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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/31/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1and 9-10 have been amended. Claims 1-14 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-5, 11-12, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loo et al. (U.S. 20120164500) in view of Dansui et al (U.S. 20030013009).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (34/38)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second contact)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Support surface of the screw receiving means)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Support surface of the rib)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second sealing direction)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rib)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First sealing direction)]
PNG
media_image1.png
633
447
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claims 1 and 11-12, Loo discloses a battery module (inside battery case 10) (Fig. 2) comprising:
a housing element (20 – tray member) and a cover element (22) (Fig. 7), the housing element (20) and the cover element (22) are connected to one another by a plurality of screw connections (28 - bolts), such that, by forming a common interior (Fig. 3), the housing element (20) and the cover element (22) configured to receive a plurality of battery cells (30 – batteries) (Fig. 3), wherein the cover element (22) also forms a rib (labeled) and a direct mechanical contact (40 – joint area) is made between the rib (labeled) of the cover element (22) and the housing element (20) (Fig. 7 – above), and a first sealing element (46 – seal member) is also arranged inward from the rib (labeled) relative to the common interior and between an uppermost sealing surface (44 - top) of the housing element (20) and a lowermost sealing surface (52 – bottom) of the cover element (22) such that the interior is fluidically sealed from an environment (Fig. 7 – above; [0071]),
wherein the plurality of screw connections (28) and the rib (labeled) are arranged outside of the first sealing element (46) (Fig. 7 – above; Fig. 3).
Loo does not disclose that the housing and cover elements are made of a metallic material or that electrical contact is made between the housing and cover elements.
Dansui discloses a housing element (2a – housing body) and a cover element (2b – lid) ([0027]) and teaches that they are both made of aluminum (thus teaching electrical connection as aluminum is electrically conductive and reading on claims 11-12) ([0027]). Dansui further teaches that the aluminum is preferred as it has excellent thermal conductivity ([0027]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed to ensure the housing and cover elements taught by Loo were electrically connected by being made of aluminum as taught by Dansui as aluminum has excellent thermal conductivity.
With respect to claim 2, Loo discloses a second sealing element (62 - projections) is arranged on a side of the rib (labeled) facing away from the first sealing element (46) (Fig. 7 – above; [0081]), wherein said direct mechanical contact (40) is free of the first sealing element (46) and the second sealing element (62) (Fig. 7 – above).
With respect to claim 3, Loo discloses a first sealing direction (labeled) of the first sealing element (46) and a second sealing direction (labeled) of the second sealing element (62) are perpendicular to one another (Fig. 7 – above; [0081]).
With respect to claim 4, Loo discloses a support surface (labeled) of the rib (labeled) extends from the lowermost sealing surface (52) of the cover element (22) such that a distance between the uppermost sealing surface (44) of the housing element (20) and the lowermost sealing surface (52) of the cover element (22) is adjustable (Fig. 7- above; [0097]).
With respect to claim 5, Loo discloses individual screw connections (28) are arranged at a distance from one another (Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 13, Loo discloses the rib (labeled) is circumferential (Figs. 3 and 7).
With respect to claim 14, Loo discloses the support surface of the screw receiving means (34/38) is a screw boss (Fig. 2 and 7 – above).
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loo et al. in view of Dansui et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Burrer et al. (CN 112909405, Espanet translation provided in non-final rejection of 10/29/2025 for reference).
With respect to claim 6, Loo discloses the screw connections (28) each comprise a screw receiving means (34 and 38 – through holes), in which a sliding means (bottom pole portion of 28) is respectively received (Figs. 3 and 5), and a support surface (labeled) of the screw receiving means (384/38) is directly connected with the first contact surface (40) of the cover element (20) (Fig. 7 – above).
Loo does not disclose that the cover element (22) comprises screw receiving means, rather Loo discloses a metal plate 26 is formed around a periphery of the cover element (2) and comprises screw receiving means (38) which align with the screw receiving means (34) of the housing (20) to connect the two.
Burrer discloses a housing element (12 – main body) and a cover element (14) cover (Fig 1) and teaches the cover element comprises screw receiving means (hole for screw 16) (Fig. 2). Burrer further teaches that the screw receiving means in the cover (14) allows for the connection between the cover element (14) and housing element (12), thus covering the battery unit from above ([abstract]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed that the screw connection means in the metal plate disclosed by modified Loo could be in the cover as taught by Burrer as an alternative method of securing the cover element and housing element in order to cover the battery unit from above. Applicant is reminded that a rational which supports a conclusion of obviousness includes a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (MPEP 2143.I.B). In this instance, substituting the screw means in the cover of Burrer to the cover of modified Loo yields the same predictable result of connecting he cover and housing to protect the battery from above.
With respect to claim 7, Loo discloses the screw receiving means (28) are screw bosses (fasteners S are threaded) (Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 8, Loo discloses the support surface (labeled) of a screw receiving means (34/38) is configured to be elevated over the uppermost sealing surface (44) of the housing element (20) such that, a distance between the uppermost sealing surface (44) of the housing element (20) and the lowermost sealing surface (52) of the cover element (22) is adjustable (Fig. 7; [0097]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loo et al. in view of Dansui et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Keller et al. (U.S. 20160118635).
With respects to claim 9, modified Loo discloses a housing element (12) (Fig. 1), but does not disclose the housing element is a die cast aluminum housing.
Keller discloses a housing for a battery ([abstract]) and teaches the housing ca be formed of die casted aluminum ([0013]). Keller further teaches that this material and process yields battery housing parts that are easily manufactured and inexpensive to mass produce ([0013]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed to manufacture the housing disclosed by Loo using die casted aluminum as taught by Keller in order to yield battery housing parts that are easily manufactured and inexpensive to mass produce.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loo et al. in view of Nietling et al. (U.S. 20170256760).
With respect to claim 10, Loo discloses a first sealing element (46) and a second sealing element (62) (Fig. 7), but does not disclose either sealing elements is configured as an adhesive.
Nietling discloses a sealing element (56 – seal) used between a surface of a cover (50 – lid) and a housing element (60 – container) (Figs. 1 and 9; [0046]) and teaches the sealing element (56) can be configured as an adhesive ([0046]). Nietling further teaching that this allows for a permanent bonding of the cover element (50) and the housing element (60) ([0046]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art when the application was effectively filed to use an adhesive as taught by Nietling as one of the sealing elements disclosed by Loo if a permanent bonding between the cover element and housing element was desirable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-7 of response, filed 07/31/2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 of claim 1 has been withdrawn in light of the amendment.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The rejection of claim 1 no longer relies on the prior art of Lai et al., instead relying on new prior art Loo et al. to read on the newly amended claim 1. No other arguments regarding any other claims were made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/WYATT P MCCONNELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights