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 .
Drawings
Objections to the drawings are withdrawn in view of the replacement drawings, filed 18 Jun, 2026.
Claim Objections
The objection to claim 3 is withdrawn in view of the amended claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 18 Jun, 2026, have been fully considered, but are not deemed persuasive.
With regard to the rejection of claims 1-16 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Dawley et al. (US 2019/0355954), Applicant argues that the newly-amended feature of “a clasp that is separate from the cross-member, that is configured to engage the cross-member, and that holds a plurality of tab terminals against the cross-member, a backing pad secured to the cross-member, or both” renders the claim patentable because Dawley et al. does not disclose a clasp that is separate from the cross-member, but rather a spring element 28 that is soldered to PCBA 24 at solder points 31 and therefore is an integral part of the PCBA and not a separate component (see e.g. Dawley et al., Figs. 4-5).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and submits that this newly-claimed feature is taught by Kim et al. (US 2019/0006645), as set forth in detail in the claim rejections below.
Applicant additionally argues that Dawley et al. does not disclose a hook extending through an aperture in the cross-member, and does not disclose first and second hooks extending through respective first and second cross-member apertures (see pg. 7, para 2 of Applicant’s Remarks).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and maintains that the end tabs 29 of Dawley et al. are shown as extending through PCBA 24, which reads on a cross-member (see e.g. Dawley et al.: Fig. 6A and Fig. 6B). Additionally, the snap-fit hook members of Kim et al. are shown as extending through circuit board body 141, which reads on a cross-member (see e.g. Kim et al.: Fig. 9).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dawley et al. (US 2019/0355954) in view of Kim et al. (US 2019/0006645).
As to claim 1, Dawley et al. discloses battery pack terminal retention system, comprising:
a cross-member (see e.g. carrier frame 14F and PCBA 24 can both be considered to be part of a cross-member, Dawley et al.: [0030] and Fig. 4); and
a clasp (see e.g. spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Fig. 6A) and configured to engage the cross-member (see e.g. spring element 28 causes battery tabs 16 to be securely clamped and can thereby be said to engage carrier frame 14F as 28, 16, and 14F are all engaged together, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Figs. 4-6), the clasp configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against the cross-member, a backing pad secured to the cross-member, or both, as the tab terminals are electrically connected together (see e.g. Dawley et al.: [0034], spring element 28 causes battery tabs 16 to be securely clamped and engaged to PCBA 24, which reads on a cross-member, and the spring element 28 can thereby be said to be configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against a cross-member, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Figs. 4-5. Note that for examination purposes, it is understood that the claim is met if the clasp configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against the cross-member, or if the clasp configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against a backing pad secured to the cross-member. In the instant case, the clasp configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against the cross-member).
Dawley et al.’s terminal retention system differs from the instantly-claimed structure in that Dawley et al.’s clasp is soldered to the cross-member (see e.g. Dawley et al.: [0031] and Fig. 5, stating that spring element 28 is attached to PCBA 24 at solder points 31) and therefore is not separate from the cross-member.
Kim et al. teaches an analogous terminal retention system in which a spring member is configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against a cross-member (see e.g. Kim et al.: [0033], [0057], and Figs. 5 and 9, cover clips 160, which read on spring members, hold tab terminals 133 against circuit board body 141, which reads on a cross member). In Kim et al.’s system, the spring member is attached to the cross-member via snap protrusions and snap holes (see e.g. 163 and 143, Kim et al.: [0071] and Figs. 5-6), and therefore Kim et al.’s spring members are separate from the cross-member. Kim et al. teaches that the use of this snap-fit connection allows for a detachable coupling (see e.g. Kim et al.: [0096]) and prevents possible thermal damage to the battery that could result from welding the spring member in place (see e.g. Kim et al.: [0123]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the terminal retention system of Dawley et al. by using the snap-fit connectors taught by Kim et al. instead of Dawley et al.’s soldering method such that the clasp is separate from the cross-member. Said artisan would have found such a modification to be obvious because Kim et al. teaches that a snap-fit is a functionally equivalent method of attaching a clasp to a tab terminal, and because Kim et al. teaches that a snap-fit system avoids potential thermal damage caused by welding the clasp.
As to claim 2, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, further comprising a cross-member (see e.g. carrier frame 14F and PCBA 24 can both be considered to be part of a cross-member, Dawley et al.: [0030] and Fig. 4) and the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. battery tabs 16, Dawley et al.: [0029] and Fig. 4), wherein the clasp engages the cross-member when holding the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. spring element 28 causes battery tabs 16 to be securely clamped and can thereby be said to engage carrier frame 14F as 28, 16, and 14F are all engaged together, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Figs. 4-6).
As to claim 3, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 2, further comprising a sense lead (see e.g. conductive bus bar 22, which is electrically conductive and thereby can be considered to be a sense lead, Dawley et al. [0025] and Fig. 4. See also para [0059] of the Instant Specification) secured to the cross-member (see e.g. conductive bus bar 22, is secured to 24 via the clamping force of spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0035] and Fig. 5), the clasp sandwiching the plurality of tab terminals against the sense lead, the cross-member, or both when holding the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. Dawley et al.: Fig. 4 and [0034], spring element 28 securely clamps tabs 16 to the assembly and thereby sandwiches tabs 16 against cross member 24).
As to claim 4, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 2, wherein the tab terminals extend through an aperture in the cross-member (see e.g. tabs 16 extend through an aperture in PCBA 24, which reads on the claimed cross-member, Dawley et al.: Figs. 6A-6B) when the clasp is holding the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. Dawley et al. Fig. 4 and [0034], spring element 28 securely clamps and thereby holds tabs 16).
As to claim 5, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 2, wherein the plurality of tab terminals extend from a plurality of lithium-ion battery cells (see e.g. tabs 16 extend from pouches 20, which may comprise lithium oxide active material and thereby read on the claimed lithium-ion battery cells, Dawley et al.: [0001]-[0002], [0027], and Fig. 3A).
As to claim 6, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 2, wherein the cross-member is a composite material (see e.g. PCBA 24, which reads on the claimed cross-member, is a printed circuit board, which is a composite material, Dawley et al.: [0024]).
As to claim 7, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 2, wherein the clasp includes at least one hook that engages the cross-member (see e.g. spring element 28, which reads on the clasp, includes end tabs 29 that read on the claimed hook and that engages cross-member 24, Dawley et al.: [0035] and Figs. 6A-6B).
As to claim 8, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 7, wherein the at least one hook extends through aperture in the cross-member (see e.g. spring element 28, which reads on the clasp, includes hook 29 that extends through cross-member 24 as shown in Dawley et al.: Figs. 6A-6B, implying that 28 comprises apertures that allow the hooks to extend therethrough).
As to claim 9, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 8, wherein the least one hook (see e.g. end tabs 29, Dawley et al.: [0035] and Fig. 6A) includes a first hook that extends through a first cross-member aperture, and a second hook that extend through a second cross-member aperture (see e.g. Dawley et al.:Figs. 6A-6B, showing first and second hooks 29 that extend through cross-member 24 as shown in Figs. 6A-6B, implying that 28 comprises first and second apertures that allow the first and second hooks to extend therethrough).
As to claim 10, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, wherein the clasp (see e.g. spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Fig. 6A) includes an aperture that provides access to the tab terminals to join the tab terminals (see e.g. Dawley et al.: Fig. 6A, showing an aperture in the middle of 28. Fig. 5 shows tab terminal 16B visible through the opening in 28, and as such provides access to said tab terminals).
As to claim 11, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 10, wherein an entire circumferential perimeter of the aperture is provided by the clasp (see e.g. Fig. 6A, showing an aperture in the middle of spring element 28, which reads on the claimed clasp. It can reasonably be said that the entirety of this circumferential perimeter is provided by clasp 28).
As to claim 12, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of welds that electrically connect together the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. Dawley et al.: [0025], stating that tabs 16 are welded to each other, and to bus bar 22, implying a plurality of welds that electrically connect these elements).
As to claim 13, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, wherein the clasp (see e.g. spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Fig. 6A) is configured to provide at least a portion of a sensing circuit path (see e.g. spring element 28 is constructed from metal and can thereby be considered to be configured to provide at least a portion of a sensing circuit path, Dawley et al.: [0034]).
As to claim 14, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, wherein the clasp (see e.g. spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Fig. 6A) applies a clamp load to the plurality of tab terminals when holding the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. spring element 28 provides a spring force that securely clamps tabs 16 as per Dawley et al.: [0034], and can thereby be considered to provide a spring force that secures said clamps).
As to claim 15, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, wherein the clasp is a sense lead (see e.g. spring element 28, which reads on the claimed clasp, is constructed from metal and can thereby be considered to be a sense lead, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Fig. 6A).
As to claim 16, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack terminal retention system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of terminals includes at least two terminals (see e.g. Dawley et al.: Fig. 4, showing a plurality of tabs 16B, which read on the claimed terminals).
As to claim 21, Dawley et al. discloses a battery pack assembly, comprising:
a plurality of battery cells each including a tab terminal such that the battery cells together provide a plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. battery cells 12, each comprising cell tabs 16, Dawes: [0027] and Fig. 3A);
a cross-member having an aperture (see e.g. carrier frame 14F and PCBA 24 can both be considered to be part of a cross-member and comprises an aperture, Dawley et al.: [0030] and Fig. 4);, the plurality of tab terminals extending through the aperture (see Dawley et al.: Fig. 4); and
a clasp (see e.g. spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Fig. 6A), the clasp including at least one hook extending through the cross-member(see e.g. spring element 28, which reads on the clasp, includes hook 29 that extends through cross-member 24 as shown in Dawley et al.: Figs. 6A-6B, implying that 28 comprises apertures that allow the hooks to extend therethrough), the clasp holding the plurality of tab terminals for the plurality of tab terminals to be welded to each other (see e.g. Dawley et al.: [0034], spring element 28 causes battery tabs 16 to be securely clamped and engaged to PCBA 24, and can thereby be said to be configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals for the plurality of tab terminals to be welded to each other, Dawley et al.: [0034] and Figs. 4-5).
Dawley et al.’s terminal retention system differs from the instantly-claimed structure in that Dawley et al.’s clasp is soldered to the cross-member (see e.g. Dawley et al.: [0031] and Fig. 5, stating that spring element 28 is attached to PCBA 24 at solder points 31) and therefore is not separate from the cross-member.
Kim et al. teaches an analogous terminal retention system in which a spring member is configured to hold a plurality of tab terminals against a cross-member (see e.g. Kim et al.: [0033] and Fig. 5, cover clips 160, which read on spring members, hold tab terminals 133 against circuit board 140, which reads on a cross member). In Kim et al.’s system, the spring member is attached to the cross-member via snap protrusions and snap holes (see e.g. 163 and 143, Kim et al.: [0071] and Figs. 5-6), and therefore Kim et al.’s spring members are separate from the cross-member. Kim et al. teaches that the use of this snap-fit connection allows for a detachable coupling (see e.g. Kim et al.: [0096]) and prevents possible thermal damage to the battery that could result from welding the spring member in place (see e.g. Kim et al.: [0123]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the terminal retention system of Dawley et al. by using the snap-fit connectors taught by Kim et al. instead of Dawley et al.’s soldering method such that the clasp is separate from the cross-member. Said artisan would have found such a modification to be obvious because Kim et al. teaches that a snap-fit is a functionally equivalent method of attaching a clasp to a tab terminal, and because Kim et al. teaches that a snap-fit system avoids potential thermal damage caused by welding the clasp.
As to claim 22, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack assembly of claim 21, wherein the at least one hook includes a first hook positioned on a first side of the plurality of tab terminals and a second hook positioned on an opposite, second side of the plurality of tab terminals (see e.g. Dawley et al.: Fig. 6A and Illustration 1 below, end tabs 29 read on the first and second hooks).
PNG
media_image1.png
608
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Illustration 1: Reproduction with annotation of Fig. 6A of Dawley et al..
As to claim 23, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack assembly of claim 21, further comprising a backing pad secured to the cross-member and providing a sense lead (see e.g. conductive bus bar 22, which is electrically conductive and thereby can be considered to be a sense lead. Conductive bus bar 22 is secured to 24 via the clamping force of spring element 28, Dawley et al.: [0025], [0035], and Figs. 4-5. See also para [0059] of the Instant Specification), wherein the clasp sandwiches the plurality of tab terminals against the backing pad (see e.g. Dawley et al.: Figs. 4-5, spring element 28 sandwiches tab terminals 16 against conductive bus bar 22, which reads on a backing pad).
Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dawley et al. (US 2019/0355954) in view of Kim et al. (US 2019/0006645) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Oh et al. (US 2022/0115736).
As to claim 24, Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. teaches the battery pack assembly of claim 21, wherein the cross-member (see e.g. carrier frame 14F and PCBA 24 can both be considered to be part of a cross-member, Dawley et al.: [0030] and Fig. 4).
The cross-member of Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. does not define a passageway configured to communicate battery cell vent byproducts away from the plurality of battery cells.
Oh et al. teaches an analogous battery pack comprising a cross-member (see e.g. busbar frame 300, Oh et al.: [0041] and Figs. 4-5) that defines a passageway configured to communicate battery cell vent byproducts away from a plurality of battery cells (see e.g. Oh et al. [0041] and Fig. 5, vent gas from cells 110 follows path F1, which passes through apertures in busbar frame 300 that define passageways).
PNG
media_image2.png
257
665
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Illustration 2: Reproduction with annotation of Fig. 5 of Oh et al..
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to similarly provide an aperture in the cross-member of Dawley et al. in view of Kim et al. in the manner taught by Oh et al. such that the cross-member defines a passageway configured to communicate battery cell vent byproducts away from a plurality of battery cells. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to allow vent gas to escape the battery pack, as suggested by Oh et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shimizu et al. (JP 2014022195A, as read via machine translation) teaches an analogous clasp system for securing the tab terminals of a battery.
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 ALBERT HILTON whose telephone number is (571)272-4068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571)-272-3066. 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.
/A.M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 07/29/2026
Prosecution Insights