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
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:140 in Fig. 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the recitation including “The disclosure related to the technical field of….”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 recites “The battery according to claim 5, wherein the first folded edge completely fits the second”. It appears the second half of claim 6 is missing and should recite “The battery according to claim 5, wherein the first folded edge completely fits the second folded edge.”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 and 16 recite “…wherein the folded edges are disposed on edges of the first sides of two adjacent batteries corresponding to the bottom plate, and there is a gap between the two folded edges along the first direction”; however, only one folded edge is positively recited (i.e. claim 13 depending on claim 11 limitation “the folded edge is attached…”. For the purpose of compact prosecution this limitation will be interpreted as “the at least one folded edge”.
Claim Interpretation
A battery is interpreted as a battery module, pack, housing, cover, etc. For example, a battery may be interpreted as a cell in combination with a heat/separator plate, or a battery housing. Therefore, a folded edge integrally formed with the plate or a housing will read on the limitation of claim 6; “…the folded edge and the battery are integrally formed”. This interpretation is supported by the instant disclosure which teaches a battery as i.e., a set of walls with a cover and case (no teachings are provided with respect to the structure/placement of a cell) and the folded edge integrally formed with the cover and/or case (P33; Fig. 1-3).
Claim 7 recites “…the first folded edge and the second folded edge are not connected…”. For the purpose of compact prosecution “not connected” will be interpreted as not integrally connected i.e., welded together. This interpretation is supported by paragraphs 24 and 37 in light of Fig. 4.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okada et al. (US 20080160395).
Regarding claim 1, Okada teaches a battery, wherein the battery with a prismatic structure comprises a top surface, a bottom surface, two first sides 21, and two second sides 22; the two first sides are spaced apart along a first direction and each perpendicular to the first direction; the two second sides are spaced apart along a second direction and each perpendicular to the second direction; the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction; an area of the first side is greater than an area of the second side; a folded edge 21/22/23/24 is disposed on at least one edge of one of the first sides; and the folded edge extends along the first direction (and the second direction), wherein the battery is interpreted as two separators 20 joined to house a cell 10, as shown in annotated Fig. 2 shown in rejection of claim 4 (P50).
Regarding claim 2, Okada teaches the folded edge 23/24 is disposed on at least one of an upper edge and a lower edge of the first side (Fig.
Regarding claim 3, Okada teaches the folded edge and the battery, defined by the separators 20 forming box of battery are integrally formed (Fig. 4-8.12.17).
Regarding claim 4, Okada teaches the battery comprises a case and a cover plate, formed by two separator plates 20, a side of the case facing the first direction is an opening, the cover plate is disposed and closes the opening SK, and a side of the cover plate facing away from the case defines one of the first side; wherein the folded edge is disposed on an edge of the case at the opening; or the folded edge is disposed on an edge of the cover plate, as shown in annotated Fig. 2, below (P50).
PNG
media_image1.png
449
651
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Okada teaches the battery comprises a case and a cover plate, formed by two separator plates 20, a side of the case facing the first direction is an opening SK, the cover plate is disposed and closes the opening, and a side of the cover plate facing away from the case defines one of the first side; wherein a first folded edge 24 is disposed on an edge of the case at the opening, a second folded edge 24 is disposed on an edge of the cover plate, a shape of the first folded edge matches and fits a shape of the second folded edge, and the first folded edge and the second folded edge together form the folded edge, as shown in annotated Fig. 2, above (P50).
Regarding claim 6, Okada teaches the first folded edge completely fits the second folded edge, or completely fits into the second folded edge (Fig. 3)
Regarding claim 7, Okada teaches the first folded edge and the second folded edge are not connected, or are not bonded together (P50.65.67-68; Fig.3.17.22).
Regarding claim 8, Okada teaches a cross section of the folded edge is wavy (Fig. 10-13 – wherein folded edge disposed on at least one edge of one of the first sides is interpreted as the side plates 22; and the folded edge extends along the first direction as shown by at least projections 42).
Regarding claim 9, Okada teaches a cross section of the folded edge is bent at a right angle (Fig. 4).
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.
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.
Claims 10-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada as applied to at least claim 1 above, and further in view of Schmitt et al. (US 2023/0022636).
Regarding claim 10, Okada teaches a battery device comprising a battery pack, wherein the battery pack comprises a plurality of batteries disposed along the first direction, wherein at least one of the plurality of batteries is the battery of claim 1, wherein claim 1 is interpreted as the battery with a prismatic structure comprises a top surface, a bottom surface, two first sides 21 and back of cell, and two second sides 22; the two first sides are spaced apart along a first direction and each perpendicular to the first direction; the two second sides are spaced apart along a second direction and each perpendicular to the second direction; the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction; an area of the first side is greater than an area of the second side; a folded edge 23/24 is disposed on at least one edge of one of the first sides; and the folded edge extends along the first direction, wherein the battery is interpreted as the another separator 20 stacked in the same orientation, that closes the open region by the backside of its surface, or bottom surface plate 21 and the cell 10 behind it, as shown in annotated Fig. 2 below (P50; Fig. 2), alternatively folded edge can be interpreted as electrode terminals 12 (P59-65; Fig. 3.6).
PNG
media_image2.png
356
438
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
341
402
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Okada teaches radiating heat through the bottom of the plurality of batteries (P64; Fig. 16-20) but is silent in teaching a battery box accommodating the battery pack of a plurality of batteries; however, Schmitt, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a plurality of battery cells thermally insulated from another and that it is well known to remove heat from the bottom of batteries, by having a plurality of batteries in a battery box for mechanical and thermal stability (P3-6.24.29.54-56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have a battery box, as taught by Schmitt, accommodating the battery pack of a plurality of batteries of Okada to further secure the batteries. Furthermore, with respect to the above combination of overall element, the rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2143
Regarding claim 11, modified Okada in view of Schmitt teaches it is well known to have a bottom plate 31, wherein the bottom plate 31 is located on a bottom surface 21 of the battery pack (P5.23.63; Fig. 3-4), wherein using the folded edge of the pack of Okada is attached to the bottom plate (Okada; Fig. 15-19).
Regarding claim 12, modified Okada in view of Schmitt teaches wherein the folded edge is adhesively bonded to the bottom plate (P1-5.12; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, modified Okada teaches the folded edges 22/24 are disposed on edges of the first sides of two adjacent batteries corresponding to the bottom plate, and there is a gap SL between the two folded edges 22/24 along the first direction (P44.58.65-68; Fig. 20B).
Regarding claim 14, modified Okada in view of Schmitt teaches a heat exchange plate, or first/second temperature control element 130 wherein the heat exchange plate is located on at least one of a top surface, a bottom surface, and a second side of the battery pack, wherein the folded edge is attached to the heat exchange plate (P23.31.40; Fig, 3-4).
Regarding claim 15, modified Okada in view of Schmitt teaches wherein the folded edge is adhesively bonded to the heat exchange plate (P23.31.40; Fig, 3-4).
Regarding claim 16, modified Okada teaches the folded edges 22/24 are disposed on edges of the first sides of two adjacent batteries corresponding to the heat exchange plate, and there is a gap SL between the two folded edges along the first direction (P44.58.65-68; Fig. 20B).
Regarding claim 17, modified Okada teaches the plurality of batteries comprise a first battery and a second battery adjacent to each other, the folded edge 24 extending toward the second battery is disposed on the first battery, the folded edge and the first side form an accommodating space SK, and the accommodating space is configured for accommodating at least part of the second battery, as shown in annotated Fig. 2, above (Fig. 2.10.22).
Regarding claim 12, modified Okada in view of Schmitt teaches wherein the folded edge is adhesively bonded to the bottom plate (P1-5.12; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 19, modified Okada teaches wherein a length of the folded edge along the first direction is equal to a thickness of the second battery along the first direction, and the accommodating space is configured for accommodating the entire second battery, such as in Fig. 20(b) wherein the folded end of edge 20E extends the full length or in Fig. 22 wherein the maximum length of the folded edge is fit into interlocking groove, with no folded edge, covering the entire adjacent battery cell (P67-68; Fig. 21-22).
Regarding claim 20, modified Okada teaches a fixing portion, or end plate 30, wherein the fixing portion 30 is located at an end of the battery pack along the first direction, wherein the folded edge extending toward the fixing portion is disposed on the battery adjacent to the fixing portion, the folded edge and the first side form an accommodating space, and the accommodating space accommodates at least part of the fixing portion, as shown in annotated Fig. 2 above (P60.62; Fig. 3.9-10.20.21).
Regarding claim 21, modified Okada teaches the folded edge extending toward the fixing portion, or end plate 30 is disposed on a lower edge of the first side of the battery, a first concave portion is disposed on a bottom surface of the fixing portion, the first concave portion is open on a side of the fixing portion adjacent to the battery, the first concave portion and the bottom plate form an accommodating space, and the folded edge is accommodated in the accommodating space, such as 20E of Fig. 19 & 20(b) (P44.60.63-69; Fig. 11.16.20B.21) wherein Schmitt of modified Okada teaches the box further comprises a bottom plate, and the fixing portion is fixed on the bottom plate (P3-6.24.29.34.54-56.59.86; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 22, modified Okada teaches the folded edge extending toward the fixing portion is disposed on a lower edge of the first side of the battery (Fig. 2-3.9-11.16.19), and thus there is a gap between a bottom surface of the fixing portion and the bottom plate of Okada of modified Schmitt to form an accommodating space, wherein the folded edge is accommodated in the accommodating space and covers at least part of the bottom surface of the fixing portion (Okada; Fig. 2-3.9-11.16.19), wherein Schmitt of modified Okada teaches the box bottom plate and frame (Schmitt; P41.48.57.80; Fig. 3)
Regarding claim 23, modified Okada teaches the folded edge extending toward the fixing portion is disposed on an upper edge of the first side of the battery, wherein the folded edge covers at least part of a top surface of the fixing portion (P60.63-69; Fig. 15-20)
Regarding claim 24, modified Okada teaches a second concave portion is disposed on the top surface of the fixing portion, the second concave portion is open on a side of the fixing portion adjacent to the battery, and the folded edge is accommodated in the second concave portion (P60.63-69; Fig. 15-20A).
Regarding claim 25, modified Okada teaches an accommodating groove is disposed on a side surface of the fixing portion facing the battery, and the folded edge is accommodated in the accommodating groove (Fig. 3.4.9.16.19.20B).
Regarding claim 26, modified Okada teaches the folded edges are disposed on lower edges of the first sides of at least two of the plurality of batteries, and each of the folded edges is located on a same plane (Fig. 3.4.9.16.19.20B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (US20140234691) teaches a battery device 700 comprising a box 500 and a battery pack, wherein the battery pack is accommodated in the box and comprises a plurality of batteries 400 disposed along the first direction (Fig. 8), wherein at least one of the plurality of batteries is the battery of claim 1, wherein the battery of claim 1 is of a prismatic structure, formed by the cell joined with the cover or frame, comprises a top surface, a bottom surface, two first sides, and two second sides (Fig. 5); the two first sides are spaced apart along a first direction and each perpendicular to the first direction; the two second sides are spaced apart along a second direction and each perpendicular to the second direction; the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction; an area of the first side is greater than an area of the second side; a folded edge 220 is disposed on at least one edge of one of the first sides; and the folded edge extends along the first direction, wherein a battery is interpreted as the cover 200 and a battery cell 10, or as the frame 300 and a battery cell 20 (P62-70; Fig. 4-5.8).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amanda Rosenbaum whose telephone number is (571)272-8218. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/Amanda Rosenbaum/ Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/Helen Oi K CONLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752