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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP 2022-122828, filed on 08/01/2022.
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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al (US Patent No. 9,065,111 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a battery pack (Abstract) comprising: a cell stack configured by stacking a plurality of battery cells with a substantially rectangular parallelepiped shape (Abstract, Fig. 4); and a battery case provided in a substantially rectangular parallelepiped shape and accommodating the cell stack (Abstract, Fig. 2), wherein the battery case includes a first protrusion (Lattice shaped rib 112a) protruding from an outer surface of the battery case to an outside of the battery case at a position of a gap between adjacent battery cells in a stacking direction of the cell stack (Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 8a).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein: the battery case includes a pair of side walls (side walls 112), the pair of side walls extending along the stacking direction and facing a side surface of the cell stack (Column 3, lines 35-44; Fig. 2); and the first protrusion is provided on at least one of the pair of side walls (Column 3, lines 3-4; Modified Fig. 8a).
PNG
media_image1.png
505
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Modified Figure 8a
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.
Claims 3-5 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Choi et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,777,172 B2).
Regarding claim 3, Kim fails to teach a second protrusion that protrudes from an inner surface of the battery case to be interposed between adjacent battery cells on an inner side of the first protrusion.
Choi teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the battery case includes a second protrusion (spacing bar SS) that protrudes from an inner surface of the battery case to be interposed between the adjacent battery cells on an inner side of the first protrusion (Fig. 3; Column 3, lines 29-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery pack taught by Kim by incorporating the second protrusions between adjacent battery cells and to place them on an inner side of the first protrusion, as taught by Choi. Doing so would secure a gap between adjacent cells and accommodate battery swelling and volume expansion, preventing excessive stress and battery pack deterioration, as stated by Choi (Column 6, lines 10-21).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kim teaches the battery pack according to claim 3, wherein the battery case includes a pair of side walls (sidewalls 112), the pair of side walls extending along the stacking direction and facing a side surface of the cell stack (Column 3, lines 35-44; Fig. 2); the first protrusion is provided on at least one of the pair of side walls; the battery case includes a first rib provided on an outer surface of at least one of the pair of side walls on which the first protrusion is provided (Reinforcement portion 180; Fig. 6, 7a); and the first rib is provided to extend parallel or obliquely to the stacking direction (Claims 13, 17). However, Kim fails to teach the second protrusion provided on at least one pair of the side walls, and a first rib on which the second protrusion is provided.
Choi teaches the second protrusion provided on at least one pair of the side walls (Claims 19-20; Fig. 6), a first rib (Connection bar SC1) provided on an outer surface of at least one of the pair of side walls on which the second protrusion is provided (Fig. 6), and the first rib is provided to extend parallel or obliquely to the stacking direction (Column 6, lines 39-42; Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery pack taught by Kim by incorporating a rib on which a second protrusion is formed, as taught by Choi, in order to improve rigidity in the stacking direction, as recognized by Choi.
Regarding claim 5, modified Kim teaches the battery pack according to claim 4, wherein: the first protrusion provided on at least one of the pair of side walls is provided for each gap of the adjacent battery cells in the cell stack (Lattice shaped rib 112a; Fig. 8a), and the first protrusion provided on at least one of the pair of side walls is provided so as to extend along a gap of the adjacent battery cells (Fig. 7a); and the first rib is provided so as to bridge between the first protrusions adjacent to each other (Reinforcement portion 180; Fig. 6, 7a).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein: the battery case includes a bottom wall (Bottom portion 111) extending along the stacking direction and facing a bottom surface of the cell stack (Column 3, lines 40-42; Fig. 4). However, Kim fails to teach a third protrusion protruding from an inner surface of the bottom wall to be interposed between adjacent battery cells, and a second rib provided on an outer surface of the bottom wall of the battery case, wherein the second rib extends parallel or obliquely to the stacking direction.
Choi teaches a third protrusion protruding from an inner surface of the bottom wall so as to be interposed between the adjacent battery cells (Column 15, lines 4-8); and the battery case includes a second rib (Bottom connection bar SC2) provided on an outer surface of the bottom wall (Column 2, lines 44-48), wherein the second rib is provided to extend parallel or obliquely to the stacking direction (Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery pack taught by Kim by incorporating a third protrusion from the bottom surface to be interposed between adjacent battery cells, and by arranging a second rib on the bottom wall extending in the stacking direction, as taught by Choi. Doing so would increase structural rigidity and provide a gap between batteries in case of swelling, as recognized by Choi.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Park (U.S. Patent No. 9,112,207 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein: the battery case includes an upper wall (Upper cover 122) extending along the stacking direction and facing an upper surface of the cell stack (Fig. 1a). However, Kim fails to teach a third protrusion protruding from an inner surface of the upper wall to be interposed between adjacent cells, and a second rib provided on an outer surface of the upper wall of the battery case, wherein the second rib extends parallel or obliquely to the stacking direction.
Park teaches a third protrusion (Dividing panel 27) protruding from an inner surface of the upper wall (Upper panel 26) so as to be interposed between the adjacent battery cells (Fig. 4); and the battery case includes a second rib (Fig. 1; long box-shaped rib extending down the middle of the cover) provided on an outer surface of the upper wall, wherein the second rib is provided so as to extend parallel or obliquely to the stacking direction (Fig. 1; X-direction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack taught by Kim by incorporating a protrusion protruding from the upper wall to a gap between two cells and by including a second rib extending along the outer surface of the upper wall, as taught by Park. Doing so would improve battery and frame stability, as recognized by Park (Column 1, lines 14-19).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON M BAIRD whose telephone number is (571)272-9742. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5pm.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/CAMERON M BAIRD/
Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728