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 .
Response to Amendment
In the Applicant’s response dated November 24, 2025, Claims 1-2, 12-13, and 16 are amended. Claims 8-11 are canceled. Claims 18-21 are added. Claims 1-7 and 12-21 are pending and examined.
Status of Application
In light of Applicant’s amendment to the specification, the drawing objection in the Office Action dated August 28, 2025 is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendment to claim 16 is sufficient to overcome the claim objection in the recited Office Action. The rejections/objections of claims 1-7 and 12-21 are modified as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 12-13, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al [CN115117564A, machine translation relied upon provided], hereinafter Chen.
Regarding Claim 1, Chen discloses a battery comprising [See MPEP 2111.02 II, preamble statements reciting purpose or intended use, Though Chen does not explicitly teach a traction battery, the skilled artisan would know that Chen’s battery could be used in a traction application.]:
a stack of battery cells [Chen 0048 and throughout, Figs. 1-7, wherein each of the battery cells includes a terminal having a projecting portion extending from a body of the battery cell and a flat receding portion disposed on a distal end of the projecting portion such that the receding portion forms a first acute angle with the projecting portion [Chen Figs. 2-4, see annotated Fig. 2 below]; and
a busbar including a base and a plurality of flat connecting portions extending at a second acute angle from the base [Chen 0041 and throughout, Figs. 2-4, busbar 31-33, see annotated Fig. 3 below];
wherein each flat receding portion is welded to a corresponding flat connecting portion [Chen 0067-0068 and throughout].
PNG
media_image1.png
641
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
639
507
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Chen discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the busbar further includes a plurality of stiffeners each connected to a distal end of one of the connecting portions and extending from the connecting portion toward the base [Chen 0050 and throughout, Figs. 2-4, the flat portions of 32 adjacent to busbar 31 reads on the claimed stiffeners and configuration].
Regarding Claim 3/4, Chen discloses the battery of claim 2/3 wherein the busbar defines a first set of windows at first sides of the stiffeners and the connecting portions and a second set of windows at second sides of the stiffeners and the connecting portions [Chen, annotated Figs. 2 and 7 below].
PNG
media_image3.png
641
583
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
397
821
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Chen discloses the battery of claim 1 wherein a sum of the first acute angle and the second acute angle is less than 90 degrees [Chen Figs. 1-4].
Regarding Claim 7, Chen discloses the battery of claim 1 wherein each projecting portion is deflected by a separating force between the corresponding receding portion and the corresponding connecting portion [Chen 0067-0068, Chen discloses the use of a support member placed near stiffener 32 between the tab projecting portions to press the folded tab portions against the busbar 31 during welding. The skilled artisan would know that Chen’s support member pressing against the stiffener, busbar, and tabs is used to counter an inherent separating force between the folded portion of the tab and the connection portion of the busbar. Per MPEP 2112, there is no requirement that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the inherent disclosure at the relevant time, but only that the subject matter is in fact inherent in the prior art reference. Thus, the claim limitation is met.]
Regarding Claim 12, Chen discloses a battery comprising [See MPEP 2111.02 II, preamble statements reciting purpose or intended use, Though Chen does not explicitly teach a traction battery, the skilled artisan would know that Chen’s battery could be used in a traction application.]:
a stack of battery cells [Chen 0048 and throughout, Figs. 1-7], wherein each of the battery cells includes a terminal having a projecting portion extending from a body of the battery cell and a flat receding portion disposed on a distal end of the projecting portion such that the receding portion forms a first acute angle with the projecting portion [Chen Figs. 2-4, see annotated Fig. 2 below]; and
a busbar having a central region [Chen Figs. 2-4, busbar 31-33, where the central region is the center base of 31] defining a plurality of corrugations, each corrugation including a flat connecting portion [Chen Figs. 2-4, see annotated Fig. below], and two side regions [Chen, Figs. 2-4, side regions are 32 and 33] each connected to the central region between adjacent connecting portions [Chen, Figs. 2-4, see below]; wherein each flat receding portion is welded to a corresponding flat connecting portion [Chen 0067-0068 and throughout].
PNG
media_image1.png
641
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
455
325
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13, Chen discloses the battery of claim 12 wherein each corrugation further includes a stiffener connected to a distal edge of the connection portion [Chen 0050 and throughout, Figs. 2-4, the flat portions of 32 adjacent to busbar 31 reads on the claimed stiffeners and configuration].
Regarding Claim 15, Chen discloses the traction battery of claim 12 wherein the busbar defines two sets of windows between respective side regions and the central region [see below].
PNG
media_image3.png
641
583
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17, Chen discloses the battery of claim 12 wherein each projecting portion is deflected by a separating force between the corresponding receding portion and the corresponding connecting portion [Chen 0067-0068, Chen discloses the use of a support member placed near stiffener 32 between the tab projecting portions to press the folded tab portions against the busbar 31 during welding. The skilled artisan would know that Chen’s support member pressing against the stiffener, busbar, and tabs is used to counter an inherent separating force between the folded portion of the tab and the connection portion of the busbar. Per MPEP 2112, there is no requirement that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the inherent disclosure at the relevant time, but only that the subject matter is in fact inherent in the prior art reference. Thus, the claim limitation is 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(s) 5, 14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, as applied to claims 1 and 12-13 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Chen discloses the battery of claim 1. Chen is silent to the thickness of the busbar portions; however, the skilled artisan would expect Chen Fig. 2 to generally demonstrate the relative sizes of the parts of Chen’s busbar parts, and the thickness of Chen’s connecting portions of 31 is considerably less than the stiffeners 33. Further, the relationship between the thickness of the connecting portion and the base and stiffeners would be design choices dependent on the size/weight of the battery and the material used for each of the parts. Determining the relative thickness of each of the parts would be considered a result effective variable. Specifically, the base and stiffeners would be considered structurally supporting parts and would generally be expected to have a greater thickness than the connecting portion, which is for electrical conduction. If the base and stiffeners are too thin, the stiffeners would not have the strength required to contain the battery and support the connecting portions/welds. If the base and stiffeners are too thick, space and materials used will be used inefficiently. If the thickness of the connection portions is too thick, there may be difficultly welding the connecting portion to the terminal. If the thickness of the connection portions is too thin, the connecting portion may warp due to insufficient strength during welding. The workable range of thicknesses for each of the connecting portions, base, and stiffeners can be determine through routine experimentation, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.05II,B (routine optimization), by balancing the required strengths and manufacturability requirements with consideration of the efficiency of space and materials. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation."
Regarding Claim 14 and 16, Chen discloses the battery of claims 12 and 13. Chen is silent to the thickness of the busbar portions such as the connecting portion, stiffener (claim 14), and the side regions (claim 16); however, the skilled artisan would expect Chen Fig. 2 to generally demonstrate the relative sizes of the parts of Chen’s busbar parts, and the thickness of Chen’s connecting portions of 31 is considerably less than the stiffeners 33. Further, the relationship between the thickness of the connecting portion and the side regions and stiffeners would be design choices dependent on the size/weight of the battery and the material used for each of the parts. Determining the relative thickness of each of the parts would be considered a result effective variable. Specifically, the side region and stiffeners would be considered structurally supporting parts and would generally be expected to have a greater thickness than the connecting portion, which is for electrical conduction. If the base and stiffeners are too thin, the stiffeners would not have the strength required to contain the battery and support the connecting portions/welds. If the base and stiffeners are too thick, space and materials used will be used inefficiently. If the thickness of the connection portions is too thick, there may be difficultly welding the connecting portion to the terminal. If the thickness of the connection portions is too thin, the connecting portion may warp due to insufficient strength during welding. The workable range of thicknesses for each of the connecting portions, side parts, and stiffeners can be determine through routine experimentation, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.05II,B (routine optimization), by balancing the required strengths and manufacturability requirements with consideration of the efficiency of space and materials. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation."
Claims 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al [WO2022160291A1, machine translation relied upon provided], hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding Claim 12, Zhang discloses a battery comprising [See MPEP 2111.02 II, preamble statements reciting purpose or intended use, Though Chen does not explicitly teach a traction battery, the skilled artisan would know that Chen’s battery could be used in a traction application.]:
a stack of battery cells [Zhang 0021 and throughout, Fig. 3], wherein each of the battery cells includes a terminal having a projecting portion extending from a body of the battery cell and a flat receding portion disposed on a distal end of the projecting portion and, for at least every two cells, the receding portion forms a first acute angle with the projecting portion [Zhang Fig. 5, for cells 202 and 203 projection portions 2082 and 2083, respectively, extending from cell bodies 202 and 203 have flat receding portions 2092 and 2093, respectively, on the distal ends of their respective projection portions where the receding portion forms an acute angle with the projecting portion as shown below ]; and
a busbar having a central region [Zhang 0108-0111 and throughout, Figs. 3, 6, 7, busbar is fixing plate 30 with conductive sheets 60 and central region is the center of plate 30 (Fig.3)] defining a plurality of corrugations, each corrugation including a flat connecting portion [Zhang 0109, 0111 and throughout, Figs. 3,6 , flat connection portions 60], and two side regions each connected to the central region between adjacent connecting portions [Zhang Fig. 3, left and right side]; wherein each flat receding portion is welded to a corresponding flat connecting portion [Zhang 0127].
In Zhang’s battery, cell 201 and 202 are connected in parallel and 202 and 203 are connected in series [Zhang 0027 and throughout, Fig. 3], therefore the terminal of cell 201 has an obtuse angle formed between the receding portion and the projecting portion. While Zhang does not teach each of the battery cells includes the receding portion forms a first acute angle with the projecting portion, it would be within the ambit of the skilled artisan to apply Zhang’s teaching to a battery cell stack where each of the battery cells includes the receding portion forms a first acute angle with the projecting portion with the use of basic knowledge of electrical connections and rearrangement of parts, see MPEP 2144.04 VI, C. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Zhang as described for the predictable result of a battery where the cell stack requires a different electrical connection structure, such as cells connected in series.
PNG
media_image6.png
810
965
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13, modified Zhang discloses the traction battery of claim 12, wherein each corrugation further includes a stiffener [Zhang Figs. 5-6, stiffeners 3026/3036].
Regarding Claim 15, modified Zhang discloses the battery of claim 12 wherein the busbar defines two sets of windows between respective side regions and the central region [Zhang 0112 and throughout, Fig. 7, windows 301/304].
Regarding Claim 14 and 16, modified Zhang discloses the battery of claims 12 and 13. Zhang is silent to the thickness of the busbar portions such as the connecting portion, stiffener (claim 14), and the side regions (claim 16); however, the skilled artisan would expect Zhang Figs. 5-6 to generally demonstrate the relative sizes of the parts of Zhang’s busbar parts, and the thickness of Zhang’s connecting portions of 60 is considerably less than the stiffeners 3026/3036. Further, the relationship between the thickness of the connecting portion and the side regions and stiffeners would be design choices dependent on the size/weight of the battery and the material used for each of the parts. Determining the relative thickness of each of the parts would be considered a result effective variable. Specifically, the side region and stiffeners would be considered structurally supporting parts and would generally be expected to have a greater thickness than the connecting portion, which is for electrical conduction. If the base and stiffeners are too thin, the stiffeners would not have the strength required to contain the battery and support the connecting portions/welds. If the base and stiffeners are too thick, space and materials used will be used inefficiently. If the thickness of the connection portions is too thick, there may be difficultly welding the connecting portion to the terminal. If the thickness of the connection portions is too thin, the connecting portion may warp due to insufficient strength during welding. The workable range of thicknesses for each of the connecting portions, side parts, and stiffeners can be determine through routine experimentation, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.05II,B (routine optimization), by balancing the required strengths and manufacturability requirements with consideration of the efficiency of space and materials. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation."
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 18 requires each receding portion is closer to the body of the battery cell than the corresponding connecting portion. Chen is the closest prior art as provided above and Chen does not disclose this feature. Further, there would be no know reason for such modification and the skilled artisan would not intentionally elongate Chen’s receding portion such that it is closer to the battery than the connecting portion since in insulator 32 would also need to be elongated to prevent shorting.
Claim 19 requires the terminals do not extend through the busbar. The closest prior art is Chen as provided above. Chen does not disclose this features. Further, there would be no known reason to modify Chen in this way since the terminals extend through the busbar to secure the battery terminals to the busbar for electrical connection.
Claim 20 requires each receding portion is closer to the body of the battery cell than the corresponding connecting portion. Chen and Zhang are the closest prior art. Chen does not disclose this feature. Further, there would be no know reason for such modification and the skilled artisan would not intentionally elongate Chen’s receding portion such that it is closer to the battery than the connecting portion since in insulator 32 would also need to be elongated to prevent shorting. Zhang’s receding portion 2092 is not closer to the battery cell body than the corresponding connecting portion 60, which is underneath the receding portion. Further, there would be no know reason for such modification and a significant modification of Zhang’s invention would be required to read on the claimed configuration.
Claims 21 requires that the terminals do not extend through the busbar. Chen and Zhang are the closest prior art. Chen does not disclose this features. Further, there would be no known reason to modify Chen in this way since the terminals extend through the busbar to secure the battery terminals to the busbar for electrical connection. Zhang’s terminals extend through the busbar holes 301/304. Further, there would be no know reason for such modification and a significant modification of Zhang’s invention would be required to read on the claimed configuration.
Other prior art that was considered:
Connexx Systems Corp [JP7288671B2, machine translation provided] teaches a battery with a stack of battery cells where the terminal has a projecting portion extending from a body of the battery cell and a flat receding portion 22c disposed on a distal end of the projection portion such that the receding portion forms a first acute angle with the projecting portion [Fig. 2a/b] ; however, in Connexx the plurality of flat connecting portions 90 of the busbar 50/90 do not extend from the base 50 of the busbar at a second acute angle. Further, modifying Connexx as claimed would require a significant design change with no known benefit. Therefore, Connexx does not meet the requirements of Claim 1. Further, Connexx does not read on the structure of the corrugations of Claim 12.
Regarding Claims 18 and 20, though Connexx’s receding portion would be considered closer to the battery cell body than the corresponding connecting portion 90, it would not be obvious to modify Chen or Zhang (as described above) with Connexx teachings for the reasons provided above.
Regarding Claims 19 and 21, Connex’s terminals 22b/c extend into the busbar 50/90 but do not extend through the busbar at 90. However, it would not be obvious to modify Chen or Zhang (as described above) with this feature of Connexx for the reasons provided above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed November 24, 2025, with respect to the previous rejections in the Office Action dated August 28, 2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections over Ryu claims 1-4, 6-7, 12-13, 15, and 17 and over Lee claims 1, 6, 12, and 15 have been withdrawn. Further, the 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 5, 14, and 16 over Ryu and claim 16 over Lee are withdrawn.
After additional search and consideration, the prior art of Chen was found to read on the amended claims 1-7 and 12-17 as applied above. Further, the prior art of Zhang was found to read on claims 12-16 as applied above.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. T. LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1681. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5 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, 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.
/M. T. LEONARD/Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724