DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the June 25th, 2026 arguments and remarks (“Remarks”).
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 .
Response to Amendments
In response to the amendments received in the Remarks on June 25th, 2026:
Claims 1-19 are pending in the current application. Claims 1-16 have been amended. Claims 7-13 stand withdrawn. Claims 18-19 are newly added.
The cores of the previous prior art-based rejections have been overcome in light of the amendment. All changes made to the rejection are as necessitated by the amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed with the Remarks on June 25th, 2026 with respect to claims 1-6 and 14-19 are based on the claims as amended. While Applicant’s arguments are acknowledged, they are found to be moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, presented below, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the Claims.
Prior Art
Previously cited Johnson US PG Publication 2011/0262785 (“Johnson”)
Zahn WO2013053441 (“Zahn”)
Previously cited Murata US PG Publication 2010/0178553 (“Murata”)
Previously cited Goldin US Patent 10,950,913 (“Goldin”)
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.
Claims 1-3, 14, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson US PG Publication 2011/0262785 in view of Zahn WO2013053441.
Regarding Claim 1, Johnson discloses a battery module (Abstract, entire disclosure dependent upon) comprising:
a battery cell stack in the form of a block in which a plurality of prismatic battery cells 10 are stacked in a first direction (Fig. 1, [0013], [0017]);
a container 60 (module frame) that houses the plurality of cells 10 within the battery cell stack (Fig. 1, [0013], [0017]); and
a damping element 40 (damper) that is coupled to an inside wall 32 of the end plate 30 of the module frame 60 (which meets the claim limitation of included in the module frame or located adjacent to the module frame) (Figs. 1A-1B, [0013]),
wherein the module frame 60 comprises an upper cover that wraps an upper surface of the battery cell stack and a bottom part that wraps a lower surface of the battery cell stack (Figs. 1 and 4, [0017]-[0020]), and
wherein the damper 40 exhibits viscoelastic properties (which meets the claim limitation of comprises a viscous damper or a viscoelastic damper) ([0020]).
Johnson fails to explicitly disclose wherein the damper has a structure extending along the first direction.
However, Zahn discloses a battery (Abstract, [0007], entire disclosure dependent upon) comprising: a plurality of battery cells are stacked in a first direction ([0006]-[0008]); a cell frame that houses the battery cells ([0008]); and at least one damping element included in the cell frame ([0015]).
Zahn teaches arranging the damping elements, which include a strip-shaped element, to run parallel along a length of the stack of plurality of battery cells within the base of the cell frame in order to better protect the plurality of battery cells against lateral loads and to hold the plurality of battery cells more securely (Fig. 1, [0015]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery module of Johnson such that the damper has a strip like structure extending along the first direction throughout the bottom part of the module frame and along an entire length of the battery cell stack in the first direction in order to protect the battery cell stack against lateral loads and to hold the battery cell stack more securely, as taught by Zahn.
Regarding Claim 2, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 1, and Johnson discloses wherein the damper 40 is provided inside the inside wall 32 of the end plate 30 of the module frame 60 (Fig. 1, [0013], [0017]).
Regarding Claim 3, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 2, and Johnson discloses wherein the first direction is parallel to the upper cover and bottom part (see Annotated Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
843
1182
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 4 of Johnson
Regarding Claim 14, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 1, and Johnson discloses wherein the damper 40 forms a side surface part of the module frame 60 with mount 80 and end plate 30 (Fig. 4, [0018]).
Regarding Claim 17, Johnson discloses a battery pack 100 comprising the battery module of Johnson in view of Zahn as described in the rejection of Claim 1 ([0013]-[0017]).
Regarding Claim 18, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 1, and Johnson discloses wherein the damper 40 is spaces from the battery cell stack in a second direction via a buffer material and, thereby, does not overlap or overlay the battery cell stack in the first direction (Fig. 1A, [0016]).
Regarding Claim 19, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 1, and (as previously described in the rejection of Claim 1) Johnson in view of Zahn describes wherein the damper extends an entire length of the battery cell stack in the first direction (Zahn Fig. 1, [0015]).
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murata US PG Publication 2010/0178553 in view of Zahn WO2013053441.
Regarding Claim 1, Murata discloses a battery unit 1 (battery module) (Abstract, [0039], entire disclosure dependent upon) comprising:
a bipolar type battery 2 (battery cell stack) in which a plurality of battery cells are stacked in a first direction (Fig. 2, [0039]);
a module frame (defined as the combination of at least battery case 3 and reinforcement member 4) that houses the battery cell stack 2 (Fig. 2, [0039]); and
an elastic member (damper) included in the module frame 3/4 (which meets the claim limitation of in the module frame or located adjacent to the module frame) ([0009]-[0012]),
wherein the module frame 3/4 comprises an upper wall portion 3c (upper cover) that warps an upper surface of the battery cell stack 2 and a lower wall portion 3d (bottom part) that wraps a lower surface of the battery cell stack 2 (Fig. 2, [0051]), and
wherein the damper comprises an elastic rubber damper (which meets the claim limitation of a viscous damper or a viscoelastic damper) ([0039]).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that an elastic rubber damper is a viscoelastic damper, as evidenced by Applicant’s own PG Publication paragraphs [0072]-[0074].
Murata fails to explicitly disclose wherein the damper has a structure extending along the first direction.
However, Zahn discloses a battery (Abstract, [0007], entire disclosure dependent upon) comprising: a plurality of battery cells are stacked in a first direction ([0006]-[0008]); a cell frame that houses the battery cells ([0008]); and at least one damping element included in the cell frame ([0015]).
Zahn teaches arranging the damping elements, which includes a strip-shaped element, to run parallel along a length of the stack of plurality of battery cells within the base of the cell frame in order to better protect the plurality of battery cells against lateral loads and to hold the plurality of battery cells more securely (Fig. 1, [0015]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery module of Murata such that the damper has a strip like structure extending along the first direction throughout the bottom part of the module frame and along an entire length of the battery cell stack in the first direction in order to protect the battery cell stack against lateral loads and to hold the battery cell stack more securely, as taught by Zahn.
Regarding Claim 2, Murata in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 1, and Murata discloses wherein the damper is provided inside the module frame 3/4 ([0009]-[0012], [0039]).
Regarding Claim 5, Murata in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 2, and Murata discloses wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the upper cover 3c and bottom part 3d (Annotated Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
791
1139
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2 of Murata
Regarding Claim 6, Murata in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 5, and Murata discloses wherein the damper is provided inside a side surface part side wall portion 3e of the module frame 3/4 (Fig. 2, Fig. 4, [0051]).
Regarding Claim 14, Murata in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 1, and Murata discloses wherein the damper forms a side wall portion 3e (side surface part) of the module frame 3/4 (Fig. 2, Fig. 4, [0009]-[0012], [0051]).
Regarding Claim 16, Murata in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 14, and Murata discloses wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the upper cover 3c and the bottom part 3d (Annotated Fig. 2), and
the damper forms the upper cover 3c and the side surface part 3e of the module frame 3/4 (Fig. 2, Fig. 4, [0009]-[0012], [0051]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson US PG Publication 2011/0262785 in view of Zahn WO2013053441, as applied to Claim 3, further in view of Goldin US Patent 10,950,913.
Regarding Claim 4, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 3.
Johnson in view of Zahn fails to disclose wherein the damper is provided inside the bottom part and inside the upper cover.
However, Goldin discloses a battery system comprising a plurality of battery cells (Abstract, entire disclosure dependent upon).
Goldin teaches installing a visco-elastic shock-absorbing member between an upper portion 114 and a lower portion 116 of each of the battery cells, in addition to a centrally located shock-absorbing member, to absorb or damper any shock and/or vibrational loading to the cells located within a cell housing 160 while also providing electrical insulation for the electrical contacts (Side 2 line 5-25, Side 6 lines 15-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery module of Johnson in view of Zahn such that a damper is provided in both the bottom part and the upper cover in addition to the centrally located damper inside the inside wall of the module frame, such that the damper can absorb or damper any shock and/or vibrational loading to the cells located within the cell housing while also providing electrical insulation for the electrical contacts, as taught by Goldin.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson US PG Publication 2011/0262785 in view of Zahn WO2013053441, as applied to Claim 14, further in view of Goldin US Patent 10,950,913.
Regarding Claim 15, Johnson in view of Zahn teaches the instantly claimed battery module according to Claim 14, and Johnson discloses wherein the first direction is parallel to the upper cover and the bottom part (Annotated Figure 4).
Johnson in view of Zahn fails to disclose wherein the damper forms the upper cover and the bottom part.
However, Goldin discloses a battery system comprising a plurality of battery cells (Abstract, entire disclosure dependent upon).
Goldin teaches installing a visco-elastic shock-absorbing member between an upper portion 114 and a lower portion 116 of each of the battery cells, in addition to a centrally located shock-absorbing member, to absorb or damper any shock and/or vibrational loading to the cells located within a cell housing 160 while also providing electrical insulation for the electrical contacts (Side 2 line 5-25, Side 6 lines 15-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery module of Johnson in view of Zahn such that a damper is provided in the module frame to form both the bottom part and the upper cover in addition to the centrally located damper inside the inside wall of the module frame, such that the damper can absorb or damper any shock and/or vibrational loading to the cells located within the cell housing while also providing electrical insulation for the electrical contacts, as taught by Goldin.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVIA MASON MELFI whose telephone number is (703)756-4652. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7am-6pm 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached on (571)272-1481. 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.
/O.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights