DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office action addresses claims 1-11. Claims 7-11 are allowed. Although claim 1 was amended, claims 1-6 remain rejected under 35 USC 103 over the combination of JP ‘301 and JP ‘259. Accordingly, this action is made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2015130301 in view of JP 2011103259.
Regarding claim 1, JP ‘301 teaches a battery assembly comprising a battery module (2) having a casing (3) and battery cells (20), an electrical box (4) comprising a box body (40), a current interrupter (fuse 45) in the box body and configured to be disconnected in response to a current reaching a predetermined value, first and second terminals (47, 48) which are battery pack terminals configured to output electric energy of the battery module, and a switch (421) arranged in the box body and configured to control connection or disconnection between the battery cell and the terminal 48 (Fig. 1, 4, [0015], [0016], [0032]). The terminal 47 is electrically connected to the current interrupter (Fig. 1). Note: it is presumed that the terminals 47, 48 are located on the outer surface of the box body 40. Regarding claim 4, first and second conductive members would inherently be present to connect the terminals to the switch and the interrupter, as indicated in the circuit diagram in Figure 1. Regarding claim 6, a current sensor (46) is arranged in the box body between the terminal 47 and the battery cell 20 (Fig. 1).
JP ‘301 does not expressly teach that the first and second battery pack terminals (47, 48) are part of an (integrated) connector that is fixed to the box body, as recited in claim 1. It is also not taught that the connector has an inner portion received within the box body and an outer portion positioned outside the box body, a thickness of the inner portion being smaller than a thickness of the outer portion as recited in claim 1. It is further not taught that the portion of the connector extending into the opening of the box body electrically connects to the switch and interrupter (claim 2), or that the connector comprises a base that covers the opening from an outer side of the opening, the terminals being fixed to the base (claim 3).
JP ‘259 is directed to a vehicular power unit. The power unit includes a battery pack comprising a case (10) and battery cells (1). The case has an opening (15) through which a connector (19) passes, the external portion of the connector comprising the external terminals (19B) of the battery pack. The connector also comprises a base plate (31) on which the terminals are located. The external portion of the connector (19B on the outside the base plate) is thicker than the portion (19A) on the interior of the base plate (Figs. 9, 10 and 12). Between the base plate and the case, a seal (packing 40) is present (see Figs. 1, 3, 9, [0018], [0021], [0022]).
Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing because the artisan would have been motivated to use the connector structure of JP ‘259 in the assembly of JP ‘301 (that is, using connector 19 on base plate 31 of JP ‘259 as the terminals 47 and 48 of JP ‘301). The motivation for doing so would be to improve waterproofness (abstract of JP ‘301). In using this connector structure, the following modifications would be made: the battery case (3) of JP ‘301 would be modified (enlarged) to contain the box body; and the base plate portion of the connector would be located between the box body and the battery case (the connector portion 19A extending into an opening in the box body to connect to existing circuitry inside and the external terminals 19B extending outside of the battery case).
Accordingly, in light of the above modifications, the subject matter of the claims would be rendered obvious (that is, the use of a box body having an opening through which the connector penetrates (claims 1 and 2), and the connector having a base (claim 3)).
Regarding claim 5, this claim recites the first and second conductive members are fixed to the box body and the connector is fixed to the box body by the conductive members. This subject matter would also be rendered obvious as it would have been within the skill of the art to have the conductive members (which must exist as noted above) fix the connector (a simple electrical connection may perform this function). Further, by being contained in the box body with other components, the conductors are “fixed to” the box body. As such, claim 5 is also rendered obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed January 21, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants state that neither CN ‘588 nor JP ‘301 teaches the amended limitation of the inner and outer portions having different thicknesses. However, JP ‘259 teaches the limitation as noted in the rejection above (see Figs. 9, 10), and as it would have been obvious to use the connector structure of JP ‘259 in its entirety in JP ‘301, the limitation would be rendered obvious. As such, the rejection of claims 1-6 over the combination of JP ‘301 and JP ‘259 has been maintained herein.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-11 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 7 has been amended to recite that the electrical box comprises a heating branch comprising a heating element and a relay, in parallel connection with a branch where the switch and the current interrupter are located. The closest prior art, notably CN ‘588 and JP ‘301, do not teach or suggest such a heating branch.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan Crepeau whose telephone number is (571) 272-1299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher, can be reached at (571) 270-3879. The phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 272-1700. Documents may be faxed to the central fax server at (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Jonathan Crepeau/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
May 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights