Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/032,413

Battery Pack and Automobile Comprising Same

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Apr 18, 2023
Examiner
WANG, EUGENIA
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
366 granted / 678 resolved
-11.0% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
714
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.8%
+8.8% vs TC avg
§102
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§112
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 678 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed April 18, 202, February 20, 2024, and February 7, 2025 have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. Drawings The drawings received April 18, 2023 are acceptable. 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) 1-5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being rejected by JP 2019129042 (Sakamoto et al.). As to claim 1, Sakamoto et al. teach a battery pack (battery unit [10]; fig. 2) comprising: a pack tray (battery case [11]) defining an inner space (battery storage section [13]) (fig. 3); a plurality of battery modules (modules M, i.e. M1-M10) accommodated in the pack tray (battery case [11]) (fig. 3); a battery management system (BMS) (control device [ECU], first electric junction box [BOX1], and second electric junction box [BOX2]) accommodated in the pack tray (battery case [11]) (figs. 3-4; para 0026-0027); a first cable assembly configured to connect the BMS to a first module group from among the plurality of battery modules, the first cable assembly being located adjacent to the first module group (i.e. combination of first electrical cable [33A], second electrical cable [33B], as connected to bus bars the respective applicable bus bars to [BOX1] via connector portion C (figs. 2-5; para 0012, 0026, 0031-0034); additionally, at the very least control line [34] to the voltage sensors [35] (indirect connection to the modules) and [ECU] (figs. 3-5; para 0026, 0029, 0036, 0040, 0062); and a second cable assembly configured to connect the BMS to a second module group from among the plurality of battery modules, the second cable assembly being located adjacent to the second module group (i.e. combination of first electrical cable [33A], second electrical cable [33B] as connected to bus bars the respective applicable bus bars to [BOX2] via connector portion C (figs. 2-5; para 0012, 0026, 0031-0034); additionally, at the very least control line [34] to the voltage sensors [35] (indirect connection to the modules) and [ECU] (figs. 3-5; para 0026, 0029, 0036, 0040, 0062). (Note: The first and second module groups are defined by their connection respective [BOX1] and [BOX2]; see para 0020 regarding how the modules are connected to the respective bus bars; i.e. M1 to B1; M2 to B2; M5, M4, M3 to B3; M6, M7, M8 to B4; M9 to B6; M10, B6, as different module groups.) As to claim 2, Sakamoto et al. teach the pack tray (battery case [11]) comprises: a plurality of partitions (cross members [14A], [14C]) extending in a width direction (three-dimensional figure extends in three directions, one of which is a width direction) of the pack tray (battery case [11]) and dividing the inner space of the pack tray (between M2 and M3 and between M8 and M9) (fig. 3); and a cross beam (cross member [14B]) extending in a longitudinal direction (direction that is perpendicular both 11RS and 11LS; fig. 3) of the pack tray (battery case [11]) and dividing the inner space of the pack tray (between M5 and M6) (figs. 3, 6; para 0024, 0037). As to claim 3, Sakamoto et al. teach the first module group (at least one of M1, M2, or M3/M4/M5) is located on a first side of the cross beam (cross member [14B]), and the second module group (at least one of M6/M7/M8, M9, M10) is located on a second side of the cross beam (cross member [14B]) opposite the first side (fig. 3). As to claim 4, Sakamoto et al. teach each of the plurality of battery modules comprises: a cell stack in which a plurality of battery cells are stacked (para 0007); a module housing in which the cell stack is accommodated (para 0007); a sensing line electrically connected to the plurality of battery cells (via voltage sensors [35]) (para 00026; figs. 3-4); and a module connector connected to the sensing line (control line [34]) (fig. 5; para 0026). As to claim 5, Sakamoto et al. teach the BMS (control device [ECU], first electric junction box [BOX1], and second electric junction box [BOX2]) comprises a pair of BMS connectors (terminal box 1 [TB1] and terminal box 2 [TB2]) respectively provided at a position corresponding to the first module group at least one of M1, M2, or M3/M4/M5) and a position corresponding to the second module group (at least one of M6/M7/M8, M9, M10) (figs. 2-4; para 0026, 0031-0033). As to claim 10, the battery pack of claim 1 has been set forth in the rejection to claim 1 above, incorporated herein but not reiterated herein for brevity’s sake. A vehicle with the battery pack can be seen in fig. 1 (see also para 0009). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-9 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 an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, appears to teach, suggest, or render obvious the invention of at least claim 6. Claim 6 teaches the battery pack comprising the elements therein. Notably, each of the first cable assembly and the second cable assembly comprises “a sensing cable having a printed circuit pattern; a plurality of first cable connectors connected to the sensing cable and coupled to the module connector; and a second cable connector connected to the sensing cable and coupled to the BMS connector.” Sakamoto et al.’s structure (seen in figs. 3-5) does not have the claimed structure (no printed circuit sensing cable, no presence of the claimed plurality of first cable connections and second cable connectors in the claimed manner). No motivation exists to alter Sakamoto’s structure to arrive at the claimed invention. Thus, none of the prior art alone or in combination teaches, suggests, or renders obvious the claimed invention. Since claims 7-9 are dependent upon claim 6, they are allowable for the same reason. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. EP 3249717 A1 (Kobayashi et al.) is drawn to teaching wiring connections of batteries (para 0052; figs. 1, 7, 11). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUGENIA WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4942. The examiner can normally be reached a flex schedule, generally Monday-Thursday 5:30 -7:30(AM) and 9:00-4:30 ET. 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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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. /EUGENIA WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 18, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 16, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603330
BATTERY MODULE HAVING ELECTROLYTIC SOLUTION LEAKAGE DETECTION FUNCTION AND BATTERY PACK INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603303
FUEL CELL STACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592444
Holding Device for Battery Cells
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592406
CELL STACK AND REDOX FLOW BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592428
BATTERY MODULE AND DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+35.1%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 678 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month