGPUB 2020/0194766) and Panasonic (JP 4466156) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Oury (PGPUB 2012/0028097).
Claim 4, 6: Gonzales teaches joining elements via soldering or welding [0047, 0051]; Panasonic additionally teaches formation via welding [Tech-Solution]. The prior art fail to teach a brazing mechanism that requires the use of a silver coating on the conductive metal wires of the busbar.
Oury teaches a battery pack assembly [Abstract] having electrical connectors (52) [0023]. Battery cells (20) can be coupled to respective connectors via welding or brazing [0023, 0028, 0034, 0038]; Oury establishes art recognized equivalents for the purposes of joining electrical components. Tabs of battery cells and electrical connectors are taught to have a coating, exemplified to be silver, to facilitate the forming low electrical resistance connections with the tab and connectors [0023, 0028, 0034, 0038]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to plate the electrical connection materials of Gonzales with silver prior to a welding or brazing process as taught by Oury in order to facilitate the forming low electrical resistance connections with the tab and connectors [0023, 0028, 0034, 0038].
Claim 5: Gonzales is silent to teach a plating of silver on the copper metal material of the busbar that comprises a welding step to form. Oury teaches the utilization of a coating layer of silver on the electrical connectors in order to facilitate the forming of low electrical resistance connection between two electrically conducting features.
It would have been “obvious to try” coating the first direction layer, the second direction layer, and both direction layers – finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to save the material cost of silver as well as the processing time to coat the layer in silver, while obtaining the advantage of silver coating to facilitate the forming of low electrical resistance connection. The claimed scope is obviated by the scenario of coating one layer to obtain the advantage while leaving the other layer uncoated to save cost.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uk (KR10-2018-001163) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Oury (PGPUB 2012/0028097).
Claim 4, 6: Uk teaches joining the wire layers via welding [Description of Embodiments], but is silent to teach a silver layer
Oury teaches a battery pack assembly [Abstract] having electrical connectors (52) [0023]. Battery cells (20) can be coupled to respective connectors via welding or brazing [0023, 0028, 0034, 0038]; Oury establishes art recognized equivalents for the purposes of joining electrical components. Tabs of battery cells and electrical connectors are taught to have a coating, exemplified to be silver, to facilitate the forming low electrical resistance connections with the tab and connectors [0023, 0028, 0034, 0038]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to plate the electrical connection materials of Uk with silver prior to a welding or brazing process as taught by Oury in order to facilitate the forming low electrical resistance connections with the tab and connectors [0023, 0028, 0034, 0038].
Claim 5: Uk is silent to teach a plating of silver on the copper metal material of the busbar that comprises a welding step to form. Oury teaches the utilization of a coating layer of silver on the electrical connectors in order to facilitate the forming of low electrical resistance connection between two electrically conducting features.
It would have been “obvious to try” coating the first direction layer, the second direction layer, and both direction layers – finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to save the material cost of silver as well as the processing time to coat the layer in silver, while obtaining the advantage of silver coating to facilitate the forming of low electrical resistance connection. The claimed scope is obviated by the scenario of coating one layer to obtain the advantage while leaving the other layer uncoated to save cost.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dawson et al (PGPUB 2021/0134480) teaches a busbar for use in a device that comprises knitted, woven, or braided design structures [0133]. Figure 10C-10I show different formations that may be pertinent to applicant if different design features were desired – specifically a laminated stack of ten conductors (90).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J YANCHUK whose telephone number is (571)270-7343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-8p.
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, Nick Smith can be reached at 571-272-8760. 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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752