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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/23/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 and 8-16 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.
Wang is no longer used to modify Liu. Loehrke (US-20130240385-A1) is newly applied to modify Liu to teach the support frame as claimed in amended claims 1 and 8. Loehrke discloses a drip pan which corresponds with the claimed support frame.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US-20200101335-A1), and in further view of Loehrke (US-20130240385-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses a battery pack frame (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, [0024], regarding battery boxes 301 and 302) comprising: a water tank frame including a space configured to accommodate at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; [0024], fig. 2b, regarding water tank 10, fig. 2b, regarding battery boxes 301 and 302 having a battery space for accommodating at least one battery and which may also be considered as a water tank frame as they accommodate the battery packs 91 and 92 and accommodate water in the instance of a thermal event, [0024], regarding having two batteries accommodated in the embodiment of fig. 2b, batteries 91 and 93 thereby forming a battery pack with multiple cells; multiple battery cells can be provided to form the battery pack),
the at least one battery pack being used for a predetermined period of time or below a predetermined capacity (a battery pack must necessarily include the features of being used for a predetermined period of time and below a predetermined capacity because any amount of time can be predetermined and all battery packs have a limited capacity which can also be predetermined; any quantity can be predetermined),
wherein a height of the battery pack frame is greater than a height of the at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, regarding battery boxes 301 and 302 with a higher height than battery packs 91 and 93).
Liu does not explicitly disclose a support frame disposed below the water tank frame, wherein the support frame has an area wider than a bottom area of the water tank frame such that edges of the support frame extend outward from side walls of the water tank frame, and thereby coolant overflowing from the water tank frame flows over the edges of the support frame preventing entry of the overflowing coolant into an adjacent battery pack frame. However, Loehrke discloses a drip pan (see e.g., Loehrke; [0119], fig. 3, regarding drip pan 170 ) which may correspond with the claimed support frame. The drip pan is disposed below a container containing a battery pack and filled with a filler material (see e.g., Loehrke; fig. 3, [0120]), the drip pan having an area wider than a bottom area of the container such that edges of the drip pan extend outward from side walls of the container (see e.g., Loehrke; fig. 3, [0119]), the drip pan functioning to catch fluids leaking from the container (see e.g., Loehrke; [0119]) and having the corresponding structure (see e.g., Loehrke; fig. 3) such that material overflowing from the container flows over the edges of the support frame preventing entry of the overflowing material into other areas.
The drip pan disclosed by Loehrke is analogous art because the drip pan is positioned below a container having a battery and filled with fire extinguishing material (see e.g., Loehrke; [0001], fig. 3, regarding hazardous material 150 which may specifically be lithium ion batteries, and [0110] regarding filler material 142 which may be a fire extinguishing material such as PU foam), similar to the structure of Liu which provides a battery in a container filled with fire extinguishing material. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery fire extinguishing structure disclosed by Liu by providing a drip pan as disclosed by Loehrke below the water tank frame. The structural addition of the drip pan of Loehrke modifies Liu such that the claimed function in achieved wherein coolant overflowing from the water tank frame flows over the edges of drip pan preventing entry of the overflowing coolant into an adjacent battery pack frame. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to catch fluid leaking from the container (see e.g., Loehrke; [0119]) to improve safety (see e.g., Loehrke; [0020], [0023]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 1, wherein the battery pack frame is configured to receive a coolant (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, [0024], regarding battery boxes 301 and 302 configured to receive a water solution), and wherein the battery pack frame is configured to submerge the at least one battery pack to a first predetermined heigh with the coolant (see e.g., Liu; [0024], regarding the water solution floods the batteries 91 and 93 in the battery boxes 301 and 302, [0028], regarding flooding the entire battery box with the water solution therefore corresponding with a first predetermined height) when a predetermined condition is detected in the at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; [0024], regarding flooding the battery in the predetermined condition of a fire being detected in the battery packs, [0018], regarding heat sensing automatic-sprinkler as the detection device).
Regarding claim 3, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 2, wherein the battery pack frame is configured to receive the coolant from at least one feed pipe disposed above the battery pack frame (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, [0024], regarding water distribution pipe 80, 81, 82, wherein a section of section 80 of the pipe is disposed above the battery boxes 301 and 302).
Regarding claim 4, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 3, wherein the at least one feed pipe includes at least one sprinkler to spray the coolant onto the at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, [0025], regarding feed pipes 80, 81, 82, including automatic-sprinklers as the outlet control gates 501-506 to sprinkle water onto the batteries 91 and 93).
Regarding claim 5, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 2, further comprising at least one smoke detection sensor disposed at an upper part of the battery pack frame (see e.g., Liu; fig. 4b, [0019], [0030], regarding a similar embodiment wherein fire sensors 71, 72 are disposed at an upper part of the battery boxes, [0032], regarding the fire sensor may be a smoke sensor), wherein the at least one smoke detection sensor is configured to detect smoke generated from the at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; [0031], regarding the fire sensors configured to sense a fire condition and generate a fire occurrence signal, [0032], regarding the fire sensor may be a smoke sensor).
Regarding claim 6, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 5, further comprising a sensor support disposed at the upper part of the battery pack frame, wherein the at least one smoke detection sensor is mounted on the sensor support (see e.g., Liu; [0035], fig. 4d, regarding fire sensors disposed on the top of the battery boxes 301, 302; this top area of the battery boxes where the sensors are disposed may correspond to a sensor support area).
Regarding claim 8, Liu discloses a battery pack frame (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, [0024], regarding battery boxes 301 and 302) comprising: a water tank frame including a space configured to accommodate at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; [0024], fig. 2b, regarding water tank 10, fig. 2b, regarding battery boxes 301 and 302 having a battery space for accommodating at least one battery and which may also be considered as a water tank frame as they accommodate the battery packs 91 and 92 and accommodate water in the instance of a thermal event, [0024], regarding having two batteries accommodated in the embodiment of fig. 2b, batteries 91 and 93 thereby forming a battery pack with multiple cells; multiple battery cells can be provided to form the battery pack),
the at least one battery pack being used for a predetermined period of time or below a predetermined capacity (a battery pack must necessarily include the features of being used for a predetermined period of time and below a predetermined capacity because any amount of time can be predetermined and all battery packs have a limited capacity which can also be predetermined; any quantity can be predetermined),
wherein a height of the battery pack frame is greater than a height of the at least one battery pack (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, regarding battery boxes 301 and 302 with a higher height than battery packs 91 and 93).
Liu does not explicitly disclose a support frame disposed below the water tank frame, wherein the support frame has an area wider than a bottom area of the water tank frame such that edges of the support frame extend outward from side walls of the water tank frame, and wherein the support frame has a step portion having a predetermined height at the edge of the support frame to hold coolant up to the predetermined height when the coolant leaks from the water tank frame. However, Loehrke discloses a drip pan (see e.g., Loehrke; [0119], fig. 3, regarding drip pan 170 ) which may correspond with the claimed support frame. The drip pan is disposed below a container containing a battery pack and filled with a filler material (see e.g., Loehrke; fig. 3, [0120]), the drip pan having an area wider than a bottom area of the container such that edges of the drip pan extend outward from side walls of the container (see e.g., Loehrke; fig. 3, [0119]), the drip pan functioning to catch fluids leaking from the container (see e.g., Loehrke; [0119]) and having the corresponding structure with a step portion having a predetermined height at the edge of the support frame (see e.g., Loehrke; fig. 3) such that material overflowing from the container flows over the edges of the support frame preventing entry of the overflowing material into other areas.
The drip pan disclosed by Loehrke is analogous art because the drip pan is positioned below a container having a battery and filled with fire extinguishing material (see e.g., Loehrke; [0001], fig. 3, regarding hazardous material 150 which may specifically be lithium ion batteries, and [0110] regarding filler material 142 which may be a fire extinguishing material such as PU foam), similar to the structure of Liu which provides a battery in a container filled with fire extinguishing material. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery fire extinguishing structure disclosed by Liu by providing a drip pan as disclosed by Loehrke below the water tank frame. The structural addition of the drip pan of Loehrke modifies Liu such that the claimed function in achieved wherein coolant is held up to the predetermined heigh when the coolant leaks from the water tank frame. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to catch fluid leaking from the container (see e.g., Loehrke; [0119]) to improve safety (see e.g., Loehrke; [0020], [0023]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 2, wherein the at least one battery pack is a battery pack used in an electric vehicle (see e.g., Liu; [0036]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 1. Liu also discloses a battery rack (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, wherein the stacked frame of 11, 301, 302, may be considered as a battery rack) including the battery pack frames (see e.g., Liu; fig 2b, regarding 301, 302) and the at battery packs (see e.g., Liu; fig 2b, regarding battery packs 91, 93).
Regarding claim 14, modified Liu teaches the battery rack according to claim 13, comprising a plurality of battery pack frames including the at least one battery pack frame (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, regarding frames 301 and 302), wherein at least one of the plurality of battery pack frames is stacked on top of an adjacent one of the plurality of battery pack frames in a vertical direction of the battery rack (see e.g., Liu; fig. 2b, regarding frame 301 stacked vertically on top of frame 302).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US-20200101335-A1) and Loehrke (US-20130240385-A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Shimizu (JP-2016171028-A) (see translation).
Regarding claim 9, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 2. Liu does not explicitly disclose the battery pack frame comprises at least one cable through-hole portion, wherein at least one electrical cable is passed through the at least one cable through-hole portion to connect to the at least one battery pack. However, Shimizu discloses a case 12 wherein a plurality of cable 14 are inserted into the case 12 via through holes formed in the case to electrically connect the battery cells and battery packs together (see e.g., Shimizu; [0008], figs. 1-2), wherein the cables used in the context of electric vehicles (see e.g., Shimizu; [0079]). Furthermore, the cables are used for output to an external device (see e.g., Shimizu; [0009]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack disclosed by Liu by providing a frame with at least one cable through-hole portion extending through through-holes to connect to the battery pack disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to connect battery pack or cells together with positive cables, negative cables, communication cables, battery cell terminals, and output to an external device (see e.g., Shimizu; [0009]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 9. Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one cable sealing member is mounted in the at least one cable through-hole portion. However, Shimizu discloses a cable sealing member 18 (see e.g., Shimizu; fig. 5, [0010], regarding a grommet) mounted in the at least one cable through-hole portion (see e.g., Shimizu; [0040], regarding grommet fitting into the through-holes). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack disclosed by Liu by providing cable sealing members mounted into the cable through-hole portions disclosed by Shimizu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to ensure dustproof and waterproof properties (see e.g., Shimizu; [0040]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US-20200101335-A1), Loehrke (US-20130240385-A1), and Shimizu (JP-2016171028-A) (see translation) as applied to claim 9 above, and in further view of Galaxy “Water Block Cable, Water Resistant Cable, Waterproof Cable.” Galaxy, 7 Dec. 2017, web.archive.org/web/20171202162554/www.galaxywire.com/applications/water-block-cable/. Accessed 14 Aug. 2025.
Regarding claim 11, modified Liu discloses the battery pack frame according to claim 9. Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one electrical cable has a waterproof sealing coating on an outer surface of the at least one electrical cable. However, Galaxy discloses electrical cables that are waterproof due to a specific jacket material corresponding to a waterproof sealing coating on an outer surface of the cable (see e.g., page 1 “What is Water Block Cable?”). Similar to Shimizu which discloses cables used in the presence of water, Galaxy discloses the use of the cable in water environments. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack disclosed by Liu to have waterproof cables with waterproof sealing coatings disclosed by Galaxy. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have wires that can function in a wet environment (see e.g., page 1 “What is Water Block Cable?”).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US-20200101335-A1) and Loehrke (US-20130240385-A1) as applied to claim 13 above, and in further view of Yoon (US-20180123094-A1).
Regarding claim 15, modified Liu teaches an energy storage system wherein at least one battery rack comprises the battery rack according to claim 13 (see e.g., Liu; [0036], regarding invention used in battery energy storage systems).
Liu does not explicitly disclose the energy storage system comprising a plurality of battery racks. However, Yoon teaches a plurality of battery racks in an energy storage system (see e.g., Yoon; [0031]-[0032], fig. 2 regarding rack housing 200 comprising a plurality of battery racks). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the energy storage system disclosed by Liu by having a plurality of battery racks included in the system as disclosed by Yoon. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to form an energy storage system with more capacity, and when formed according to the disclosure of Yoon would provide reduced manufacturing costs while decreasing the weight of the product (see e.g., Yoon; [0019]).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US-20200101335-A1) and Loehrke (US-20130240385-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Jeon (US-20190372070-A1).
Regarding claim 16, modified Liu teaches the battery pack frame according to claim 1.
Liu also discloses the sensors 71 and 72 may be smoke sensors (see e.g., Liu; [0032], fig. 4B).
Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein the battery pack includes a service plug for disconnecting an electrical connection of the battery pack, and a smoke detection sensor is disposed above the service plug. However, Jeon teaches that a service plug for disconnecting an electrical connection of the battery pack (see e.g., Jeon; [0043], fig. 1 regarding the disconnection header unit 120 with service plug unit 110 mounted to the battery system), wherein the manual service disconnect 100 with the service plug 110 may be fixed to the external of the battery case (see e.g., [0039]-[0040], fig. 1). Because Jeon discloses the service plug fixed to the battery case, when applied to the battery cases of Liu, the smoke sensors which are above the battery case will also be disposed above the service plugs (see e.g., Liu; fig. 4B). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack frame of Liu with a service plug for disconnecting an electrical connection of the battery pack which is positioned below the smoke sensor as disclosed by Jeon. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have a prevent safety-related accidents from occurring during the manufacture, assembly, repair, delivery, etc. of an electric car, and have a manual service disconnect which can be inserted into the battery system even when an internal space of an external casing is insufficient (see e.g., Jeon; [0003]-[0004]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN SONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7337. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/KEVIN SONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728