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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner notes the following amendments made to the claims:
Claims 1, 5, 8, 15-16 amended
New claims 17-20 added
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/24/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-16 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, by amending the claims to specify the connector being pivotably attached to an upper surface of a first partition wall, the previous prior art is overcome. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the previously presented prior art, You (CN 210136984U), which teaches a cell tray containing a plurality of cells separated by partition walls and having a connector attached to both the upper surface of the partition walls and the cells, and Watanabe (US 20030091896 A1), which teaches a pivotably attached connector/bus-bar and the improvements associated. New claims 17-20 are rejected in view of You, Watanabe, and Wang (US 20210050566 A1). Given no arguments were provided for the additional dependent claims, those rejections remain in place and unchanged other than further relying on You and Watanabe, and there is currently not considered to be any allowable subject matter present in the claims. However, examiner believes that if multiple of the dependent claims were combined with an independent claim, it is likely the previously applied prior art would be overcome, and further search and consideration would be required. For example, a combination of the insulating member with protruding downward projections along with the presence of a hinge/hinge shaft that extends to a second, third, and fourth cell.
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 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. Specifically, claim 20 recites “The cell tray of claim 11, wherein the first connector is one of a plurality of connectors.” However, there is already a requirement of both a first and second connector. It is unclear and undefined whether this limitation requires there to be a plurality of first connectors that are different from second connectors, or whether there simply needs to be multiple connectors, of any variety, present in the invention. For examination purposes, claim 20 will be examined as if it just requires multiple connectors to be present.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 11-13, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin (KR 20100100943 A) in view of You (CN 210136984U), further in view of Watanabe (US 20030091896 A1) and further in view of Seol (US 20210028431 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Guerin teaches the following elements:
A cell tray, comprising: (Guerin tray 34)
a tray body in which upper part is open and having an internal space; (“The tray 34 has an overall parallelepiped shape with an overall rectangular cross section. This train 34 is opened at the top in the manner described below and closed at the base by a flat lower horizontal wall 48.” Guerin [50])
partition walls dividing the internal space so that a plurality of cylindrical cells are each accommodated between the partition walls; (“The storage unit 20 has the same appearance. Each unit 20 thus has a cylindrical shape with a vertical axis. Each unit 20 is partitioned by an outer cylindrical surface 36 laterally and by an upper circular horizontal end surface 38 and a lower end circular horizontal end surface 40 in the vertical direction.” Guerin [49]
PNG
media_image1.png
285
335
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
429
690
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Guerin is silent on the following elements of claim 1. Specifically, while Guerin teaches that each unit has an upper and lower connection terminal (“Each unit 20 has two electrical connection terminals 42. Each terminal 42 protrudes perpendicularly to the surface 38 and the surface 40, respectively.” Guerin [49]), Guerin is silent on a first connector pivotably installed on the upper surface of the partition wall, a second connector between the partition walls in the tray body, and an electrical characteristic measurer connected to the first and second connector:
a first connector pivotably installed on an upper part attached to an upper surface of a first partition wall of the partition walls, and pivoting toward an upper electrode tab to contact an upper electrode tab of a first cylindrical cell of the plurality of cylindrical cells;
a second connector installed in the tray body between the partition walls and contacting a lower electrode tab of the first cylindrical cell;
and an electrical characteristic measurer electrically connected to the first connector and the second connector to measure an electrical characteristic of the first cylindrical cell.
You teaches the following elements of claim 1, save for the connector being explicitly pivotably attached:
a first connector pivotably installed on an upper part attached to an upper surface of a first partition wall of the partition walls, and pivoting toward an upper electrode tab to contact an upper electrode tab of a first cylindrical cell of the plurality of cylindrical cells; (circuit board 4 of You functions as the connector, which is adhered to both the side panels 15, which function as partition walls, and the upper surface of the cells.)
PNG
media_image3.png
432
422
media_image3.png
Greyscale
You is considered to be analogous to Guerin because they are both within the same field of battery modules containing a plurality of cells and a method of connecting them. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Guerin to include a connection piece that is attached to the upper surface of a partition wall and extends to connect to the upper surface of a battery cell, as You teaches that this is a known structure in the art for connection cells within a battery module.
You and Guerin are silent on a bus bar/connecting piece being pivotable attached. However, Watanabe teaches this element and it would be obvious to combine with the teachings of You:
a first connector pivotably installed on an upper part attached to an upper surface of a first partition wall of the partition walls, and pivoting toward an upper electrode tab to contact an upper electrode tab of a first cylindrical cell of the plurality of cylindrical cells; (“As shown in FIG. 5B, it is also possible to constitute the bus bar 5 by a first bus bar 51a, a second bus bar 51b and a supporter 51c for rotatably joining the first bus bar 51a and the second bus bar 51b. It is also possible to join the tab 4b and the bus bar 5 so that a joined part thereof is made rotatable. If the tab 4b and the bus bar 5 are joined rotatably or in a hinged shape, it is easier to deform the unfolded state into the integrated state.” Watanabe [0060])
Watanabe is considered to be analogous to You because they are both related to the use of a connector in a battery comprising a plurality of cells, where a connector or bus bar is used to connect the cells. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connector of You to be a pivotable bus-bar, as this allows for the easier connection and disconnection of the cells, and the formation of the battery in a compact size (“On the contrary, if the bus bars 5 are joined in the unfolded state and then folded for integration, it is possible to join the bus bars easily and to realize the final assembled battery in the compact size.” Watanabe [0058])
Essentially, the combined teachings of You and Watanabe would render obvious the use of a connector attached to an upper surface of a partition wall (You) and the modification of that connector to be a pivotable/rotatable bus-bar/connector (Watanabe).
You and Watanabe are silent on the following elements of claim 1:
a second connector installed in the tray body between the partition walls and contacting a lower electrode tab of the first cylindrical cell;
and an electrical characteristic measurer electrically connected to the first connector and the second connector to measure
However, Seol teaches all of the elements of claim 1 that are not found in Guerin, You, and Watanabe. Specifically, Seol teaches a battery tray with a voltage detection implement that includes detection ends on both the upper and lower portions of the cell block. The only thing Seol does not teach is the first connector being explicitly pivotably installed:
a first connector pivotably attached to an upper surface of a first partition wall of the partition walls, and pivoting toward the upper electrode tab to contact an upper electrode tab of a first cylindrical cell to the plurality of cylindrical cells; (“and a connection end on another end of the voltage detection lead and exposed at an upper end of the insulative body for connection with a circuit board on the cell block.” Seol [0010])
a second connector installed in the tray body between the partition walls and contacting a lower electrode tab of the first cylindrical cell; (“The voltage detection lead may include a detection end on an end of the voltage detection lead and exposed at a lower end of the insulative body to form a voltage detection position at a lower portion of the cell block;” Seol [0010])
and an electrical characteristic measurer electrically connected to the first connector and the second connector to measure(“The detector 40 extends vertically in the lengthwise direction of the side cells C2, it may be efficient to measure the voltages of the lower ends 10b of the side cells C2 by using the detector 40, and it may be effective for obtaining a simple structure to measure the voltages of the upper ends 10a of the side cells C2 by using the connectors 105 that connect the upper ends 10a of the side cells C2” Seol [0085]. In this case, the voltage detector acts as the electrical characteristic measurer.)
Seol and Guerin are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of battery trays/packs configured to secure a plurality of battery cells. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery tray of Choi containing a plurality of battery cells separated by partition walls to include the voltage detection system utilizing an upper and lower connector, as taught by Seol, in order to be able to monitor the cell performance in real time and be aware of any potential malfunctions earlier than would otherwise be possible. It would additionally be obvious, when modifying the structure of Guerin to incorporate the voltage detection implement of Seol, to install the upper and lower connectors to be connected to the partition wall and be in contact with the upper and lower electrode tabs, as this would be the safest method of production.
Regarding claim 2, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 1, wherein the partition walls are formed in a lattice shape. (Guerin fig. 3 depicts its battery cells being separated by a lattice-shaped partition wall, analogous to that depicted in the instant drawings.)
PNG
media_image4.png
270
327
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
411
534
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 2, wherein the tray body comprises a bottom plate forming a lower part of the tray body, the partition walls being installed on the bottom plate, and an outer frame surrounding the partition walls and coupled to the bottom plate or integrally formed with the bottom plate. (Guerin figure 4 clearly depicts a bottom plate and partition walls being formed on the bottom plate, and an outer frame surrounding the cell units and partition walls)
PNG
media_image6.png
317
409
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 3, wherein a height of the outer frame is greater than a combined height of the partition walls and a length of the first connector. (Given that the tray structure of Guerin comprises a housing/cover “There is a single housing 32, which constitutes a tray for receiving the unit 20. Thus, a single hollow portion is provided to form a receptacle 234 having a rectangular shape in the unit 20. Unit 20 is introduced laterally into receptacle 234.” Guerin [113], this limitation would be met even with the modifications via Seol and Ma. Specifically, if the height of the partition wall and first connector were greater than that of the outer frame, the outer frame/housing would not be able to perform is primary purpose of housing the interior components of the battery tray. Therefore, it would be obvious to anyone skilled in the art to make the outer frame large enough to house all of the components of the interior.)
Regarding claim 5, modified Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 1, wherein a hinge frame is installed on the upper part of the first partition wall, and wherein the first connector has a hinge shaft hinged to the hinge frame. (By modifying the partition wall of Guerin to include the upper connector of Seol or You, provided with a hinge frame/shaft as taught by Watanabe, this limitation would be met without any further motivation or modification.)
Regarding claim 6, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 1, wherein the electrical characteristic measurer measures at least one of electrical resistance, voltage, and current of the first cylindrical cell. (“The detector 40 extends vertically in the lengthwise direction of the side cells C2, it may be efficient to measure the voltages of the lower ends 10b of the side cells C2 by using the detector 40, and it may be effective for obtaining a simple structure to measure the voltages of the upper ends 10a of the side cells C2 by using the connectors 105 that connect the upper ends 10a of the side cells C2” Seol [0085]. In this case, the voltage detector acts as the electrical characteristic measurer.)
Regarding claim 8, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 3, further comprising a cooling member for cooling the cylindrical cell on the bottom plate of the tray body. (“Advantageously, the outer surface 51 of the tray 34 is thermally connected to cooling means such as cooling air flow, heat pipes, or any suitable cooling means.” Guerin [104])
PNG
media_image7.png
358
265
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 1, further comprising a tray top coupled to the tray body to cover the upper part of the tray body. (“The cover 132 for closing the tray 34 constitutes a protective cover for the unit 20.” Guerin [128])
Regarding claim 12, Guerin teaches the following elements:
The cell tray claim 11,wherein the tray top comprises an insulating member protruding downward at a position corresponding to the first cylindrical cell. (“As a variant, the trays and covers are made of thermally conductive and electrically insulating materials.” Guerin [172])
Regarding claim 13, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 11, as shown above. Guerin is silent on the following elements of claim 13:
The cell tray of claim 11, wherein the electrical characteristic measurer is installed either on the tray body or on the tray top.
However, Seol teaches all of the elements of claim 13 that are not found in Guerin:
The cell tray of claim 11, wherein the electrical characteristic measurer is installed either on the tray body or on the tray top. (Seol figure 1 depicts the voltage measuring device being installed on the interior of the tray body, thus meeting the limitations of claim 13.)
PNG
media_image8.png
269
451
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, modified Guerin teaches all of the following elements:
The cell tray of claim 1, wherein the partition walls are formed in a lattice shape, and wherein the first connector is located at an intersection of the first partition wall and a second partition wall. (Guerin fig. 3 depicts its battery cells being separated by a lattice-shaped partition wall, analogous to that depicted in the instant drawings. If Guerin were modified to include the connector of You, which is clearly shown to intersect two cells via a center partition wall, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the connector at an intersection of the walls such that the connector can extend across and connect to multiple cells at once, as this is the entire purpose of the connecting piece. )
PNG
media_image4.png
270
327
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
411
534
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin (KR 20100100943 A) in view of You (CN 210136984U), further in view of Watanabe (US 20030091896 A1), further in view of Seol (US 20210028431 A1), and further in view of Capati (US 20190081372 A1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Guerin is silent on the following elements of claim 7:
The cell tray of claim 1, further comprising a wireless communication device connected to the electrical characteristic measurer and capable of transmitting an electrical characteristic value of the first cylindrical cell measured by the electrical characteristic measurer to outside the tray body.
However, Capati teaches all of the elements of claim 7 that are not found in Guerin. Specifically, Capati teaches a similar voltage monitoring device that can explicitly comprise wireless communication to outside of the battery tray:
The cell tray of claim 1, further comprising a wireless communication device connected to the electrical characteristic measurer and capable of transmitting an electrical characteristic value of the first cylindrical cell measured by the electrical characteristic measurer to outside the tray body. (“The BMU connectors 145, e.g., wires, wireless, or mechanical connectors, … The BMU connectors 145 can include signal paths or conductive paths having at least one second end coupled with a port (e.g., input port, output port) of the battery module 100, one or more battery blocks 105, one or more battery cells 110 and one or more cold plates 130 to receive signals from the battery monitoring unit 140 or to transmit signals (e.g., voltage signals, current signals, temperature signals, power signals, status signals) from the respective component to the battery monitoring unit 140.” Capati [0027]. In this case, the BMU is shown to be outside of the battery tray, thus teaching an electrical characteristic measurer within the battery tray which is capable of wireless communication to a device outside of the battery tray. Capati additionally teaches that the BMU can couple further with the battery pack via wireless communication, thus extending the transmission even further from the battery tray “The battery monitoring unit 140 can couple with a battery pack level monitoring system using a wiring harness or an alternative wireless form of communication.” Capati [0091])
Capati is considered to be analogous to Guerin because they are both within the same field of battery systems containing a plurality of cells in a tray, and having an electrical characteristic measurer within the tray. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrical characteristic measurer of Guerin to include the ability to wirelessly communicate to a device outside of the battery tray, as this is taught by Capati to be a known method within the art, and additionally because it would allow for effective transmission of the collected data while requiring less materials/space in the battery tray in the form of wires.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin (KR 20100100943 A) in view of You (CN 210136984U), further in view of Watanabe (US 20030091896 A1), further in view of Seol (US 20210028431 A1), and further in view of Stephens (US 20180337377 A1).
Regarding claim 9, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 8, as shown above. Guerin, Seol, and You are silent on the following elements of claim 9:
The cell tray of claim 8, further comprising a cooling member accommodating groove in the bottom plate, wherein the cooling member is installed in the cooling member accommodating groove, and the second connector is installed on the cooling member.
However, Stephens teaches all of the elements of claim 9 that are not found in the aforementioned references:
The cell tray of claim 8, further comprising a cooling member accommodating groove in the bottom plate, wherein the cooling member is installed in the cooling member accommodating groove, and the second connector is installed on the cooling member. (“As shown in FIG. 9, the cold plate supports 145 have a height that is configured to place a cold plate or cooling element 147, such as a thermoelectric component or a liquid cooled component, against or in thermal engagement with the lower surface of the battery module 114.” Stephens [0069]. Figure 8 and 9 of Stephens clearly depict a cooling element formed in a groove on the bottom plate of the battery tray.)
PNG
media_image9.png
362
484
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
324
652
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Stephens is considered to be analogous to Guerin because they are both within the same field of battery trays containing cooling devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling device of Guerin to be formed in a groove to have additional air circulation and support various structural designs of battery modules (“The battery supports 38 may elevate the lower surface of the battery modules 14 away from the floor portion 24 of the tub component for air circulation and to provide an intrusion distance that prevents damage to the battery modules 14 from impacts to the bottom or lower surface of the battery tray 10. The battery supports 38 may also have a height that is configured to support a cold plate or cooling element 47, such as a thermoelectric component or a liquid cooled component, against or in thermal engagement with the lower surface of the battery module 14, such as shown in FIG. 8. The battery supports in additional embodiments may have various structural designs to support the battery modules or other items.” Stephens [0054]). It would additionally be obvious to use a thermoelectric cooling component as Stephens demonstrates that this is a common method in the art, and therefore would only require a simple substitution of one cooling element for another, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
No further modification or motivation would be required to meet the additional elements of claim 10.
Regarding claim 10, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 9, as shown above. Guerin, Seol, and You are silent on the following elements of claim 10:
The cell tray of claim 9,wherein the cooling member is a thermoelectric module.
However, Stephens teaches all of the elements of claim 10 that are not found in the aforementioned references:
The cell tray of claim 9,wherein the cooling member is a thermoelectric module. (“As shown in FIG. 9, the cold plate supports 145 have a height that is configured to place a cold plate or cooling element 147, such as a thermoelectric component or a liquid cooled component, against or in thermal engagement with the lower surface of the battery module 114.” Stephens [0069].)
Claim(s) 14-16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin (KR 20100100943 A) in view of You (CN 210136984U), further in view of Watanabe (US 20030091896 A1), further in view of Seol (US 20210028431 A1), and further in view of Biskup (US 20170047572 A1).
Regarding claim 14, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 5, as shown above. Guerin, Seol, and You are silent on the following elements of claim 14:
The cell tray of claim 5, wherein further comprising a third connector hinged to the hinge frame, the third connector contacting an upper electrode tab of
However, Biskup teaches all of the elements of claim 14 that are not found in the aforementioned references. Specifically, Biskup teaches a novel bus bar that connects numerous cells, therefore showing that it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to connect multiple cells from a single connection point:
The cell tray of claim 5, wherein further comprising a third connector hinged to the hinge frame, the third connector contacting an upper electrode tab of (Biskup figure 11 depicts a bus bar which connects to a plurality of battery cells in a non-overlapping way. This demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art could take the modified hinge and connection use to meet the limitations of claim 5, and add in additional connectors to connect up to 4 or more cells to a single connector.)
PNG
media_image11.png
197
296
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Buskin and Guerin are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of battery trays configured to hold and connect a plurality of cells. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection structure of Guerin, Seol, and You to connect to multiple cells from a single point, without overlap, in order to reduce cost associated with extra materials (“To simplify fabrication of the current distribution link while reducing cost and insuring performance, preferably link 1101 is fabricated from a single sheet of conductive material, for example a sheet of a metal such as a sheet of copper or aluminum. To form the symmetrical, equal length current pathways, a series of slots 1105 are formed in the link, for example using a stamping process, a laser cutting process, or another fabrication technique.” Buskin [0057] and “ the use of non-overlapping bus bars of alternating polarity provide a simplified configuration that yields reduced weight as well as reduced material and fabrication costs.” Buskin [0053] and “the present invention provides a current distribution link, also referred to herein as a current distribution interconnect. The purpose of this link is to evenly distribute the current among the parallel connected batteries, thereby eliminating the current imbalance that resulted from the prior art's assembly connections.” Buskin [0054])
By modifying the rotatable hinge shaft/bus-bar of Watanabe, used in the battery tray of Guerin, to include connections to multiple cells from one point, the additional limitations of claims 15 and 16 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation. One skilled in the art would understand both that up to four cells could be connected from one point without overlap, and that in order to do so, the connections could be formed diagonally from a point located in between the four cells.
Regarding claim 15, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 5, as shown above. Guerin, Seol, and You are silent on the following elements of claim 15:
The cell tray of claim 5, wherein the partition walls are formed in a lattice shape, and wherein the hinge frame has a third connector, a fourth connector and a fifth connector respectively contacting a second battery cell, a third battery cell and a fourth battery cell of the plurality of battery cells.
However, by combining modified Guerin with the teachings of Biskup, as shown above regarding claim 14, the additional limitations of claim 15 would be met:
The cell tray of claim 5,wherein the partition walls are formed in a lattice shape, and wherein the hinge frame has a third connector, a fourth connector and a fifth connector respectively contacting a second battery cell, a third battery cell and a fourth battery cell of the plurality of battery cells. (As shown in claim 14 above, Buskin teaches that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to connect up to four [or more] cells from a single connection point. Therefore, it would additionally be obvious to include a fourth and fifth connector used to connect a third and fourth battery cell, in addition to a second.)
Regarding claim 16, modified Guerin teaches all the elements of claim 15, as shown above. Guerin, Seol, and You are silent on the following elements of claim 16:
The cell tray of claim 15, wherein the hinge frame is located at an intersection of the first partition wall and a second partition wall, and wherein each of the connectors extends diagonally from the intersection.
However, by combining modified Guerin with the teachings of Biskup, as shown above regarding claims 14 and 15, the additional limitations of claim 16 would be met:
The cell tray of claim 15, wherein the hinge frame is located at an intersection of the first partition wall and a second partition wall, and wherein each of the connectors extends diagonally from the intersection. (Based on the combination of Biskup and modified Guerin, if the connectors were coming from a single point—the hinge frame—rather than a linear bus bar, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to form the connections to the four surrounding cells diagonally, as there would be no other way to connect four cells from one frame without overlapping.)
Regarding claim 19, modified Guerin teaches all of the elements of claim 18, as shown above. Guerin, Seol, and You are is silent on the following elements of claim 19:
The cell tray of claim 18, further comprising a hinge frame, wherein the first connector, a third connector, a fourth connector and a fifth connector extend from the hinge frame and each of the first connector, the third connector, the fourth connector and the fifth connector extends over a different compartment formed by the partition walls.
However, Buskin teaches all of the elements of claim 19 that are not found in Guerin. Specifically, if the hinge frame and multi-connection bus bar of Buskin were used to connect cells separated via the lattice partition wall structure of Guerin, all of the limitations of claim 19 would be met:
The cell tray of claim 18, further comprising a hinge frame, wherein the first connector, a third connector, a fourth connector and a fifth connector extend from the hinge frame and each of the first connector, the third connector, the fourth connector and the fifth connector extends over a different compartment formed by the partition walls. (Biskup figure 11 depicts a bus bar which connects to a plurality of battery cells in a non-overlapping way. This demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art could take the modified hinge and connection use to meet the limitations of claim 18, and add in additional connectors to connect up to 4 or more cells to a single connector. As described above, if this were used in conjunction with the lattice shaped partition walls of Guerin, all of the limitations of claim 19 would be met.)
PNG
media_image11.png
197
296
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 17, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerin (KR 20100100943 A) in view of You (CN 210136984U), further in view of Watanabe (US 20030091896 A1), further in view of Seol (US 20210028431 A1), and further in view of Wang (US 20210050566 A1).
Regarding claim 17, modified Guerin teaches all of the elements of claim 11, as shown above. Guerin, You, and Seol are silent on the following elements of claim 17:
The cell tray of claim 11, wherein the tray top comprises an insulating member, the insulating member comprising a projection protruding downward to contact the first connector.
However, Wang teaches all of the elements of claim 17 that are not found in the aforementioned references. Specifically, Wang teaches a tray top comprising an insulating member that projects downwards towards the tops of the cells. Thus, if this tray top were used with the partition lattice of Guerin comprising the connector of Seol or You, all of the limitations of claim 17 would be met:
The cell tray of claim 11, wherein the tray top comprises an insulating member, the insulating member comprising a projection protruding downward to contact the first connector. (“Specifically, as shown in FIG. 1, each battery module M further includes: an insulation batten 14 extending in the longitudinal direction D1 and fixed onto the flexible printed circuit board 12, wherein each insulation cover 2 is fixed onto a corresponding insulation batten 14. Each insulation cover 2 is directly fixed onto the corresponding insulation batten 14, thereby preventing the insulation cover 2 from crushing the flexible printed circuit board 12.” Wang [0042]. The insulation batten 14 is fixed to, and therefore protrudes downward from the insulation cover 2.)
PNG
media_image12.png
757
718
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Wang is considered to be analogous to Guerin because they are both within the same field of battery modules containing trays and covers to hold a plurality of battery cells. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tray cover of Guerin to be that of Wang, which includes an insulation member, as this would only require the simple substitution of one cell tray lid/top/cover for another, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
By including the tray cover of Wang onto the module of Guerin, all of the additional limitations of claim 20 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.
Regarding claim 20, modified Guerin teaches all of the elements of claim 11, as shown above. Guerin teaches the following elements of claim 1:
The cell tray of claim 11, wherein the first connector is one of a plurality of connectors, and (“Each unit 20 has two electrical connection terminals 42. Each terminal 42 protrudes perpendicularly to the surface 38 and the surface 40, respectively.” Guerin [49]. Guerin clearly teaches a plurality of connectors, and when modified by You or Seol, this would remain the case.)
Guerin, You, and Seol are silent on the following elements of claim 20:
wherein the tray top comprises an insulating member, the insulating member comprising a plurality of projections protruding downward to contact a respective one of the plurality of connectors.
However, Wang teaches all of the elements of claim 20 that are not found in the aforementioned references:
wherein the tray top comprises an insulating member, the insulating member comprising a plurality of projections protruding downward to contact a respective one of the plurality of connectors. (“Specifically, as shown in FIG. 1, each battery module M further includes: an insulation batten 14 extending in the longitudinal direction D1 and fixed onto the flexible printed circuit board 12, wherein each insulation cover 2 is fixed onto a corresponding insulation batten 14. Each insulation cover 2 is directly fixed onto the corresponding insulation batten 14, thereby preventing the insulation cover 2 from crushing the flexible printed circuit board 12.” Wang [0042]. The insulation batten 14 is fixed to and therefore protrudes downward from the insulation cover 2. The insulation member would project downward to connect with any one of the plurality of connectors that would be present on the upper surfaces of the partition walls and battery cells.)
PNG
media_image12.png
757
718
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
In an updated search, the following references were considered to be relevant but were not used in the above rejection:
Kim (US 20220314772 A1)—teaches a bus bar or connector mounted on upper surface of partition wall ("In addition, an electrical device such as a bus bar or a connector may be mounted on an upper end of the partition wall member 330 in a space between the battery modules." Kim [0100].)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET whose telephone number is (571)272-0156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6pm except for the first Friday of bi-week.
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, NICHOLAS SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights