CTNF 18/239,163 CTNF 102104 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are rej ected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)( 1) as being ant icipated by U S 9, 318,734 B2 (Zhao). Zha o talks about a bimetal buss bar assembly for connecting battery cell terminals in a battery module for use in electric and hybrid vehicles, comprising a copper main body (copper block 164) and an aluminum connection element (aluminum strip 166) inset within a profile of the copper body and shape-matched therewith, wherein the assembly is laser welded to aluminum and copper battery cell terminals. Zhao anticipates each and every limitation of Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 12, as set forth below. Claim 1: Zhao discloses a buss bar 140 comprising “a layer or block 164 of copper material and having a layer or strip 166 of aluminum material applied at the positive end 142 adjacent the flat pad 130.” (Col. 6, lines 45–48). The aluminum strip 166 constitutes the connection block including a first metal (aluminum). Zhao discloses that the buss bar 140 is “generally manufactured of a layer or block 164 of copper material.” (Col. 6, lines 46–47). The copper block 164 constitutes the main body including a second metal (copper) different from the first metal (aluminum). Zhao discloses that “the copper block 164 includes a pocket 168 defined within the envelope of the copper block 164 that receives the aluminum strip 166. The envelope may be the same envelope of the buss bar 140.” (Col. 6, lines 58–61). Further, “The copper block 164 extends the full width 148 of the buss bar 140 over the aluminum strip 166. The copper block 164 extends the full height 146 of the buss bar 140 at the negative end 144.” (Col. 7, lines 1–3). The copper block 164 thus surrounds and encloses the aluminum strip 166. Zhao discloses that “The aluminum strip 166 is inset in the pocket 168 of the copper block 164 and fits within the envelope or profile of the copper block 164.” (Col. 6, lines 61–63). Zhao further discloses that “The aluminum strip 166 has a height 170 less than the height 146 of the buss bar 140. The aluminum strip 166 has a width 172 less than the width 148 of the buss bar 140.” (Col. 6, lines 64-66). Additionally, “The copper block 164 extends along the top 174 and at least a segment of the edge 178 to define the bimetal interface 141 along two mutually perpendicular surfaces of the aluminum strip 166.” (Col. 7, lines 6–9). The aluminum strip is mechanically fitted and shape-matched within the copper block profile along the height (thickness) direction (height 146, Col. 6, lines 12–14). The specification of the present application at [0039] defines “shape-matched” as referring to “structures having complementary shapes, and/or same thicknesses for example, or where the connection block 20 matches an opening in the main body 30 so as to fill the opening” — which is precisely what Zhao discloses with the aluminum strip 166 filling pocket 168 of the copper block 164. Accordingly, claim 1 is fully anticipated by Zhao. Claim 2: Zhao explicitly discloses: “the positive cell terminal 120 is aluminum and the negative cell terminal 122 is copper.” (Col. 5, lines 31–32). The buss bar 140 comprises “a layer or block 164 of copper material and having a layer or strip 166 of aluminum material.” (Col. 6, lines 45–48). One metal is aluminum and the other is copper, as recited in Claim 2. Claim 4: Zhao discloses: “The aluminum strip 166 has a top 174, a bottom 176 facing the flat pad 130 of the positive battery cell terminal 120, and an edge 178 between the top 174 and the bottom 176. The copper block 164 extends along the top 174 and at least a segment of the edge 178 to define the bimetal interface 141 along two mutually perpendicular surfaces of the aluminum strip 166.” (Col. 7, lines 3–9). The edge 178 (side of the connection block/aluminum strip) directly contacts the corresponding side wall of the pocket 168 of the copper block 164 (side of the main body) to form the boundary/bimetal interface 141. This is further confirmed by FIG. 5 of Zhao, which illustrates direct side-to-side contact between the aluminum strip 166 and the copper block 164 at the bimetal interface 141. Claim 6: Zhao discloses that “The buss bar 140 is configured to be terminated to a positive cell terminal 120 at a first interface 136 and a corresponding negative cell terminal 122 of the adjacent battery cell 102 at a second interface 138.” (Col. 5, lines 54–57). Zhao further discloses that the buss bar 140 is “connected to the positive plate 124 at a positive end 142 of the buss bar 140 and connected to the negative plate 126 at a negative end 144 of the buss bar 140.” (Col. 6, lines 9–11). The aluminum strip 166 at positive end 142 constitutes the first connection block and the copper connection region at negative end 144 constitutes the second connection block, both located at opposite ends along the lengthwise direction of the bus bar and forming the electrical connection between adjacent battery cells. Claim 9: Zhao discloses a battery module 100 including a plurality of prismatic battery cells 102 (Col. 4, lines 63–65). Zhao also discloses: “the positive cell terminal 120 is aluminum.” (Col. 5, lines 31–32). The aluminum strip 166 (connection block) of the buss bar is connected to the aluminum terminal (positive cell terminal 120) of the first battery cell, both being aluminum. Specifically, Zhao discloses: “the aluminum strip 166 of the positive end 142 of the buss bar 140 is welded to the aluminum pad 130 of the aluminum plate 124.” (Col. 7, lines 17-20). The terminal of the first battery cell comprises the same metal (aluminum) as the connection block (aluminum strip 166). Claim 10: Zhao discloses: “The buss bar assembly 134 is used to electrically connect cell terminals 120, 122 of adjacent prismatic battery cells 102.” (Col. 5, lines 49–51). Zhao further discloses: “the buss bar 140 is welded to the positive and negative plates 124, 126 such that the aluminum strip 166 of the positive end 142 of the buss bar 140 is welded to the aluminum pad 130 of the aluminum plate 124 and the copper block 164 at the negative end 144 of the buss bar 140 is welded to the copper pad 132 of the copper plate 126.” (Col. 7, lines 16–21). The bus bar electrically connects two neighboring battery cells. In the embodiment of FIG. 7 of Zhao, the buss bar 140 comprises an aluminum block 204 at the positive end and a copper strip 206 at the negative end, and the terminals of both cells include the same metal as the respective connection blocks: “the copper strip 206 of the buss bar 140 is welded to the copper block 202 of the copper plate 126 and the aluminum block 204 of the buss bar 140 is welded to the aluminum block 200 of the aluminum plate 124.” (Col. 9, lines 17–21). Claim 11: Zhao discloses: “the positive cell terminal 120 is aluminum and the negative cell terminal 122 is copper.” (Col. 5, lines 31–32). The inventive concept of Zhao is premised on connecting battery cells having terminals of different metals — aluminum and copper — through a bimetal bus bar assembly. The copper negative terminal plate 126 is made from a copper block 162 (Col. 6, lines 38–42) and constitutes a lead/terminal of a second metal (copper) different from the first metal (aluminum) of the positive terminal. Zhao thus discloses that at least one of the battery cells has terminals connected with leads including a second metal (copper) different from the first metal (aluminum). Claim 12: Zhao explicitly discloses: “the buss bar 140 is terminated by laser welding to the terminals 120, 122, and as such, the interfaces 136, 138 define laser weld interfaces 136, 138, respectively.” (Col. 5, lines 58–60). Zhao further discloses: “the aluminum strip 166 of the buss bar 140 at the positive end 142 area to the positive flat pad 130 by laser welding or other suitable means. The copper block 164 of the buss bar 140 at the negative end 144 is terminated to the negative flat pad 132 by laser welding or other suitable means.” (Col. 7, lines 11–16). The connection block (aluminum strip 166) of the bus bar is connected to the terminal of the first battery cell (positive terminal 120) by laser welding . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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 3, 5, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over US 9,318,734 B2 (Zhao) in view of US 9,997,878 B1 (Hua). Claim 3: Zhao discloses a bimetal interface 141 between the aluminum strip 166 and the copper block 164, wherein “The copper block 164 extends along the top 174 and at least a segment of the edge 178 to define the bimetal interface 141 along two mutually perpendicular surfaces of the aluminum strip 166.” (Col. 7, lines 6–9). The boundary surfaces run along the thickness direction. However, Zhao does not explicitly disclose boundary surfaces that converge (approach each other) or diverge (move away from each other) in a tapered manner along the thickness direction. Hua discloses exactly this feature. Hua discloses that “the first end 108 of the aluminum body 102 includes a plurality of first extensions 118 extending therefrom, and the copper connector 104 includes a plurality of second extensions 120 extending therefrom. The first extensions 118 and second extensions 120 are alternatingly stacked such that the plurality of first extensions 118 are received between respective pairs of the plurality of second extensions 120 and the cladded interface 106 is formed therebetween.” (Col. 5, lines 3–11, FIG. 3 description). This interdigitated, alternating extension structure defines boundary surfaces that approach and move away from each other along the thickness direction, as illustrated in FIG. 3 of Hua. Hua further discloses at Claim 5: “the first end of the aluminum body includes a plurality of first extensions extending toward the copper connector, the copper connector includes a plurality of second extensions extending toward the first end of the aluminum body, and the plurality of first extensions are received between respective pairs of the plurality of second extensions.” Hua expressly teaches that the plurality of first and second extensions “can be sized and shaped to further inhibit yield between the aluminum and the copper during thermal cycles and thereby improve robustness of the interface between the aluminum and the copper.” (Col. 5, lines 13–16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to apply Hua’s interdigitated, converging/diverging boundary surface profile to the bimetal bus bar of Zhao, because improving the mechanical robustness of the bimetal interface is a recognized and directly relevant design goal in Zhao’s bus bar assembly as well. Claim 5: Zhao discloses the aluminum strip 166 inset into the copper block 164, with the copper block extending over the top and along at least a segment of the edge of the aluminum strip (Col. 7, lines 1–9). As shown in FIG. 5 of Zhao, the copper block 164 covers the top 174 and edge 178 of the aluminum strip 166, but the bottom 176 of the aluminum strip faces the flat pad 130 of the battery cell terminal — resulting in an asymmetric profile with respect to the center of the thickness direction. Zhao does not explicitly disclose a symmetrical configuration about the thickness centerline. Hua discloses a symmetrical configuration. Hua discloses: “The lightweight busbar 100 includes a plurality of surfaces 114a–d, each of which includes a first portion 116a defined by the aluminum body 102 and a second portion 116b defined by the copper connector 104. In some aspects, each of the plurality of surfaces 114a–d is generally planar to provide substantially uniform packaging between the aluminum body 102 and the copper connectors 104.” (Col. 4, lines 55–62). As illustrated in FIG. 3 of Hua, the cross-sectional view shows the copper connector 104 enveloping the aluminum body 102 symmetrically from both the top and bottom surfaces, with the cladded interface 106 running symmetrically about the thickness centerline. Hua further discloses at Claim 2: “the copper connector envelops the first end of the aluminum body and extends toward a center of the aluminum body, the center extending between the first end and the second end of the aluminum body,” showing the symmetric, center-referenced configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the bimetal bus bar of Zhao symmetrically about the thickness centerline, as taught by Hua, because the interdigitated alternating extension structure of Hua – which also defines a symmetric profile about the thickness centerline – expressly teaches that such extensions “can be sized and shaped to further inhibit yield between the aluminum and the copper during thermal cycles and thereby improve robustness of the interface between the aluminum and the copper” (Col 5., lines 13-16). The symmetrical configuration is an inherent structural feature of Hua’s interdigitated interface, and applying it to Zhao’s bus bar would have yielded a predictable result using known techniques. Claim 7: Zhao discloses a single aluminum strip 166 at the positive end 142 and a copper block 164 at the negative end 144 of the buss bar 140 (Col. 6, lines 45–50). Zhao does not explicitly disclose paired connection blocks spaced apart in the widthwise direction. Hua discloses a busbar having copper connectors at both ends of an aluminum body: “The copper connectors 104 are disposed proximate the first end 108 and the second end 110 of the aluminum body 102 such that an electrical connection can be formed therebetween.” (Col. 4, lines 27–30). Hua further discloses at Claim 5: “the first end of the aluminum body includes a plurality of first extensions extending toward the copper connector, the copper connector includes a plurality of second extensions extending toward the first end of the aluminum body, and the plurality of first extensions are received between respective pairs of the plurality of second extensions.” FIG. 3 of Hua further illustrates a plurality of interdigitated extensions 118, 120 spaced across the width of the interface — i.e., multiple connection features spaced apart in the widthwise direction. Hua also discloses at Col. 4, lines 32–35 that “In some aspects, the copper connectors 104 are configured to be removably fastened to copper terminals 40 using fasteners such as bolts 50,” with FIG. 2 showing two spaced-apart fastening locations across the width of the busbar. Both references address bimetallic bus bars for the same EV battery application. The combination of Zhao and Hua results in a useable bus bar for useable a configuration of battery cells, which would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art as a predictable variation of the known bimetallic bus bar structure. Claim 8: Zhao discloses the aluminum strip 166 inset within the profile/pocket of the copper block 164: “The aluminum strip 166 is inset in the pocket 168 of the copper block 164 and fits within the envelope or profile of the copper block 164.” (Col. 6, lines 62–64). Zhao discloses cladding as the joining method: “the aluminum strip 166 may be mechanically and electrically connected to the copper block 164 by cladding the aluminum strip 166 and the copper block 164.” (Col. 6, lines 50–53). However, Zhao does not explicitly describe a press-working step with raw material blocks being sandwiched under a predetermined pressure to fit into a profile. Hua explicitly teaches the press-working/cladding process. Hua discloses: “The cladded interface 106 can be created using any of a number of cladding processes such as extruding, pressing, rolling, or fusion welding portions of the aluminum body 102 together with portions of the copper connectors 104.” (Col. 4, lines 48–52). Hua’s method of forming the busbar (FIG. 4, steps 402–406) includes: “disposing 404 the copper connector 104 proximate the first end 108 of the aluminum body 102, and bonding 406 the first end 108 of the aluminum body 102 to the copper connector 104 using the cladding process to form the cladded interface 106 therebetween.” (Col. 5, lines 19–24). Hua further discloses at Claim 14: “bonding the first end of the aluminum body to the copper connector using a cladding process to form a cladded interface therebetween to inhibit yield between aluminum and copper during thermal cycling.” FIG. 3 of Hua further illustrates the first extensions 118 and second extensions 120 arranged in an “alternatingly stacked configuration” — structurally equivalent to raw material blocks being sandwiched and pressed into the profile of the opposing body under a predetermined pressure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply Hua’s pressing/cladding process — specifically pressing raw material blocks of the connection elements into the profile of the main body under a predetermined pressure — to the bimetal bus bar assembly of Zhao. Zhao already discloses that cladding is used to join the aluminum strip to the copper block (Col. 6, lines 50–53), and Hua provides explicit manufacturing process details for performing such cladding via pressing. Both references are in the same technical field (bimetallic EV battery bus bars), address the same problem (mechanically and electrically bonding aluminum and copper elements in a bus bar), and Hua’s pressing process would have been a naturally selected technique for achieving the inset profile fit of Zhao’s aluminum strip within the copper block pocket. A person of ordinary skill would have had a clear reason to combine and a reasonable expectation of success. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATEF A SHAT whose telephone number is (571)270-0364. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 5712721418. 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. /A.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1712 /MICHAEL B CLEVELAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 2 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 3 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 4 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 5 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 6 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 7 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 8 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 9 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 10 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 11 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 12 Art Unit: 1712 Application/Control Number: 18/239,163 Page 13 Art Unit: 1712