DETAILED ACTIONAcknowledgment is made of applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 6/16/23. 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/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1 – 11, in the reply filed on 4/3/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 12 – 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/3/26.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 5, 7, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (KR20200059483, hereinafter Kim – See IDS dated 6/16/23).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses an apparatus comprising a module case 100 in which a plurality of battery cells 110 are accommodated; a pressure plate 120 installed in a middle portion of the module case in a width direction and configured to pressure the plurality of battery cells toward the module case; a pressure driver 130 configured to apply a pressure to the pressure plate; and a controller 200 configured to control a pressure force and a pressure pattern with respect to the plurality of battery cells, wherein the pressure plate simulates expansion and contraction of the plurality of battery cells by repeatedly pressurizing and depressurizing the plurality of battery cells(See Fig. 6, See Pg. 2, Para. 7 and Pg. 3, Paras. 1 – 3).
Regarding claim 2, the pressure plate 120 pressurizes or depressurizes the plurality of battery cells in a same direction as a swelling direction (See Fig. 6, See Pg. 2, Para. 7 and Pg. 3, Paras. 1 – 3).
Regarding claim 5, a pressure sensor 150 is disposed at an inner surface of the module case facing at least one of the plurality of battery cells and is configured to measure a pressure applied to the module case (See Fig. 6). Regarding claim 7, the pressure plate 120 is provided as two or more pressure plates disposed in the length direction of the plurality of battery cell cells 110 to pressurize the plurality of battery cell cells with the a same pressure or different pressures (See Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10, a charging/discharging part configured to charge and discharge the plurality of battery cells 110 (See Pg. 6, Paras. 5 - 6). Regarding claim 11, the charging/discharging part is configured to measure charging/discharging performance of the plurality of battery cells according to a pressure condition (See Pg. 6, Paras. 5 - 6).8. Claims 1, 2, 5, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hettrich (2020/0168959).
Regarding claim 1, Hettrich discloses an apparatus comprising a module case 214 in which a plurality of battery cells 212 are accommodated; a pressure plate 210 installed in a middle portion of the module case in a width direction and configured to pressure the plurality of battery cells toward the module case; a pressure driver 206 configured to apply a pressure to the pressure plate; and a controller 202 configured to control a pressure force and a pressure pattern with respect to the plurality of battery cells, wherein the pressure plate simulates expansion and contraction of the plurality of battery cells by repeatedly pressurizing and depressurizing the plurality of battery cells (See Fig. 2, See Pg. 6, Para. 0066).
Regarding claim 2, the pressure plate 210 pressurizes or depressurizes the plurality of battery cells in a same direction as a swelling direction (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 5, a pressure sensor 208 is disposed at an inner surface of the module case facing at least one of the plurality of battery cell cells and is configured to measure a pressure applied to the module case (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 10, a charging/discharging part configured to charge and discharge the plurality of battery cells (See Pg. 6, Para. 0068). Regarding claim 11, the charging/discharging part measures is configured to measure charging/discharging performance of the plurality of battery cells according to a pressure condition (See Pg. 6, Para. 0068). 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.
Claims 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Hettrich in view of Fetzer et al. (2012/0189879, hereinafter Fetzer).
Regarding claim 3, Hettrich discloses an apparatus comprising a module case 214 in which a plurality of battery cells 212 are accommodated; a pressure plate 210 installed in a middle portion of the module case in a width direction and configured to pressure the plurality of battery cells toward the module case; a pressure driver 206 configured to apply a pressure to the pressure plate; and a controller 202 configured to control a pressure force and a pressure pattern with respect to the plurality of battery cells, wherein the pressure plate simulates expansion and contraction of the plurality of battery cells by repeatedly pressurizing and depressurizing the plurality of battery cells (See Fig. 2, See Pg. 6, Para. 0066).
Hettrich fails to disclose that the pressure driver includes a hydraulic pump and a pressure member connected to the hydraulic pump to pressurize the pressure plate and the plurality of battery cells. However, Fetzer discloses a method and apparatus comprising a pressure member (mechanical-hydraulic pressure generating device) having a piston cylinder unit and a pump for pressurizing stacked battery cells (See Pg. 2, Para. 0019). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hettrich according to the teachings of Fetzer for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device comprises one or more cells to reduce adverse effects on operation which occur because of different states of battery charge (See Fetzer, Pg. 1, Para. 0001). Regarding claim 8, Hettrich fails to disclose that the pressure member is provided as two or more pressure members disposed in a length direction of the plurality of battery cell cells to pressurize the plurality of battery cells with a same pressure or different pressures. However, in Fetzer, the pressure member is provided as at least one pressure member (at least one mechanical-hydraulic pressure generating device) disposed in a length direction of the plurality of battery cell cells to pressurize the plurality of battery cells with a same pressure or different pressures (See Pg. 2, Para. 0019). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hettrich according to the teachings of Fetzer for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device comprises one or more cells to reduce adverse effects on operation which occur because of different states of battery charge (See Fetzer, Pg. 1, Para. 0001).12. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Park et al. (KR20200030967, hereinafter Park – See IDS dated 4/17/25).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses an apparatus comprising a module case 100 in which a plurality of battery cells 110 are accommodated; a pressure plate 120 installed in a middle portion of the module case in a width direction and configured to pressure the plurality of battery cells toward the module case; a pressure driver 130 configured to apply a pressure to the pressure plate; and a controller 200 configured to control a pressure force and a pressure pattern with respect to the plurality of battery cells, wherein the pressure plate simulates expansion and contraction of the plurality of battery cells by repeatedly pressurizing and depressurizing the plurality of battery cells(See Fig. 6, See Pg. 2, Para. 7 and Pg. 3, Paras. 1 – 3).
Kim fails to disclose a buffer pad disposed between the module case and a battery cell located at an outermost portion among the plurality of battery cells accommodated in the module case. However, Park discloses an apparatus comprising a buffer pad 40 that is disposed between a module case 23 and a battery cell 11 located at an outermost portion among a plurality of battery cells accommodated in the module case (See Fig. 2, See Pg. 4, Paras. 4 and 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Kim according to the teachings of Park for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device improves the insulation between a battery case and a module case for storing battery cells (See Park, Pg. 2, Para. 2).13. Claim 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Kristofek et al. (9,306,252, hereinafter Kristofek – See IDS dated 8/19/24).
Regarding claim 6, Kim fails to disclose a displacement sensor located outside the module case that is configured to measure a displacement of the module case according to the pressure.
However, Kristofek discloses an apparatus comprising monitoring the health of battery cells 14 using a position sensor (See Col. 7, lines 46 – 56 and Col. 8, lines 1 – 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Kim according to the teachings of Kristofek for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device improves the performance and/or longevity of rechargeable battery cells (See Kristofek, Col. 2, lines 41 - 59). Regarding claim 9, Kim fails to disclose a welding fatigue tester configured to test a state of a welded portion formed in the module case. However, in Kristofek, the health of battery cells and cell pouches is monitored to detect cell failure (See Col. 7, lines 46 – 56 and Col. 8, lines 1 – 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Kim according to the teachings of Kristofek for the purpose of, advantageously providing an improved device since this type of device improves the performance and/or longevity of rechargeable battery cells (See Kristofek, Col. 2, lines 41 - 59).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure.15. Kim et al. (9,969,296) disclose a battery module, method for manufacturing the same, and electric vehicle using the same. He et al. (2026/0128359) disclose a battery pressurization device and battery production system. Satou et al. (11,522,242) disclose a battery pack. Lemke et al. (CN110311068) disclose a battery group.16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2176. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, John Breene can be reached at 5712724107. 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.
/OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 5/14/26
Prosecution Insights