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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the heat insulating member provided between the heat exchange member and the reinforcement member of claim 20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Instant paragraph 68 of the Specification states that this feature is shown in Figure 3. However, no element number is provided for the heat insulating member and nothing discernible is depicted as being present between the heat exchange member (70) and the reinforcement member (40). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a wire harness or bus bar as described in paragraphs 44 and 45 of the instant specification. The paragraphs describe the harness and bus bar within the avoidance space but the Drawings do not depict this orientation. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a part of the bus bar being located above the reinforcement member as recited in claim 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The feature is described in instant paragraph 70 of the Specification. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
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 1-12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hernandez Saab (US 2023/0070013 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hernandez Saab discloses an apparatus comprising: a battery box body 102 (see Figure 1B); a pressure relief structure 700, which is disposed on the outer surface 206 of battery box body 102 (see Figure 3); a first battery assembly 104a, which comprises a plurality of first single cells disposed in the same orientation as the assembly (paragraph 37), wherein the first battery assembly is disposed in the battery box body (see Figure 1A); a reinforcement member 202B, which is disposed in the battery box body, and is located between the battery box body 102 and the first battery assembly 104a (between outer surface 206 of Figure 3 and interior space 105a of Figure 1A), wherein the reinforcement member is provided with a gas guiding channel 516A, the gas guiding channel comprises a first opening 214, and an orthographic projection of the first opening 214 facing a surface of the battery box body 102 provided with the pressure relief structure 700 coincides with at least a part of the pressure relief structure 700 (see Figures 3 & 5), such that a gas discharged from the first opening 214 is in contact with the pressure relief structure 700 (paragraph 59).
Regarding claim 2, Hernandez Saab discloses that the gas guiding channel 516A further comprises a second opening 216, and the first opening 214 intersects the second opening 216 (see Figure 5).
Regarding claim 3, Hernandez Saab discloses that the pressure relief structure is disposed on a side portion of the battery box body, the first opening is disposed on one side of the reinforcement member facing the side portion of the battery box body, and the second opening is disposed on one side of the reinforcement member facing a top portion of the battery box body (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 4, Hernandez Saab discloses that the gas guiding channel comprises a bottom wall and at least one side wall (see Figures 3 and 5).
Regarding claim 5, Hernandez Saab discloses that at least a part of the side wall is perpendicular to the bottom wall; wherein the number of the side wall is one, or the number of the side wall is three (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 6, Hernandez Saab discloses that the bottom wall is aligned with a bottom of the pressure relief structure (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 7, Hernandez Saab discloses that a circular arc transition is formed between at least a part of the side wall and a top surface of the reinforcement member (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 8, Hernandez Saab discloses that the first single cell comprises a large surface and a small surface, an area of the large surface is larger than an area of the small surface, and the reinforcement member is disposed opposite to the large surface of the first single cell; wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the large surface of the first single cell (see Figure 1A). It is the Office’s position that the cells of the assemblies 104a-h are oriented in the same manner as the assemblies (paragraph 37).
Regarding claim 9, Hernandez Saab discloses that the reinforcement member 506C is independently disposed relative to the battery box body (paragraph 53).
Regarding claim 10, Hernandez Saab discloses that the reinforcement member is bonded to the first single cell (paragraph 50). It is the Office’s position that the assembly can be a single cell (paragraph 37).
Regarding claim 11, Hernandez Saab discloses that the reinforcement member is provided with an avoidance space 516A (see Figure 5). A harness is not positively recited. The space of Hernandez Saab is capable of having elements inserted into it.
Regarding claim 12, Hernandez Saab discloses that the reinforcement member is provided with a hollow cavity 516 (see Figure 5).
Regarding claim 14, Hernandez Saab discloses that a bottom portion of the battery box body is set facing a top portion of the battery box body, a height of the reinforcement member is less than or equal to a height of the first single cell (see Figure 1B).
Regarding claims 15-17, Hernandez Saab discloses that the reinforcement member is integrally formed with at least a part of the battery box body (see Figure 3). Hernandez Saab discloses that the assemblies contain multiple cells and it is the Office’s position that the cells of the assemblies 104a-h are oriented in the same manner as the assemblies (paragraph 37). Hernandez Saab discloses the relative orientation and dimensions of the assemblies (see Figure 1A). Therefore, the stacked cells, oriented in the manner shown in Figure 1A, are such that the reinforcement member is parallel to the small (side) surface of the cells.
Regarding claim 18, Hernandez Saab discloses a second battery assembly, which comprises a plurality of second single cells disposed along the first direction, wherein the first battery assembly and the second battery assembly are disposed on the battery box body along a second direction, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction; wherein one side of the second single cell at an end portion of the second battery assembly facing the battery box body is aligned with one side of the reinforcement member facing the battery box body (see Figure 1A).
Regarding claim 19, Hernandez Saab discloses that the second single cell at the end portion of the second battery assembly is located in a corner area of the battery box body (see Figure 1A).
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.
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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez Saab as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lei (US 2023/0031476 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Hernandez Saab does not disclose a spacer. Lei—in an invention for a battery case with pressure relief mechanism—discloses a spacer 50 disposed between the pressure relief mechanism 40 and the battery 10, and the spacer comprises an insulating part (paragraph 136) so as to realize insulation between the battery and the housing without an additional support member, which reduces occupation of the space, and is beneficial to improve energy density of the battery cell without affecting the gas exhausting of the battery cell (paragraph 15). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to add an insulating spacer between the reinforcement member and the battery assembly/cell so as to ensure insulation between battery and housing, improving energy density of the battery cell without affecting the gas exhausting of the battery cell as suggested by Lei.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20 and 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Hernandez Saab fails to disclose a heat insulating member provided between a heat exchange member and the reinforcement member as in claim 20 and a part of the bus bar being located above the reinforcement member as recited in claim 21. No motivation was found in the prior art to modify Hernandez Saab these features. It should be noted, however, that the Drawings have been objected to as in paragraphs 3-5 above for these exact features. No written description rejection to these claims is appropriate in that context because the instant specification does support these features. However, the allowability of these claims will be reevaluated based on the replacement drawings provided so that the Office has the most complete understanding of the claimed structure prior to issuance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725