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 .
This is a final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 04/16/2026. Claims 1, 3, and 8-9 are currently amended. Claims 1-13 are pending review in this action. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to Claims 3 and 9. The previous 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to Claim 1, however the previously cited prior art has been upheld as reading on the claims. Updated rejections necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments are detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-8 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Brandley et al. (US 2022/0294058 A1) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 07/12/2024).
Regarding Claim 1, Brandley discloses a battery pack (composite battery enclosure, 40) comprising: a lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) on which a plurality of battery modules (batteries, 30) are mounted and an upper pack frame (top composite cover, 10) located on an upper part of the plurality of battery modules (batteries, 30) (Figure 1, [0059-0060]). Brandley further discloses a rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) included in the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) (Figures 4 and 5, [0066, 0078]). Brandley further discloses that the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) comprises a region of additional core material (27) and at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) (Figures 4 and 5, [0078]). Brandley further discloses that the additional core material (27) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be formed of a first material which may be a different material than the second material (core material) forming the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) (Figures 4 and 5, [0066]). Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be formed from a second material (core material) which may be a viscoelastic material which has energy absorption properties (Figures 4 and 5, [0066, 0068, 0078]), thus the reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) may be considered to include a viscoelastic damper. Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) extends from a first side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) to an opposite second side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) (Figure 5). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
321
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5 (Brandley US 2022/0294058 A1)
Regarding Claim 2, Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) is two or more reinforcing members (base section core material, 26) formed inside the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) (see annotated Figure 4 below). Brandley further discloses that the two or more reinforcing members (base section core material, 26) comprises a first reinforcing member (base section core material, 26, formed in the highlighted region, see annotated Figure 4 below) and a second reinforcing member (base section core material, 26, formed in the highlighted region, see annotated Figure 4 below). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
PNG
media_image2.png
434
834
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 4 (Brandley US 2022/0294058 A1)
Regarding Claim 3, Brandley further discloses that the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) comprises a bottom surface (battery retaining area, 24) on which the plurality of battery modules are mounted (batteries, 30) (Figure 4, [0077]). Brandley further discloses side surface frames (outer cross members, 21, and monolithic fiber sections, 23) along each edge of the bottom surface (battery retaining area, 24) of the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20), and an inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) that partitions an interior of the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) (Figure 4, [0077]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
Regarding Claim 4, Brandley further discloses that the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) is included in the inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) (Figure 5, [0078]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
Regarding Claim 5, Brandley further discloses an additional beam (right-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) located in contact with the inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) via the bottom part (battery retaining area, 24) (Figure 4).
The examiner notes that the instant claim does not require that the additional beam (right-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) and the inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) are in direct contact with one another. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met.
Regarding Claim 6, Figure 4 of Brandley depicts that the inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) is in direct contact with the monolithic fiber sections (23) of the side surface frames (outer cross members, 21, and monolithic fiber sections, 23) (Figures 4 and 5). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) is included in at least one side surface frame (monolithic fiber sections, 23) of the side surface frames (outer cross members, 21, and monolithic fiber sections, 23) at least in a region wherein the inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) is in direct contact with the monolithic fiber sections (23) (Figure 4). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 6 are met.
Regarding Claim 7, Brandley further discloses an additional beam (right-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) in contact with one surface of the at least one side surface frame (monolithic fiber sections, 23) (Figure 4). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 7 are met.
Regarding Claim 8, Brandley further discloses that a first surface (see annotated Figure 4 below) of the additional beam (right-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) is in contact with the bottom surface (battery retaining area, 24), and a second surface (see annotated Figure 4 below) of the additional beam (right-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) is in contact with the at least one side surface frame (monolithic fiber sections, 23) (Figure 4). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 8 are met.
PNG
media_image3.png
434
738
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5 (Brandley US 2022/0294058 A1)
Regarding Claim 10, Brandley further discloses that the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be formed from a core material which possessed open cells in a honeycomb structure (Figure 4, [0068, 0078]), as such the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be considered to be formed of a hollow structure. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 10 are met.
Regarding Claim 11, Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) formed inside the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) (Figures 4 and 5). Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) may include fastening parts (reinforcement plate, 50) located at both ends of the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26), wherein the fastening parts (reinforcement plate, 50) are in contact with an inner surface (inside surface of base section core material, 26) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) (Figures 5, and 7, [0080]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 11 are met.
Regarding Claim 12, Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) is located vertically (Figure 4).
The examiner notes that terms such as “vertically” as utilized in the claims do not convey any particular structural requirements other than establishing the location of the components of the battery pack relative to one another within the battery pack. The particular orientation of the battery pack does not provide any structural limitations to the battery pack itself. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 12 are met.
Regarding Claim 13, Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) is located horizontally (Figure 4).
The examiner notes that terms such as “horizontally” as utilized in the claims do not convey any particular structural requirements other than establishing the location of the components of the battery pack relative to one another within the battery pack. The particular orientation of the battery pack does not provide any structural limitations to the battery pack itself. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 12 are met.
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brandley et al. (US 2022/0294058 A1) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 07/12/2024), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Guo et al. (US 2022/0255172 A1).
In Regards to Claim 9 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Brandley discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above. Brandley further discloses that the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) comprises a bottom surface (battery retaining area, 24) on which the plurality of battery modules are mounted (batteries, 30) (Figure 4, [0077]). Brandley further discloses side surface frames (outer cross members, 21, and monolithic fiber sections, 23) along each edge of the bottom surface (battery retaining area, 24) of the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20), and an inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4) that partitions an interior of the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) (Figure 4, [0077]). Brandley further discloses that the inner beam (left-side inner cross member, 22, see Figure 4), which comprises the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26), may be formed individually and assembled to the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) (Figure 4, [0067]).
Brandley is deficient in disclosing that the rigid beam is weld-coupled with at least one of the side surface frames and the inner beam.
Guo discloses a battery pack comprising a lower pack frame (lower box body, 100) and a rigid beam (stiffening beam, 3) (Figure 1, [0074]). Guo further discloses that the lower pack frame (lower box body, 100) includes a side surface frame (box frame, 1) around the perimeter of the lower pack frame (lower box body, 100) (Figure 1, [0066]). Guo further discloses that the rigid beam (stiffening beam, 3) is weld-coupled to the side surface frame (box frame, 1) to ensure a strong bond (Figure 1, [0069]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to attach the inner beam (and thus the rigid beam) to the lower pack frame by welding the inner beam to the side surface frame, as such an attachment configuration is known in the art as suitable and reliable for coupling a beam to a side surface frame in a lower pack frame, as taught by Guo. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon making the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 9 are met.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that Brandley et al. (US 2022/0294058 A1) fails to teach all of the limitations of amended Claim 1. Particularly, the Applicant argues that Brandley fails to teach that the rigid beam is formed of a first material and at least one reinforcing member including a viscous damper or viscoelastic damper formed of a second material different than the first material, the at least one reinforcing member extending from a first side surface of the rigid beam to an opposite second side surface of the rigid beam.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Brandley discloses a battery pack (composite battery enclosure, 40) comprising: a lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) on which a plurality of battery modules (batteries, 30) are mounted and an upper pack frame (top composite cover, 10) located on an upper part of the plurality of battery modules (batteries, 30) (Figure 1, [0059-0060]). Brandley further discloses a rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) included in the lower pack frame (bottom composite cover, 20) (Figures 4 and 5, [0066, 0078]). Brandley further discloses that the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) comprises an additional core material section (27) and at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) (Figures 4 and 5, [0078]). Brandley further discloses that the additional core material section (27) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be formed of a first material which may be a different material than the second material (core material) forming the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) (Figures 4 and 5, [0066]). Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be formed from a second material (core material) which may be a viscoelastic material which has energy absorption properties (Figures 4 and 5, [0066, 0068, 0078]), thus the reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) may be considered to include a viscoelastic damper. Brandley further discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) extends from a first side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) to an opposite side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) (Figure 5). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
321
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5 (Brandley US 2022/0294058 A1)
The Applicant specifically argues that in Brandley, the base section core material (26) does not extend from a first side surface of the additional core material (27) to a second side surface of the additional core material (27). The Applicant argues that as fiber layer (28) covers the side surfaces of the base core material (26) and the additional core material (27), the fiber layer (28) prevents the base core material (26) from extending from a first side surface of the additional core material (27) to a second side surface of the additional core material (27).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As detailed above, Brandley discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) extends from a first side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) to an opposite side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) (Figure 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
321
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5 (Brandley US 2022/0294058 A1)
The examiner notes that the rejection of Claim 1 detailed above considers the rigid beam to be formed of the additional core material (27) and base section core material (26). The rejection of Claim 1 in view of Brandley does not rely on the fiber layer (28). The examiner further notes that the instant claims neither require nor prohibit the presence of the fiber layer (28). As the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) of Brandley comprises only the additional core material (27) and base section core material (26), the skilled artisan would appreciate from looking at Figure 5 above that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) extends from a first side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) to an opposite side surface (see annotated Figure 5 below) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26).
The Applicant further argues that the fiber layer (28) in Brandley serves to reinforce stiffness of the material and reduce manufacturing costs, and thus is functionally distinct from Claim 1 as the fiber layer (28) of Brandley is not analogous to the viscoelastic material of the instant claims.
As detailed above, the rejection of Claim 1 in view of Brandley does not rely on the fiber layer (28). The examiner notes that the fiber layer (28) of Brandley is not relied upon to teach a viscoelastic material. Brandley discloses that the at least one reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) of the rigid beam (additional core material, 27, and base section core material, 26) may be formed from a second material (core material) which may be a viscoelastic material which has energy absorption properties (Figures 4 and 5, [0066, 0068, 0078]), thus the reinforcing member (base section core material, 26) may be considered to include a viscoelastic damper.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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.
/E.E.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/STEWART A FRASER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights