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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 31, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (WO2020/251143; English equivalent US Pub. No. 2021/0265707 relied upon).
Regarding claim 1, Jung teaches a battery module comprising a battery cell stack in which a plurality of battery cells 100 are stacked, the module comprising a busbar connected to electrode leads of the plurality of battery cells, a flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) 300 connected to the busbar, a fixing part 110 and busbar frame 200 (collectively taken to be the claimed protector), the protector including a busbar arrangement surface on which the busbar is disposed (left side of module in figure 3) and a board arrangement surface on which the circuit board is disposed (top side of module in figure 3), wherein the busbar arrangement surface and the board arrangement surface are perpendicular to each other (paragraphs [0040]-[0045]; figure 3). Jung does not specifically disclose that the circuit board is connected to the busbar with solder, but official notice is taken that it is extremely well-known and conventional to make electrical connections using solder, and it would have been obvious to do so here in order to achieve the conventional benefits.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim (US Pub. No. 2017/0338520).
Regarding claim 1, Lim teaches a battery connection module 2 comprising a plurality of batteries, the module comprising a busbar 22 connected to electrodes of the plurality of batteries, an adapter circuit board 25 connected to the busbar, an insulating frame 21 (taken to be the claimed protector), the protector including a busbar arrangement surface on which the busbar is disposed (top side of module in figure 8) and a board arrangement surface on which the circuit board is disposed (right side of module in figure 3), wherein the busbar arrangement surface and the board arrangement surface are perpendicular to each other (paragraphs [0042]-[0046]; figures 1 and 8). Lim does not specifically disclose that the circuit board is connected to the busbar with solder, but official notice is taken that it is extremely well-known and conventional to make electrical connections using solder, and it would have been obvious to do so here in order to achieve the conventional benefits.
Regarding claim 2, Lim teaches a first and second direction as claimed, the board arrangement surface is on the right end of the protector in the second direction, and the protector has a smaller dimension measured in the first direction (up-down) than in the second direction (left-right) (figures 1 and 8-9 – in particular see figure 9, the insulating frame 21 is not labelled in this figure but is clearly depicted showing the dimensional relationships as claimed).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Nishihara (US Pub. No. 2012/0019061).
Regarding claim 3, Lim teaches or suggests that a busbar land that is electrically connected to the busbar is mounted on the circuit board (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]; figures 8-9), but does not specifically disclose that the circuit board is a flexible printed circuit board, or that the circuit board includes a notched portion adjacent to the busbar land. Nishihara teaches a battery module using a flexible printed circuit board having cutouts 54 (taken to be the claimed notched portion) near bus bars 40 (paragraph [0176]; figure 11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a flexible printed circuit board having notches as taught by Nishihara in the module of Lim in order to provide a buffering effect during manufacturing and allow easy attachment of the wiring even when errors occur (see Nishihara at paragraph [0176]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP N SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1612. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
/P.N.S/ Examiner, Art Unit 1749 January 30, 2026
/KATELYN W SMITH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749