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 .
Claim Status
This Office action is responsive to amendments and remarks filed on 1/9/2026.
Claims 1 and 18 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Amendment
In light of the amendment the objection to the drawings is withdrawn.
In light of the amendment the rejection to claims 1-11, and 13-20 under 35 USC §112(b) is withdrawn. However, claims 1-20 are rejected on new grounds under §112(a) explained in detail below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the second paragraph of page 12, filed 1/9/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 12 under USC §112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 12 under §112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejection of the claims under USC §102(a)(1) filed 1/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended the claim to redefine M as greater than 1. While this has overcome the rejection of record a new grounds of rejection under §102 using the same prior art under a different broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) has been explained in detail below. The office would like to note that the MP arrangement of storage cells in parallel and series is anticipated by the prior art when HARRIS [0126] discloses that “any suitable arrangement may be implemented, … as desired, in order to achieve desired current and voltage levels in [an] electrical system.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claim . Claims 2-20 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
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, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20200343516 A1, HARRIS et al. provided in the IDS dated 12/14/2022.
Regarding claim 1. HARRIS [0002] discloses an energy store which is referred to as a battery interconnect system for storing electrical energy; the energy store comprising:
[0084] storage cells, referred to as a plurality of cells which are arranged in R rows and Q columns in annotated figure 2B depicted below, wherein
the energy store is divided into Q/N sub-stores which have the storage cells in R rows (R=12) and N columns (where N=5);
Q/N (where Q/N=5) sub-contacting systems for the corresponding Q/N sub-stores, wherein
HARRIS [0126] anticipates multiple arrangements where there is a 1:1 correspondence between the Q/N sub-contacting systems and the Q/N sub-stores, when it is disclosed that “any suitable arrangement may be implemented, … as desired, in order to achieve desired current and voltage levels in electrical system.”
HARRIS further discloses this in the annotated figure depicted below.
See MPEP 2131.02 I. "A generic claim cannot be allowed to an applicant if the prior art discloses a species falling within the claimed genus." The species in that case will anticipate the genus. In re Slayter, 276 F.2d 408, 411, 125 USPQ 345, 347 (CCPA 1960); In re Gosteli, 872 F.2d 1008, 10 USPQ2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 1989)
[0126] a sub-contacting system for a respective sub-store is configured to interconnect the storage cells of the respective sub-store in accordance with an MP arrangement, called a group or groups of parallel cells (211) in which storage cells of sub-groups, , are interconnected in parallel to one another; and
[0126] each sub-group has exactly M storage cells where “any suitable arrangement may be implemented, for example “5s, 60p”, “20s, 20p”, “10s, 40p”, and/or the like, as desired, in order to achieve desired current and voltage levels in electrical system” wherein M are all greater than 1; and
Q/N-1 (where Q/N-1 = 4 from above) connection elements, via which the Q/N sub-stores are interconnected in series; wherein
each of R, Q, N, Q/N, and M is a positive integer.
PNG
media_image1.png
706
1041
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
984
936
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1.
HARRIS discloses in the annotated figure depicted above wherein:
the Q/N sub-stores each have R*N-T storage cells when Q=25, N=5 R=12;
0≤T<N; and when T=0
((R*N)-T)/M is an integer, in this case ((12*5)-1)/1=59
Regarding claim 20. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1.
Wherein in the annotated figure depicted in the rejection of claim 1 above:
the storage cells are each circular-cylindrical;
the storage cells are round cells, which is synonymous with cylindrical;
the storage cells are arranged in a honeycomb pattern in the R rows and the Q columns clearly depicted in the annotated figure above.
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 2-13, 16-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200343516 A1, HARRIS et al. provided in the IDS dated 12/14/2022.
Regarding claim 2. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1, wherein:
the energy store is configured to provide a plurality of different MP arrangements of the storage cells of the Q/N sub-stores for a corresponding plurality of different values of M with constant values of Q and N by adapting the Q/N sub-contacting systems for the corresponding Q/N sub-stores; and
HARRIS does not explicitly disclose the plurality of different values of M comprises 3, 4, 5 and/or 6.
HARRIS [0105] discloses groups of parallel cells.
While HARRIS fails to teach that said cells can be connected in parallel, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would understand that said cells could be connected in series or in parallel in order to obtain the desired power from said energy store. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the cells could be electrically connected in series in order to obtain increased voltage, while the cells could be electrically connected in parallel in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have battery cells in parallel to each other in an array or configuration disclosed by HARRIS in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
Regarding claim 3. HARRIS discloses in the annotated figure above the energy store according to claim 2, wherein
HARRIS discloses values of R=12, Q=25 and N=5,
HARRIS does not explicitly disclose that solely by adapting the Q/N sub-contacting systems for the corresponding Q/N sub-stores, the plurality of different MP arrangements of the storage cells of the Q/N sub-stores is provided for the corresponding plurality of different values of M,
However, through routine experimentation it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have battery cells in parallel to each other in an array or configuration disclosed by HARRIS in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
Regarding claim 4. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 2.
HARRIS does not disclose each of the plurality of different values of M all comprises an integer 1 ≤ M ≤ 2*N.
While HARRIS fails to teach that said cells can be connected in parallel, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would understand that said cells could be connected in series or in parallel in order to obtain the desired power from said energy store. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the cells could be electrically connected in series in order to obtain increased voltage, while the cells could be electrically connected in parallel in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have battery cells in parallel to each other in an array or configuration disclosed by HARRIS in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
Regarding claim 5. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1.
HARRIS does not explicitly disclose, wherein:
Q = 24;
N = 3;
R ≥ 10; and
1 ≥ M ≥ 6.
The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have rearranged the battery cells in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
Regarding claim 6. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1.
HARRIS does not explicitly disclose wherein:
the Q/N sub-stores are arranged next to one another along a transverse axis so that a first sub-store is arranged on a first longitudinal edge and a Q/Nth sub-store is arranged on an opposite second longitudinal edge of the energy store;
the R rows of storage cells are arranged along a longitudinal axis between a first transverse edge and a second transverse edge of the energy store; and
the Q/N sub-stores are interconnected in series such that:
the one or more connection elements for interconnecting an odd sub-store to a directly subsequent sub-store are arranged on the second transverse edge; and
the one or more connection elements for interconnecting an even sub-store to a directly subsequent odd sub-store are arranged on the first transverse edge.
The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have rearranged the battery cells in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings.
Regarding claims 7, 8 and 19. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 6.
HARRIS [0004] discloses, wherein:
the energy store has a first terminal and a second terminal;
HARRIS does not explicitly disclose
the energy store is configured to provide a nominal voltage of 800 V or more between the first terminal and the second terminal;
or wherein N and/or Q/N are such that a differential voltage between any storage cells from any two directly adjacent sub-stores does not exceed a predefined maximum voltage of 220 V as pertains to claim 19.
Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, F.).
HARRIS [abstract] discloses battery pack for use in electric vehicles. It is well known in the art and within the gambit for one of ordinary skill to use a battery pack providing a nominal voltage of 800 V or more or where wherein N and/or Q/N are such that a differential voltage between any storage cells from any two directly adjacent sub-stores does not exceed a predefined maximum voltage of 220 V as pertains to claim 19.
HARRIS does not explicitly disclose
the first terminal is arranged on the first transverse edge of the first sub-store; and
the second terminal is arranged on the first transverse edge of the Q/Nth sub-store.
However, mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have rearranged the battery cells in order to obtain higher ampere-hour ratings and to have performed routine experimentation in order to achieve the proper voltage which is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 9. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 6.
HARRIS [0111] discloses in the annotated figure 4C depicted below, wherein the Q/N sub-stores are interconnected in series such that:
a discharge current flows into one or more odd sub-stores in a first longitudinal direction from the first transverse edge to the second transverse edge; and
the discharge current flows into one or more even sub-stores of the discharge current in an opposite, second longitudinal direction from the second transverse edge to the first transverse edge.
PNG
media_image3.png
600
844
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1.
HARRIS [0111] discloses in the annotated figure 4C depicted below, wherein:
the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store has a plurality of connection arrangements of different design for interconnection of a corresponding plurality of different sub-groups, each with M storage cells;
spatial arrangements of the M storage cells relative to one another in the different sub- groups differ from one another; and
the connection arrangements of different design are each configured to provide an MP arrangement of the M storage cells of a respective sub-group.
PNG
media_image4.png
741
843
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 10 in the annotated figure 4C depicted above, wherein:
the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store (120) has a specific number of connection arrangements along the longitudinal axis (left to right); and
the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store has the connection arrangements of like design with a constant repetition rate along the longitudinal axis.
Regarding claim 12. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 11.
HARRIS discloses in annotated figures 11B-11D depicted below, wherein:
the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store has k connection arrangements of different design;
PNG
media_image5.png
631
735
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 11G depicted below discloses each (k+1)th connection arrangement along the longitudinal axis is of like design; and k=3 or k=4.
PNG
media_image6.png
574
708
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1, wherein HARRIS discloses the annotated figures 12a and 12B depicted below:
the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store has first cell connectors and second cell connectors;
PNG
media_image7.png
1150
876
media_image7.png
Greyscale
each of the cell connectors is configured to connect a first contact point of a first storage cell from a first sub-group, with M storage cells, of the sub-store electrically conductively to a second contact point of a second storage cell from a second sub-group, with M storage cells, of the sub-store;
[0149] the first contact point and the second contact point have different electrical polarities; and
the second sub-group follows the first sub-group directly along a longitudinal axis of the energy store (top to bottom in figure).
Regarding claim 13. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 1, wherein HARRIS discloses the in annotated figure 12C depicted below:
the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store has first cell connectors and second cell connectors;
each of the cell connectors is configured to connect a first contact point of a first storage cell from a first sub-group, with M storage cells, of the sub-store electrically conductively to a second contact point of a second storage cell from a second sub-group, with M storage cells, of the sub-store;
[0115] the first contact point (positive163) and [0116] the second contact point (negative 153) have different electrical polarities; and
the second sub-group follows the first sub-group directly along a longitudinal axis of the energy store.
PNG
media_image8.png
1140
813
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 13 in the first rejection above.
HARRIS further discloses the annotated figures 12a and 12B depicted above wherein:
all first cell connectors of the energy store are of like design;
all second cell connectors of the energy store are of like design.
Regarding claim 17. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to claim 13 in the second rejection of claim 13 above, wherein:
Annotated figure 12C depicted below shows the sub-contacting system for the respective sub-store has a plurality of connection arrangements of different design for interconnection of a corresponding plurality of different sub-groups, each with M storage cells;
spatial arrangements of the M storage cells relative to one another in the different sub-groups differ from one another;
PNG
media_image9.png
149
589
media_image9.png
Greyscale
annotated figure 14A depicted below shows the connection arrangements of different design are each configured to provide an MP arrangement of the M storage cells of a respective sub-group; and
PNG
media_image10.png
308
616
media_image10.png
Greyscale
the figure above shows the connection arrangements each comprise one or more first cell connectors and one or more second cell connectors, which are electrically conductively connected to one another.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200343516 A1, HARRIS et al. provided in the IDS dated 12/14/2022 as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of US 20110223776 A1, FERBER also provided in the IDS dated 12/14/2022.
Regarding claim 14. HARRIS discloses the energy store according to the second rejection of claim 13 above
HARRIS does not disclose, wherein:
the first cell connectors are each configured to connect two storage cells electrically conductively to one another and to skip one further storage cell arranged between the two storage cells; and
the second cell connectors are each configured to connect two storage cells arranged directly next to one another electrically conductively to one another.
FERBER [title] discloses A Modular Interconnection System where,
in annotated figure 10 depicted below
the first cell connectors are each configured to connect two storage cells electrically conductively to one another and to skip one further storage cell arranged between the two storage cells; and
the second cell connectors are each configured to connect two storage cells arranged directly next to one another electrically conductively to one another.
FERBER [0029] also discloses “the releasable modular interconnect can be utilized in environments that experience vibrations, such as, for example, being affixed to a moving vehicle or bike. Further, in some environments the releasable modular interconnect, the electrical connections, and the power cells may be subjected to thermal cycling, for example in the context of a photovoltaic energy system, which can have further effects on the quality of the components and electrical connections. Because, according to some example embodiments, the connections between the releasable contacts of the releasable modular interconnect are permitted to move slightly while maintaining an electrical connection, fatigue on the releasable contacts is reduced or eliminated, relative to a fixed, for example tack welded, connection. Fatigue can cause degradation in the quality of a fixed connection, and result in reduced power transfer efficiency.”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the interconnecting modular connectors disclosed by FEBER in the array disclosed by HARRIS in order to reduce fatigue.
PNG
media_image11.png
824
791
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15. HARRIS modified by FERBER discloses the energy store according to claim 14 in the rejection above, wherein: the annotated figure depicted below discloses
the first cell connectors each have a straight form along the longitudinal axis of the energy store; and/or
the second cell connectors each have an L-shape.
PNG
media_image12.png
246
800
media_image12.png
Greyscale
FERBER [0029] also discloses “the releasable modular interconnect can be utilized in environments that experience vibrations, such as, for example, being affixed to a moving vehicle or bike. Further, in some environments the releasable modular interconnect, the electrical connections, and the power cells may be subjected to thermal cycling, for example in the context of a photovoltaic energy system, which can have further effects on the quality of the components and electrical connections. Because, according to some example embodiments, the connections between the releasable contacts of the releasable modular interconnect are permitted to move slightly while maintaining an electrical connection, fatigue on the releasable contacts is reduced or eliminated, relative to a fixed, for example tack welded, connection. Fatigue can cause degradation in the quality of a fixed connection, and result in reduced power transfer efficiency.”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the interconnecting modular connectors disclosed by FEBER in the array disclosed by HARRIS in order to reduce fatigue.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20190296311 A1, CAMPELL et al. where A Battery Cell for Electric Vehicle Battery Pack is disclosed.
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 LAWRENCE LA RAIA III whose telephone number is (703)756-5441. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 6:00am-4:00pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571) 272-1330. 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.
LAWRENCE LA RAIA III
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights