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 .
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made to applicant’s amendment of claims 1 filed on 07/13/2026. Claims 2-4, 10-12, 17 and 19 have been canceled. Claim 21-22 are newly submitted claims. Accordingly, claims 1, 5-9, 13-16, and 20-22 remain pending and are claims addressed and examined below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the spacer taught by Friedrich does not comprise a separate different member and that the regions are made of the same material folded to create a thickness variation, not structurally distinct different member, the Examiner disagrees. In ¶ 0065 and ¶ 0076 -¶ 0082, Friedrich discloses a number of functions and properties that the spacer must possess (pages 20 and 24-25). Friedrich goes on to list polyethylene and polypropylene as examples of materials with such properties. In ¶ 0082 on page 25, Friedrich additionally teaches that the spacer may be composed of several different materials such as an elastic material and a metal. This reads on the spacer comprising a structurally different member regardless of whether the spacer is formed unitarily or not, the spacer may still comprise a different member. Friedrich does not limit the materials only to the specific ones mentioned. One of ordinary skill in the art may utilize any combination of materials possessing the suitable properties taught by Friedrich to reach the porous elastic member and different member of the claimed invention. Applicant states that the spacer taught by Friedrich comprises integral parts of a single unitary spacer assembly and not separate different member. However, the claim does not preclude the porous elastic member and the different member being formed unitarily.
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, 8-9, 13, 18, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Friedrich (DE102018133004 A1, Translation used for citation) in view of Kogami et al. (US 20230135817 A1) and Takahashi et al. (US 20220247040 A1).
With regards to claim 1, Friedrich teaches a battery pack, comprising: a plurality of rectangular secondary batteries that are disposed along a predetermined arrangement direction (page 31; ¶ 0094 and ¶ 0096 and Fig. 3). Friedrich teaches the battery pack wherein each of the plurality of rectangular secondary batteries (cells) includes a battery case (page 2; ¶ 0007 and Fig. 3). In ¶ 0007, Friedrich’s teaches a cell (6) located inside the casing that reads on an electrode body that is accommodated in the battery case. Friedrich goes on to teach the battery case including a pair of first side walls opposing each other (12), and each of the plurality of rectangular secondary batteries is arranged with the corresponding pair of first side walls opposing each other (Fig. 3). Friedrich teaches a porous elastic member (spacer) that is disposed between the rectangular secondary batteries that are adjacent in the arrangement direction (Page 24; ¶ 0078, Page 31; ¶ 0094, and Page 42; ¶ 0117). Friedrich also teaches a restriction mechanism including a pair of plates applying a restriction load on the plurality of rectangular secondary batteries and the porous elastic member from the arrangement direction (Page 3-4; ¶ 0011 and page 26; ¶ 0088). Friedrich teaches that the porous elastic member (spacer) may be formed of different materials (Page 25; ¶ 0082) which reads on a different member additionally provided between one of the rectangular secondary batteries and the porous elastic member (page 19-20: ¶ 0061 - ¶ 0063 and page 43: ¶ 0118). Since the porous elastic member (spacer) is disposed between the batteries, at least one pair of first side walls in each of the plurality of rectangular secondary batteries opposes the porous elastic member. Friedrich goes on to teach that the porous elastic member includes a plurality of communication holes that communicate with outside of the porous elastic member and is configured to be deformable elastically in the arrangement direction by taking in or discharging gas (Page 18; ¶ 0057 - ¶ 0058, ¶ 0078 and ¶ 0024). Friedrich teaches that the different member includes a gas flow channel extending from an outer edge of the different member to inside on at least a surface that is in contact with the porous elastic member in a state where the different member is assembled to the battery pack (page 19-20: ¶ 0061 - ¶ 0063 and page 43: ¶ 0118). In Fig. 17, Friedrich also teaches that the different member includes a first part and a second part spaced apart from the first part in at least one direction that is orthogonal to the arrangement direction, and a space between the first and second parts of the different member
PNG
media_image1.png
298
581
media_image1.png
Greyscale
forms the gas flow channel of the different member. Fig. 17 is shown below.
As discussed earlier, Friedrich teaches that at least one of the pair of first side walls in each of the plurality of rectangular secondary batteries opposes the porous elastic member. However, Friedrich does not teach an area of each of the pair of first side walls is 20000 mm2 or more in plan view. Similar to the applicant, Friedrich, discloses that the battery pack is meant for use in vehicles [0006]. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, barring a showing of unexpected results, to adjust the size of the rectangular secondary battery of Friedrich by including a 20000 mm2 area of the first side wall, since different sized vehicles require different sized batteries as mere changes in size or relative dimension present a case of prima facie obviousness. See MPEP 2144.04.IV.A.
Friedrich teaches that the porous elastic member (spacer) may be formed of polypropylene and polyethylene which are resins (page 24-26: ¶ 0081). In ¶ 0065, Friedrich teaches that the porous elastic member (spacer) may comprise materials that allow for the absorption of deformation work (page 21). However, Friedrich does not specifically teach that the porous elastic member (spacer) includes at least one of natural rubber, synthetic rubber, silicone resin or urethane resin.
In a similar field of endeavor Kogami teaches a separator interposed between battery cells (¶ 0025). Kogami teaches that the separator may comprise an elastomer layer, and a plastic foam layer that deform and absorb the expansion of each battery cell (¶ 0026). In ¶ 0026, Kogami also teaches that the separator is capable of absorbing large expansion while more smoothly absorbing small expansion of the battery cell having a high occurrence frequency. Kogami teaches that the elastomer material may be a synthetic rubber and similar to Friedrich, Kogami discloses that the plastic foam may be an open-cell plastic (¶ 0029 - ¶ 0031). The separator reads on the claimed porous elastic member.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to include an elastomer layer such as synthetic rubber as taught by Kogami in the spacer taught by Friedrich as this would predictably yield a spacer capable of deforming to absorb large and small expansions of the battery cell with no unpredictable results. Through this modification, modified Friedrich teaches that the porous elastic member comprises synthetic rubber which reads on the porous elastic member comprising at least one of natural rubber, synthetic rubber, silicone resin or urethane resin.
As discussed above, Friedrich teaches that the porous elastic member (spacer) may comprise a combination of different materials (page 25; ¶ 0082). Friedrich also teaches that the porous elastic member (spacer) may comprise materials that allow for the absorption of deformation work and prevent thermal runaway by acting as a thermal barrier (page 21; ¶ 0065). However, Friedrich does not specifically teach that the different member includes at least one of a non-porous insulation film; a heat-resistant member including high-melting-point resin; a heat-resistant member including a resin material and ceramic particles; or a heat insulation member including a nanoporous body mainly containing silica aerogel or silica.
In a similar field of endeavor Takahashi teaches a separator interposed between battery cells to absorb the expansion of battery cells (¶ 0046). Takahashi teaches that the separator is formed of a hybrid material comprising an inorganic powder and a fibrous reinforcing material fibrous reinforcing material that may further include an elastic sheet (¶ 0047). Takahashi teaches that the elastic sheet may be a synthetic rubber or, similar to Friedrich, a resin such as polypropylene which suppresses deformation of the upper edge part of the battery cell (¶ 0070). Takahashi goes on to teach that the inorganic powder is preferably silica aerogel which is a ceramic (¶ 0047). Takahashi teaches that the fibrous reinforcing material is polyethylene terephthalate which is a resin (¶ 0047). In ¶ 0035, Takahashi teaches that the hybrid material also functions as an insulating sheet that insulates the stacked battery cells (¶ 0035). The separator reads on the different member that includes a heat insulation member including a nanoporous body containing silica aerogel and a heat-resistant member including a resin material and ceramic particles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the porous elastic member (spacer) taught by Friedrich to include the hybrid material taught by taught by Takahashi as this would predictably yield a spacer capable of absorbing the expansion of the battery cells as well as insulating them. Through this modification, modified Friedrich teaches that the different member may comprise a nanoporous body containing silica aerogel or a heat-resistant member including a resin material and ceramic particles which reads on the different member comprising at least one of a non-porous insulation film, a heat- resistant member including high-melting-point resin, a heat-resistant member including a resin material and ceramic particles, or a heat insulation member including a nanoporous body containing silica aerogel or silica.
With regards to claim 5, In Fig. 13, Friedrich shows that in the battery case of each of the plurality of rectangular secondary batteries, an exterior body including a bottom wall, the pair of first side walls extending from the bottom wall, a pair of second side walls extending from the bottom wall and opposing each other, and an opening that opposes the bottom wall, and a sealing plate that seals the opening of the exterior body are joined. Fig. 13 below shows
PNG
media_image2.png
555
725
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the battery housing with six walls; However, all walls are not visible in this view.
Regarding claim 8, modified Friedrich teaches the battery pack according to claim 1. Friedrich
also teaches that the spacer is made of plastics such as polyethylene or polypropylene (page 24-26; [0081]). Friedrich does not explicitly teach that the porous elastic member is made of resin however, polyethylene and polypropylene anticipate resin since they are a species of the resin genus. See MPEP § 2131.02.
With regards to claim 9, modified Friedrich teaches the battery pack according to claim 1. Friedrich teaches a spacer that reads on the porous elastic member of the claimed invention. As discussed earlier, Friedrich teaches that the spacer is a porous and elastically deformable material that is arranged between the batteries (page 24: ¶ 0078; page 31: ¶ 0094; page 42; ¶ 0117). The holes that form the porous body taught by Friedrich read on the communication holes. Overall, the resulting structure of Friedrich is a porous elastic member with communication holes and will therefore be able to discharge gas through the plurality of communication holes in response to at least one of the rectangular secondary batteries adjacent to the porous elastic member expands, and take in gas through the plurality of communication holes in response to the at least one of the rectangular secondary batteries adjacent to the porous elastic member shrinking.
PNG
media_image3.png
298
581
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 13, as discussed earlier, Friedrich teaches that the different member includes the first and second part spaced apart from the first part in at least one direction that is orthogonal to the arrangement direction, and the space between the first and second parts of the different member forms the gas flow channel (16) of the different member (page 43: ¶ 0118, Fig. 17). Fig. 17 is shown below.
With regards to claim 18, modified Friedrich teaches the battery pack according to claim 1. Friedrich is silent on a thickness of the porous elastic member in a state after the porous elastic member is assembled to the battery pack and compressed. However, Friedrich teaches a similar porous elastic member that is arranged and configured to function in the same manner as the porous elastic member as the claimed invention.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, barring a showing of unexpected results, to adjust the compressed thickness of the porous elastic member to be 2 to 9 mm, as mere changes in size or relative dimension present a case of prima facie obviousness. See MPEP 2144.04.IV.A.
PNG
media_image1.png
298
581
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 20, In Fig. 17, Friedrich shows that the outer edge of the different member is located on an inner side of the outer edge of the porous elastic member in plan view. Fig. 17 is shown below.
With regards to claim 21, modified Friedrich teaches that the different member comprises a heat-resistant member including a resin material and ceramic particles (Takahashi; ¶ 0047).
With regards to claim 22, modified Friedrich teaches that the different comprises a heat insulation member including a nanoporous body containing silica aerogel or silica (Takahashi; ¶ 0047).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Friedrich (DE102018133004 A1, Translation used for citation) in view of Kogami et al. (US 20230135817 A1) and Takahashi et al. (US 20220247040 A1) as applied to claim 5 above, and in further view of Holman et. al (US 20170237112 A1).
With regards to claim 6, modified Friedrich teaches the battery pack according to claim 5. Modified Friedrich is silent to a ratio of an area of the porous elastic member to the area of one of the pair of first side walls is 50% or more in the plan view. However, Friedrich teaches that the contact of the heat medium with the cells is such that at least 50% of the respective cell wall comes into direct contact with the heat medium (¶ 0019).
In a similar field of endeavor, Holman teaches a battery pack comprising a porous elastic member disposed between rectangular secondary batteries (¶ 0036). Holman goes on to teach that a ratio of an area of the porous elastic member to the area of the first side wall is 50% or more in the plan view (¶ 0004).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the porous elastic member taught by Friedrich to have a ratio of an area of the porous elastic member to the area of the first side wall be 50% as taught by Holman. This will predictably enable the spacer to exert a preload on designated portion or portions of the electrochemical cell while cooling the cell.
Claim(s) 7 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Friedrich (DE102018133004 A1, Translation used for citation) in view of Kogami et al. (US 20230135817 A1) and Takahashi et al. (US 20220247040 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Torita et al. (US 20180090763 A1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Friedrich teaches the battery pack according to claim 1. Friedrich teaches that the porous elastic member (spacer) may comprise polyethylene or polypropylene (page 25, ¶ 0081). However, Friedrich is silent on the porosity of the porous elastic member, prompting one of ordinary skill to look to related art.
In a similar field of endeavor, Torita also teaches a separator that may include porous polyethylene or polypropylene (¶ 0080). Torita teaches that the separator may have a porosity of about 30% to 80%.
As Torita teaches the same material as Friedrich, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to form the porous elastic member to have a porosity within a range such as 30% to 80% as taught by Torita as there are no unpredictable results. Through this modification, modified Friedrich teaches that a porosity od the porous elastic member to be within a range of 30% to 80% which is within the claimed range of 10 to 90 vol%. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 15, as discussed earlier, modified Friedrich teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein a porosity of the porous elastic member may be 30% to 80% which overlaps with the claimed range of 25 to 75 vol%. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 16, modified Friedrich is silent on the elastic force of the porous elastic member being 1 kN/mm to 10x3 kN/mm.
Tirota teaches that the separator may have a spring constant of about 90 to 150 kN/mm. This spring constant reads on the elastic force of the separator as it is a representation of the force exerted per mm of displacement.
As Tirota teaches the same material as Friedrich, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to form the spacer taught by Friedrich to have an elastic force within the range taught by Tirota as there would be no unexpected results. Through this modification, modified Friedrich teaches that an elastic force of the porous elastic member is 90 to 150 kN/mm, which falls within the claimed range of 1 kN/mm to 10x3 kN/mm. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Friedrich (DE102018133004 A1, Translation used for citation) in view of Kogami et al. (US 20230135817 A1) and Takahashi et al. (US 20220247040 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kitaoka et al. (US 20160293929 A1).
With regards to claim 14, In Fig. 13, Friedrich shows that each of the first side walls has a flat shape having a height in a height direction perpendicular to the arrangement direction and a width in a direction perpendicular to the height direction and the arrangement direction. However, Friedrich is silent on the exact measurements of the height and width of the side walls. See Fig. 13 above.
In a similar field of endeavor, Kitaoka teaches dimensions of a prismatic secondary battery (¶ 0064). Kitaoka teaches that the battery is particularly effective when the height of is 10 cm or less and the width of the prismatic secondary battery is 17 cm or greater (¶ 0064). These dimensions read on the dimensions of a first cell wall. In a case where the height is 5 cm and the width is 17 cm, the ratio of the height to the width is approximately 0.30, which falls within the range of the claimed invention (1/3 to 1/15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the first cell wall taught by Friedrich to have a height and width within the range taught by Kitaoka as this would predictably yield an effective battery cell.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNSUYADOR YUSIF whose telephone number is (571)272-4531. The examiner can normally be reached 7 am - 5 pm (M-R).
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, Galen H Hauth can be reached at (571) 270-5516. 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.
/HUNSUYADOR MUGEESATU YUSIF/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights