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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant's election with traverse of battery module, Group I, Species A (claims 1-5 and 8-9), in the reply filed on 12 August 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that 10-14 depend on claim 1. This is not found persuasive because applicant’s arguments are directed toward an election/restriction under US practice, while the election/restriction for the Instant application is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372 and restriction is proper as the technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art, as set forth in the prior office action.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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)(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.
(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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee US20170069887A1.
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a battery module (Lee, Fig. 1, 1), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
338
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of pouch-type battery cells (Lee, [0040], Fig. 4, 100) respectively having an accommodation portion and a sealing portion (Lee, annotated Fig. 4, 100, accommodation portion, sealing portion) and configured to be stacked on each other (Lee, Fig. 4, 100),
a module case (Lee, Fig. 1, 40) configured to accommodate the plurality of pouch-type battery cells in an inner space thereof (Lee, Figs. 1 and 4, 40, 100)
and a barrier member (Lee, Fig. 4, 200 and 300), interposed between the accommodation portions of neighboring pouch-type battery cells of the plurality of pouch-type battery cells (Lee, Fig. 4, 100, 200 and 300) and configured to have a first portion between the accommodation portions of the neighboring pouch-type battery cells and a second portion between the sealing portions of the neighboring pouch-type battery cells (Lee, Fig. 4, 100, 200 and 300, accommodation portion, sealing portion, first portion, second
PNG
media_image2.png
662
512
media_image2.png
Greyscale
portion).
Regarding claim 2, Lee further discloses wherein each of the plurality of pouch-type battery cells (Lee, Fig. 4, 100) has an electrode lead (Lee Fig. 4, 120) extending from a terrace portion (Lee, Fig. 4, 300c), and wherein the barrier member (Lee, Fig. 4, 200 and 300) is configured to protrusively extend toward the terrace portions of the neighboring pouch-type battery cells (Lee, Fig. 4, 200 and 300 protrude and extend toward 300c of neighboring 100).
Regarding claim 3, Lee also discloses wherein the plurality of pouch-type battery cells are stacked in a horizontal direction (Lee, Figs. 4-5, 100, stacked horizontally), and wherein the barrier member is configured in a plate (flat) shape (Lee, Fig. 4, 200 and 300) and interposed between the neighboring pouch-type battery cells (Lee, Figs. 4-5, 100, 200 and 300).
Regarding claim 4, Lee additionally discloses further comprising: a bus bar assembly (Lee, Fig. 1, 43) configured to connect electrode leads of the plurality of pouch-type battery cells to each other (Lee, [0073]), wherein an end of the barrier member contacts the bus bar assembly (Lee, Figs. 1 and 4, 43, 200 and 300 are all in contact as they comprise the battery module).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee US20170069887A1 in view of Shin US20100009251A1.
Regarding claim 5, Lee does not disclose wherein the barrier member is configured to have an end inserted into a groove in an inner surface of the bus bar assembly.
Shin teaches wherein the barrier member (Shin, Fig. 16, 352) is configured to have an end inserted into a groove (Shin, Figs. 2 and 16, 140b) in an inner surface of the bus bar assembly (Shin, Figs. 2 and 16, 100b). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Lee wherein the barrier member is inserted into a groove of the bus bar, as taught by Shin, thereby improving the productivity and safety (Shin, [0014]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee US20170069887A1 in view of Linde US20190097184A1.
Regarding claim 8, Lee does not disclose wherein the barrier member includes at least one material selected from GFRP (Glass Fiber Reinforced Plastic) and CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic)
Linde teaches wherein the barrier member (Linde, Fig. 2, 16) includes at least one material selected from GFRP (Glass Fiber Reinforced Plastic) (Linde, [0017]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device as taught by Lee wherein the barrier member includes at least one material selected from GFRP, as taught by Linde, thereby protecting the battery from mechanical effects (Linde, [0017]).
Regarding claim 9, Lee does not disclose further comprising: a sealing member configured to surround an end of the barrier member.
Linde teaches further comprising: a sealing member (Linde, Fig. 2, 17) configured to surround an end of the barrier member (Linde, [0017]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device as taught by Lee including a sealing member, as taught by Linde, thereby protecting the battery from moisture or chemical effects from the environment (Linde, [0017]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARED HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4590. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at 571-270-7078. 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.
/JARED HANSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
