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 .
The Applicant amended claims 12 and 15; and added new claims 18-20. The pending claims are claims 1-20.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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.
Claim 20 is 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 20 recites the limitation "the first and second contact regions" in last two lines of claim 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 10, 11, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman et al., US 20070054561, in view of Steuer US 2003/0077485 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Gutman et al., discloses a plurality of battery modules (20A and 20B) in Fig. 20a. Fig. 19a shows pole pins protruding out of one battery module which should be the same for the adjacent battery module in Fig. 20a. Fig.19a shows pole pin coverings (55) but doesn’t quite have first and second covers mounted on respective first and second battery modules. Fig. 19a shows an insulating housing 50 but doesn’t show it being mounted on the first and second battery modules.
Gutman teaches module cover connected with a pole pin covering and a gap between the pole pin cover and the base of the module cover.
Steuer (US 2003/0077485 A1) teaches a module cover (1) which is integrated with a pole pin covering (7) where there is a gap between the pole pin cover (7) and the base of the module cover (1).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Streuer teaches the first and second pole pin coverings (0016- 0018), further are connected to the respective cover in regions facing the end edge of the respective cover (0016-0018) and positioned over the first and second pole pins respectively. The claimed first and second contact regions are herein equated to a surface of the pole pin which is in contact with the electrical connector.
Streuer "relates to an electrical rechargeable battery adapted to connect to at least one substantially flat cable lug of a cable connection including a cover made at least partially from substantially non- conductive material and having a substantially circular recess, an end pole provided with an external thread and arranged in the circular recess in the cover such that the end pole is surrounded on all sides by the substantially non-conductive material of the cover and is accessible only from above and through at least one narrow slot in the cover through which a flat cable connection can be inserted, and a covering cap which may be screwed onto the end pole to substantially isolate a region which is accessible from above." (0007).
Regarding claim 11, Streuer teaches a motor vehicle (0018) having the battery system of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zeng et al., US 2020/0091487.
Regarding claim 12, Zeng teaches a battery connector (3) for electrical contact-connecting a first pole pin of a first battery module (Fig. 3) to a second pole pin of a second battery module (Fig. 2-4) (0075); wherein the battery connector comprises a busbar with a first contact region (32); a second contact region (31); and a connecting region (33) having an electrically insulating coating (4) between the first contact region and the second contact region (Fig. 4) (0078-0079); the first contact region and the second contact region being provided respectively with cut-outs (cutouts between 32 and 31 respectively in Fig. 4); wherein the cut-outs are open in an insertion direction (x direction in Fig. 4) that is parallel to a main plane of extent of the bus-bar (plane formed in x-direction and y-direction in Fig. 4) and orthogonal to the main direction of extent of the bus-bar (plane formed in x-direction and y-direction in Fig. 4) and orthogonal to the main direction of extend (y direction in Fig. 4); wherein the cutouts are disposed through an entirety of a thickness of the busbar, wherein a direction of the thickness is oriented in a z-direction that is orthogonal to the main plane of extent (z direction in Fig. 4).
Thus, the claim is anticipated.
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.
Claim(s) 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al., US 2020/0091487.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Zeng teaches a contact region having a cutout. Regarding additional cutouts, Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of cutouts, the court held that mere duplication of parts, since the further cutout can be used to connect three batteries (15) in the first module as opposed to two batteries (Fig. 3) has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Regarding the cutout, two cutouts would form a U-shape for both the first contact region and the second contact region.
Regarding claim 15, Zeng doesn’t explicitly teach the first contact region and the second contact region for the busbar (3), each having a recessed region, the recessed region being arranged offset relative to the connecting region in the z direction; but it does teach this feature for busbar (2) (Fig. 5) (0084). Therefore, the insulating material (4) can be coated on busbar (2) instead of busbar (3) in order to electrically insulate busbars 2 and 3 from each other as an obvious alternative.
Regarding claim 16, Zeng teaches the insulating coating on the connecting region of busbar (2) (instead of busbar (3) would result in the connecting region having a thickened portion orthogonal to the main plane of extent.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al., US 2020/0091487, in view of Wang et al., CN 208423030.
Regarding claim 17, Zeng does not teach the claim limitations of claim 17.
Wang et al., teaches battery connector (0014; 0055), wherein the connecting region has a lug that extends over an entire extent of the busbar (0024-0025; 0064) in the insertion direction, the lug being electrically insulating and spacing apart the first battery module from the second battery module (0030; 0061).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9, 18, 19 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: Streuer does not fairly teach or suggest the first contact region and the second contact region being provided respectively with first and second cutouts that are open in an insertion direction that is parallel to a main plane of extent of the busbar and orthogonal to the main direction of extent, the first cutout being connectable to the first pole pin of the first battery module and the second cutout being connectable to the second pole pin of the second battery module with the connecting region being between the first pole pin covering of the first cover and the second pole pin covering of the second covering.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1288. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-4pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/ANGELA J MARTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights