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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/28/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words and 15 lines. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4 recites “wherein of the first edge” in Line 27. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-3, 5-9 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “at least one of a sectional shape of the first mating surface and a sectional shape of the second mating surface includes an intersection surface” and Claims 2-3 are dependent on claim 1 and recite “wherein the intersection surface extends” which fails to clearly point to which mating surface (first or second) comprises an intersection surface and if both mating surfaces comprise an intersection surface as allowed by claim 1’s language then claim 2-3 are unclear which intersection surface comprises the claim limitations.
Claims 5-9 all suffer from the same ambiguity as claims 2-3 above as their dependency is ultimately on claim 1. Claims 5, 8, and 9 recite “wherein a sectional shape of the intersection surface is” and Claims 6-7 depend from claim 5 and refer to a sectional shape of the slope of the intersection surface which fails to clearly point out the mating surface with the intersection surface.
Claims 10-12 all suffer from the same ambiguity as claims 2-3 above as their dependency is ultimately on claim 1. Claim 10 recites “wherein the intersection surface extends” which fails to clearly point out the mating surface with the intersection surface and Claims 11-12 are dependent on claim 10.
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.
Claims 1-3, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alisic et al. (US 20210313649 A1), hereinafter "Alisic". Alisic et al. is analogous prior art to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of endeavor, namely doping of battery cell holders.
In regard to Claim 1, Alisic et al. discloses a battery unit comprising: a plurality of cylindrical cells arranged such that a plurality of electrode terminals face in a same direction; and a cell holder that holds the plurality of cylindrical cells; wherein the cell holder includes a first end holder, an intermediate holder, and a second end holder which are arranged in order in a length direction of the cylindrical cell (Alisic, Abstract). Alisic et al. also discloses the intermediate holder includes an intermediate cylindrical hole that penetrates in the length direction of the cylindrical cell and houses an intermediate portion of the cylindrical cell in the length direction, a first opening that opens from the intermediate cylindrical hole toward the first end holder, a first edge that is an edge of the first opening, a second opening that opens from the intermediate cylindrical hole toward the second end holder, and a second edge that is an edge of the second opening (Alisic, [0005], Figure 3).
Alisic et al. further discloses the first end holder which includes a first cylindrical hole that penetrates in the length direction and houses one end of the cylindrical cell in the length direction; a third opening that opens from the first cylindrical hole toward the intermediate holder, and a third edge that is an edge of the third opening as well as a second end holder that includes a second cylindrical hole that penetrates in the length direction and houses the other end of the cylindrical cell in the length direction, a fourth opening that opens from the second cylindrical hole toward the intermediate holder, and a fourth edge that is an edge of the fourth opening (Alisic, [0040]).
Additionally, Alisic et al. discloses the first cylindrical hole, the intermediate cylindrical hole, and the second cylindrical hole are arranged in order in the length direction to form a cell housing portion in which one of the cylindrical cells is housed, a same number of the cell housing portions as the plurality of cylindrical cells are provided (Alisic, [0016-0017], Figure 2), wherein the first edge and the third edge are abutted against each other to form an annular first mating surface as viewed in the length direction and wherein the second edge and the fourth edge are abutted against each other to form an annular second mating surface as viewed in the length direction (See Annotated Figure 1).
Alisic et al. also discloses at least one of a sectional shape of the first mating surface and a sectional shape of the second mating surface includes an intersection surface intersecting a planar direction orthogonal to the length direction (See Annotated Figure 5). Lastly, while Alisic et al. is silent as to the diameter of the cylindrical hole in the intermediate unit, the material chosen for the intermediate unit is an elastic material which is configured to create compressive contact and elastically deform in order to clamp the battery cells (Alisic, Abstract), Therefore the diameter of the cylindrical hole in the intermediate unit must be some degree smaller than the diameter of the cell in order to create a compressive force and clamp the battery cells, as a cylindrical hole that was the same exact size or larger than the battery cell would not be capable of creating a compressive load and clamping the cells.
PNG
media_image1.png
412
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
PNG
media_image2.png
569
641
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5
In regard to Claims 2-3, Alisic et al. discloses the battery unit according to claim 1. Alisic et al. also discloses wherein the intersection surface extends in a circumferential direction (Alisic, Figure 6), which further has an annular shape (Alisic, [0017]).
In regard to Claim 13, Alisic et al. discloses the battery unit according to claim 1. Alisic et al. also discloses wherein the first end holder and the second end holder are formed of thermoplastic resin, and the intermediate holder is formed of an elastic body (Alisic, [0003]).
Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alisic et al. (US 20210313649 A1), hereinafter "Alisic" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Kawamura et al. (US 5578392 A), hereinafter "Kawamura". Alisic and Kawamura et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely doping of battery cell holders.
In regard to Claim 4, Alisic et al. discloses the battery unit according to claim 1. Alisic et al. also discloses an embodiment where the first edge has a shape and structure (Alisic, Figure 6) and a second embodiment where the second edge has a different shape and structure than the first edge (Alisic, Figure 4) and even though the shape of the first and second edge may have a similar shape as each other in each embodiment a variation in shape and structure is contemplated and would yield predictable results.
Kawamura et al. discloses a cell holder wherein the first end holder (upper end portion), an intermediate holder (supporting member), and a second end holder (lower end portion) (Kawamura, Abstract), wherein the interface of the upper and lower end portions mate with the intermediate holders surfaces and wherein the sections have a different shape and size (Kawamura, Column 4, Figures 24, 25) which is done, in part to create an orientation constraint for the cylindrical cells that prevents a mismatch during assembly (Kawamura, Columns 10-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a first and second edge which are a different shape from each other as taught in Kawamura and as depicted in Alisic as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of achieving the benefits taught in Kawamura and as doing so would amount to nothing more than a variation of it for use in the same field based on design incentives or other market forces, as the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alisic et al. (US 20210313649 A1), hereinafter "Alisic" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Hashimoto et al. (JP2019216054A - Machine Translation), hereinafter "Hashimoto". Alisic and Hashimoto et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely doping of battery cell holders.
In regard to Claims 5-9, Alisic et al. discloses the battery unit according to claim 1. Alisic et al. also discloses wherein a sectional shape of the intersection surface is an arc surface (See Annotated Figure 5). While the skilled artisan of Alisic et al. provides the intersection surface in some sectional shape, it is not particularly limited and the desired result is having the surfaces abut tightly and sealingly against the surfaces in contact with the intermediate holder material, dampen vibration and improve heat dissipation (Alisic, [0003, 0051]).
Further, Hashimoto et al. discloses a battery unit comprising cylindrical cells and a cell holder that holds the plurality of cylindrical cells; wherein the cell holder includes a first end holder, an intermediate holder, and a second end holder which are arranged in order in a length direction of the cylindrical cell (Hashimoto, Abstract), wherein an annular first mating surface as viewed in the length direction is formed with the edges of the intermediate holders and end holders and a sectional shape of the mating surfaces includes an intersection surface intersecting a planar direction orthogonal to the length direction (Hashimoto, [10-12]).
Hashimoto et al. also discloses the elastically deforming convex portion (intersection surface) can have a truncated pyramid shape (linear slope) and wherein a sectional shape of the slope is inclined so as to be located in a length direction in which the first or second end holder is disposed as viewed from the intermediate holder as being away from the cylindrical cell (Hashimoto [11-12]), Hashimoto et al also discloses the intersection surface may be any one of a truncated cone shape, a hemispherical shape, a semi-elliptical spherical shape a trapezoidal shaped, drop shaped or triangular shaped (V shape) (Hashimoto, [11, 18, 47-48).
The shape of the intersection surface is one that is optimized by the skilled artisan and as taught in Hashimoto, has the beneficial function of abutting tightly and sealingly against the surfaces in contact with the intermediate holder material by increasing the frictional resistance and dampening movement and rotation of the cells (Hashimoto, [9]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide an intersection surface with a beneficial shape as taught in Hashimoto as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of achieving the benefits taught in Hashimoto and as doing so would amount to nothing more than applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
In regard to Claims 10-12, Alisic et al. discloses the battery unit according to claim 1. Alisic et al. also discloses wherein the intersection surface extends linearly in the length direction, and at least one of the sectional shapes of the first mating surface and the sectional shape of the second mating surface is a rectangular shape (Alisic, Figure 2), but is silent as to the shape being a rectangular wave.
Hashimoto et al. discloses the sectional shape of a mating surface may be a columnar shape and discloses a plurality of protrusions (rectangular wave) at the mating surfaces (Hashimoto, Figure 11) which is nothing more than a pattern which the skilled artisan can optimize and would be obvious to try in an intermittent or continuous fashion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide rectangular waved shaped patterns on the mating surfaces as doing so would amount to nothing more than a variation of a pattern for use in the same field based on design incentives or other market forces, as the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alisic et al. (US 20210313649 A1), hereinafter "Alisic" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Razack et al. (US 20160319174 A1), hereinafter "Razack". Alisic and Razack et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely doping of battery cell holders.
In regard to Claim 14, Alisic et al. discloses the battery unit according to claim 13. Alisic et al. also discloses wherein the intermediate holder is formed of an elastic body such as a polymer (Alisic, [0049]), but is silent as to a phase change material being included. The skilled artisan of Alisic must provide some material for the intermediate holder which has certain properties well known to the skilled artisan in the same field.
Razack et al. discloses a beneficial cell holder comprising a PCM composite and further comprising an elastic polymer with the preferential features of being flexible/compressible (Razack, [0023, 0026]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the elastic body containing a phase change material as taught in Razack et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would amount to nothing more than the use of known material to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MAX OTERO whose telephone number is (571)272-2559. The examiner can normally be reached M-F Generally 7:30-430.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/K.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JONATHAN CREPEAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725