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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 4, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends that Kong does not allow for a space between the faces of the first and second plates. However, as seen in Fig. 10, the beam insert groove is a space between the faces adjacent to the coupling means.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pucher et al. (WO 2019/198952 A1, with reference to US 2021/0013565 A1 as a direct English translation) in view of Kong et al. (US 2020/0287182 A1) and Burrows et al. (US 2019/0143836 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pucher teaches a battery module comprising first and second plates (lateral sidewalls 52) around stacked battery cells (Pucher Fig. 1 and [0065]-[0066]) to be arrayed horizontally (Pucher Fig. 9).
Pucher does not teach that the end plates are slidably coupled. Kong teaches that slidably coupled side plates for battery modules maximizes space utilization (Kong [0074]-[0075]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add the slidable couplings of Kong to the sidewalls of Pucher to maximize space utilization.
The slidable couplings of Kong include beam insert grooves 150 (Kong [0051] and Fig. 10), which are spaces between first and second faces adjacent to the coupling means (protrusion 122 and groove 126).
Pucher does not teach first and second end plates at the end of the battery module array. Pucher teaches that such batteries are typically contained by side walls attached to the base plate (Pucher [0005]). Burrows teaches that slidably connected battery modules may be fixed to the side walls of the battery by the same slidable connections (Burrows Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use any conventional configuration, including slidably connecting the battery modules to side walls of the battery, to attach the modules to their housing.
Slidably connecting adjacent battery modules of modified Pucher would form intermediate beams, and slidably connecting the end modules to the battery side walls would form first and second end beams, with the coupling means preventing displacement other than in the sliding direction.
Regarding claim 2, each plate of modified Pucher includes a first guide rail (T-shaped protrusion) and second guide rails (defining the T-shaped groove) that engage with each other (Kong Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
374
340
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, the first and second guide rails comprise a bulge and a complimentary cavity, with the connecting part of the bulge passing through the opening of the cavity (Kong Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 6, the first sides of the plates are configured to support the lateral sides of the battery cell stacks (Pucher Fig. 1 and [0065]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 7, the side walls of Pucher can be seen to have flanges that would support the lower sides of prismatic batteries (Pucher Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, each of the plates is rectangular (Pucher Fig. 1 and Kong Fig. 4) and therefore trapezoidal.
Regarding claim 9, modified Pucher does not teach that the end plates are configured to be mounted to an external structure. Pucher teaches that the battery is intended for use in an electric vehicle (Pucher [0046]). The battery must necessarily be fixed to the vehicle, and there are only 6 sides to a prismatic battery. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to configure any of those sides, including the side wall plates, to be mounted to the external structure (i.e. the vehicle).
Regarding claim 11, the frame of modified Pucher is part of a battery pack (Pucher [0047] and Kong Abstract), and the stacks of cells will necessarily be mounted between corresponding pairs of adjacent beams.
Regarding claim 13, Pucher teaches that the battery is intended for use in an electric vehicle (Pucher [0046]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pucher in view of Kong and Burrows as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Leigh ("Leigh Joinery Gallery," August 2020 snapshot, retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20200807180443/https://www.leightools.com/gallery/).
Regarding claim 4, modified Pucher does not teach the use of a dovetail joint. However, dovetail joints and T-shaped joints such as those used by Kong are both known methods for slidably joining panels (Leigh p. 1). T-shaped joints and dovetail joints are therefore art-recognized equivalents for the same purpose, and substituting equivalents known for the same purpose is prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.06 II). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use any conventional sliding joint, including dovetail joints, for the slidable coupling of modified Pucher.
Claim(s) 5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pucher in view of Kong and Burrows as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2016/0315366 A1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Pucher does not teach the use of cooling channels on the surfaces of the plates. Wang teaches that hollow side plates for stacks of batteries can be adapted to form cooling channels (Wang Figs. 4 and 5) to provide a more uniform temperature distribution across the array of cells (Wang [0033]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to adapt the hollows of modified Pucher as coolant channels as taught by Wang to provide a more uniform temperature distribution.
Regarding claim 10, modified Pucher does not teach bars at the front or rear of the frame attached to the beams at their ends. Wang teaches that hollow side plates for stacks of batteries can be adapted to form cooling channels (Wang Figs. 4 and 5) to provide a more uniform temperature distribution across the array of cells (Wang [0033]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to adapt the hollows of modified Pucher as coolant channels as taught by Wang to provide a more uniform temperature distribution. The ends of the channels must necessarily be connected (i.e. mechanically connected) to an air circulation system (Wang [0026]) (i.e. a coolant system), and the coolant systems of modified Pucher include bars (ducts) across the ends of the frame (Pucher Fig. 9 and Burrows Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pucher in view of Kong and Burrows as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shen et al. (US 2019/0161123 A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Pucher does not teach any particular means of attaching the battery cells to the walls. Shen teaches that components of vehicle systems may be fixed to one another by conventional means including gluing (Shen [0052]) (i.e. applying layers of adhesive). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any conventional means for fixing the battery cells to the walls, including applying layers of adhesive.
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 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 JAMES A CORNO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0745. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/J.A.C/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights