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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/16/2026 has been entered.
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) 1-2, 5, 7-8, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2021/0028517, previously made of record).
Regarding claim 1, Choi teaches an elastic pad (buffer pad, 0066) with a synthetic resin film (blocking member, 0017, which can be made of any material having ductility, 0015, for example, a gel-type heat insulating material on a film, 0020, or a rubber material with expandable graphite, 0021, both of which can be considered a synthetic resin and be in the form of a film), which together can be called a compression pad, and which is on the outside of a cell stack for use in a battery module (0009). The synthetic resin film (80 in figure 7) extends beyond the elastic pad and bends to cover a top portion of the cell stack. Choi further teaches that there are multiple instances of a buffer pad (elastic pad) and a blocking member (synthetic resin film). While Choi exemplifies that the blocking member is one connected piece, it can be said that the different instances of the buffer pad with the blocking member can be considered separate in the same way as a pair of pants and therefore meets the limitation of the claim as the separate portions can be considered a pair and are present on the outside of the stack and have the blocking member folding over and towards the middle of the top portion of the adjacent cell (fig. 7 shows the zigzag blocking member, 80, with the buffer pads, 5, on the outside). The length extension portion is the portion folded over the top of the first and last cells respectively. As it has already been established that the buffer pads are separate, the synthetic resin film of a first buffer pad is spaced apart from the synthetic resin film of a second compression pad by the stack of battery cells. The synthetic resin film of the buffer pad specifically is labelled separately from the synthetic resin film in general.
PNG
media_image1.png
300
417
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and further teaches that the cells are pouch-type cells (0041) and have a sealing portion (0052) which is covered by the folding over portion of the synthetic resin film on each side (2022 in fig. 7)
Regarding claim 5, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and further teaches that the separate portions do not overlap (fig. 7 shows that the first and second bend of the blocking member, 80, on the left side of the cell stack does not touch the first and second bend of the blocking member on the right side of the cell stack).
Regarding claim 7, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and further teaches that the frame for the module is sufficiently U shaped and has an open top (50 in fig. 2) alongside a top plate. (40 in fig. 2), where the bottom surface of the cell stack is mounted to the bottom of the U-shaped frame via a heat transfer member (0086, 0093, and fig. 2 shows the U shape)
Regarding claim 8, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 7 as described above and further teaches that there is a vertical distance of at least of the thickness of the synthetic resin film plus the thickness of the heat transfer member (fig. 4 shows the gap).
Regarding claim 11, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and further teaches that there are additional compression pads are between multiple cells in the stack (0017, and fig. 4 shows the pads between each cell).
Regarding claim 12, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 11 as described above and further teaches that the compression pads can be between predetermined cell groups instead of between each cell (fig. 9 shows the compression pads between each group of 3 cells).
Regarding claim 13, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but does not explicitly teach a battery pack using the module. However, a battery pack is essentially a plurality of battery modules and duplicity is obvious and known in the art, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claim 14, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but does not explicitly say what the purpose of inventive battery module is. Choi does explain, however, that, in general, secondary batteries can be used in hybrid vehicles. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the battery module which contains secondary battery cells would be capable of use in a vehicle.
Claim(s) 3, 6, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Rhee et al. (US 20220069377 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 and further teaches that the buffer pad can be polyurethane foam (0066). Choi does not teach that the blocking member is specifically PET.
Rhee teaches that there is a pad layer that prevents swelling (0065) which is attached to a rigid mechanical layer that can be PET (0053). Rhee further has an additional mica sheet on either side of the pad/rigid layer stack with the whole composite being called a thermal barrier (0013, 0065, fig. 4(b), heat resistance layer of mica, 32, on both sides of the rigid mechanical layer, 34, and pad layer, 35) and is allowed by the claim language due to the use of “comprising” in claim 1.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to take the battery module of choi and replace the blocking member and buffer pad with the thermal barrier of Rhee so as to prevent thermal runaway in one cell from cascading to another cell, while still keeping the extension portion of the rigid mechanical layer made of PET which can connect continuously to the next thermal barrier later down the cell stack and further separate cells from each other.
Regarding claim 6, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but does not teach the buffer pad on the inner portion of the blocking member.
Rhee teaches that there is a pad layer that prevents swelling which is attached to a rigid mechanical layer and further has an additional mica sheet on either side of the pad/rigid layer stack with the whole composite being called a thermal barrier (0013, 0065, fig. 4(b), heat resistance layer of mica, 32, on both sides of the rigid mechanical layer, 34, and pad layer, 35) and is allowed by the claim language due to the use of “comprising” in claim 1. In this case, as the pad layer is on both sides of the rigid mechanical layer it would meet the limitation of the claim as is any scenario where the thermal barrier is attached there would be a buffer portion on the inner part of the cell stack in reference to the rigid mechanical layer.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to take the battery module of choi and replace the blocking member and buffer pad with the thermal barrier of Rhee so as to prevent thermal runaway in one cell from cascading to another cell, while still keeping the extension portion of the rigid mechanical layer which can connect continuously to the next thermal barrier later down the cell stack and further separate cells from each other.
Regarding claim 9, Choi teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but does not teach an adhesive to attach the buffer pad and blocking member to the battery stack.
Rhee effectively teaches that all portions of the thermal barrier can have an adhesive which connects the parts together including the outermost portion of the thermal barrier which is in contact with the cell stack (0059). While Rhee has an extra mica layer on the outside of the pad layer preventing direct contact with cell stack, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the mica layer provides substantial utility in preventing a thermal runaway cascading to other cells (0070), and if the layer were to be removed for some reason the adhesive on the pad would still be capable of attaching to the battery stack directly as the adhesive used is the same throughout the thermal barrier.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to take the battery module of choi and replace the blocking member and buffer pad with the thermal barrier Rhee, which is attached by an adhesive, so as to prevent thermal runaway in one cell from cascading to another cell, while still keeping the extension portion of the rigid mechanical layer which can connect continuously to the next thermal barrier later down the cell stack and further separate cells from each other. Alongside this, since Rhee teaches that the adhesive can be on the rigid mechanical layer, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to further connect the extension portion of the rigid mechanical layer to the top of the cell via the same adhesive as doing so helps prevent relative flow between cells (Rhee, 0059).
Regarding claim 10, Choi in view of Rhee teaches the battery module of claim 9 as described above and Rhee further teaches that the adhesive can be placed as a band, strip or layer (fig. 4(a), an example of the adhesive, 33, can be seen placed along a longitudinal direction and can be reasonably considered a band).
In the event that applicant disagrees with the interpretation above, an alternative rejection for claims 1-3 and 5-14 is provided below.
In the alternative, claims 1-2, 5, 7-8, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2021/0028517) in view of Secondary Reference Ryu et al. (US 20200099114 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Choi teaches an elastic pad (buffer pad, 0066) with a synthetic resin film (blocking member, 0017, which can be made of any material having ductility, 0015, for example, a gel-type heat insulating material on a film, 0020, or a rubber material with expandable graphite, 0021, both of which can be considered a synthetic resin and be in the form of a film), which together can be called a compression pad, and which is on the outside of a cell stack for use in a battery module (0009). The synthetic resin film (80 in figure 7) extends beyond the elastic pad and bends to cover a top portion of the cell stack. Choi further teaches that there are multiple instances of a buffer pad (elastic pad) with a blocking member (synthetic resin film) present adjacent to them. The length extension portion is the portion folded over the top of the first and last cells respectively. Choi teaches that the blocking member serves to the propagation of flame or heat between cells (10) (¶ 0070) while the buffer pad (5) attached to the blocking member provides for compression and deformation when a battery cell expands (¶ 0066).
In a similar field of endeavor as applicant of stacked batteries within a housing, Ryu teaches a similar battery module to both Choi and the instant application in which a plurality of battery cells are within a housing (Fig. 1) and teaches a blocking film or flame spread prevention member (200) that functions similar to the blocking member of Choi by preventing the spread of flame (¶ 0036). Ryu teaches that a variety of configurations for the blocking or flame spreading member are feasible including individually covering the entire surface of a cell (Fig. 1) or only covering a portion of a battery cell (Fig. 4, ¶ 0041-0044) in which the flame spreading member can be either in contact or spaced apart from the cells (¶ 0044). In Ryu there is a clear teaching of utilizing individual flame spread prevention or blocking members that are discrete separable elements rather than a continuous blocking member disclosed in Choi along with demonstrating that one of ordinary skill can adjust the degree of coverage or contact with the cell and achieve a predictable result of flame spread prevention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the elastic pad with the synthetic resin film as taught by Choi and utilize discrete “L” shaped blocking members for at least the two end blocking members in place of a continuous serpentine blocking member as simply substitute the continuous serpentine synthetic resin film that is used for blocking flame propagation with the individual blocking film for each cell as shown in Ryu as a simple matter of substituting an equivalent known in the art with another for the same purpose with predictable results, See MPEP 2144.06.II. Further, there is a prima facie case of obviousness for simply making separable as discussed in MPEP 2144.04.V.C. In this case it would be obvious to make the serpentine blocking member be in separate parts as shown in Ryu as doing so allows for greater ease of replacement of a single battery cell in the case of a fire on one side of the battery module and not the other.
With the blocking member no longer being a continuous serpentine member in view of modified Choi, the compression pads can be called a pair of compression pads as they are completely separate from each other on opposite ends of the battery module in an “L” shape that necessarily includes folding over the end of the battery towards the middle.
Regarding claim 2, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and Choi further teaches that the cells are pouch-type cells (0041) and have a sealing portion (0052) which is covered by the folding over portion of the synthetic resin film on each side (2022 in fig. 7).
Regarding claim 5, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and Ryu further teaches that the separate portions do not overlap (Ryu fig. 1, the leftmost cell with its compression pad is completely separate from the rightmost cell with its own compression pad).
Regarding claim 7, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and Choi further teaches that the frame for the module is sufficiently U shaped and has an open top (50 in fig. 2) alongside a top plate. (40 in fig. 2), where the bottom surface of the cell stack is mounted to the bottom of the U-shaped frame via a heat transfer member (0086, 0093, and fig. 2 shows the U shape)
Regarding claim 8, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 7 as described above and Choi further teaches that there is a vertical distance of at least of the thickness of the synthetic resin film plus the thickness of the heat transfer member (fig. 4 shows the gap).
Regarding claim 11, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above and Choi further teaches that there are additional compression pads between multiple cells in the stack (0017, and fig. 4 shows the pads between each cell).
Regarding claim 12, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 11 as described above and Choi further teaches that the compression pads can be between predetermined cell groups instead of between each cell (fig. 9 shows the compression pads between each group of 3 cells).
Regarding claim 13, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but Choi does not explicitly teach a battery pack using the module. However, a battery pack is essentially a plurality of battery modules and duplicity is obvious and known in the art, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claim 14, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but Choi does not explicitly say what the purpose of inventive battery module is. Choi does explain, however, that, in general, secondary batteries can be used in hybrid vehicles. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the battery module which contains secondary battery cells would be capable of use in a vehicle.
In the alternative, Claim(s) 3, 6, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Ryu and further in view of Rhee et al. (US 20220069377 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 and Choi further teaches that the buffer pad can be polyurethane foam (0066). Choi in view of Ryu is silent to the blocking member being specifically PET.
Rhee teaches that there is a pad layer that prevents swelling (0065) which is attached to a rigid mechanical layer that can be PET (0053). Rhee further has an additional mica sheet on either side of the pad/rigid layer stack with the whole composite being called a thermal barrier (0013, 0065, fig. 4(b), heat resistance layer of mica, 32, on both sides of the rigid mechanical layer, 34, and pad layer, 35) and is allowed by the claim language due to the use of “comprising” in claim 1.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to take the battery module of modified choi and replace the material of the blocking member with PET as taught by Rhee as a simple matter of substituting an equivalent known in the art with another for the same purpose with predictable results, See MPEP 2144.06.II.
Regarding claim 6, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but does not teach the buffer pad on the inner portion of the blocking member.
Rhee teaches that there is a pad layer that prevents swelling which is attached to a rigid mechanical layer and further has an additional mica sheet on either side of the pad/rigid layer stack with the whole composite being called a thermal barrier (0013, 0065, fig. 4(b), heat resistance layer of mica, 32, on both sides of the rigid mechanical layer, 34, and pad layer, 35) and is allowed by the claim language due to the use of “comprising” in claim 1. In this case, as the pad layer is on both sides of the rigid mechanical layer it would meet the limitation of the claim as is any scenario where the thermal barrier is attached there would be a buffer portion on the inner part of the cell stack in reference to the rigid mechanical layer.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to take the battery module of modified Choi and simply add an extra buffer pad on the other side of the blocking member as discussed in Rhee as doing so allows for more compressibility to prevent swelling. Further, simple duplication of parts is obvious and known in the art, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claim 9, Choi in view of Ryu teaches the battery module of claim 1 as described above regarding claim 1 but is silent to an adhesive to attach the buffer pad and blocking member to the battery stack.
Rhee effectively teaches that all portions of the thermal barrier can have an adhesive which connects the parts together including the outermost portion of the thermal barrier which is in contact with the cell stack (0059). While Rhee has an extra mica layer on the outside of the pad layer preventing direct contact with cell stack, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the mica layer provides substantial utility in preventing a thermal runaway cascading to other cells (0070), and if the layer were to be removed for some reason the adhesive on the pad would still be capable of attaching to the battery stack directly as the adhesive used is the same throughout the thermal barrier.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to take the battery module of modified choi and adhere the blocking member and buffer pad to the battery cell as desired in order to prevent the battery cell from falling out of the case and spreading a flame to adjacent cells.
Regarding claim 10, modified Choi teaches the battery module of claim 9 as described above and Rhee further teaches that the adhesive can be placed as a band, strip or layer (fig. 4(a), an example of the adhesive, 33, can be seen placed along a longitudinal direction and can be reasonably considered a band).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Choi does not teach a synthetic resin film of a first compression pad spaced apart from the synthetic resin film of a second compression pad, this argument is unpersuasive. As described above regarding claim 1, it has already been established that the buffer pads are separate and form a pair. In the same vein, the synthetic resin film of the buffer pad specifically is labelled separately from the synthetic resin film in general. the synthetic resin film of a first buffer pad is therefore spaced apart from the synthetic resin film of a second compression pad by the stack of battery cells making applicant’s argument unpersuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN ROBERT BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-0640. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 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, Galen Hauth can be reached at (571)270-5516. 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.
/SEAN R. BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights