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.
DETAILED ACTION
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.
(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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukuoka (US 2020/0106066 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Fukuoka teaches a battery pack 10 (see Fukuoka [Paragraph 0019]; Fukuoka Fig. 1 below) comprising:
a plurality of battery modules 100 (see [0019]; Fig. 1 below), each battery module 100 accommodating a plurality of battery cells 110 (see [0019]; Fig. 6 below);
Fukuoka Figs. 1 and 6
PNG
media_image1.png
1057
1696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a pack case 200 configured to accommodate the plurality of battery modules 100 stacked in a horizontal direction (see Fig. 1 above); and
a pair of retention bars 400 extending along the stacking direction of the battery module (see [0019]; Fig. 1 above),
the pair of retention bars 400 being coupled to the pack case 200 while pressing upper surfaces at opposite ends of the stacked battery modules 100 (see Fig. 3 below).
Fukuoka Fig. 3
PNG
media_image2.png
851
1152
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Per Claim 2, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Fukuoka further teaches that,
the plurality of battery cells 110 of each battery module 100 are arranged as a battery cell assembly 120 (see Fig. 7 below) in which a plurality of longitudinal unit cells 110 are stacked in a thickness direction;
each battery module 100 is composed of at least two battery cells of the plurality of battery cells 110; arranged in a line in a longitudinal direction (see Fig. 2); and
each battery module 100 has a cuboid shape elongated in the longitudinal direction (see Figs. 1, 6 above).
Fukuoka Fig. 7
PNG
media_image3.png
571
851
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Per Claim 3, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 2. Fukuoka further teaches that the longitudinal direction unit cells 110 are arranged in rows in the longitudinal direction (see Figs. 1, 3 above), wherein a terminal busbar 132 is interconnected between the battery cells arranged in the longitudinal direction [0020], and an end of the terminal busbar 132 is exposed (see [0023]; Figs. 6, 7 above). The terminal busbar 132 of upper cells is located at upper portions of the battery module 100.
Per Claim 4, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 3. Fukuoka further teaches that the battery pack 10 comprises a high voltage busbar 133, 134 extending in a width direction of the battery modules, the high voltage busbar 133, 134 being electrically coupled to the terminal busbar 132 of each battery module 100 (see [0023]; Figs. 6, 7 above). With respect to the limitation of a “high voltage bus bar”, Fukuoka discloses all the claimed structure, and therefore, Fukuoka discloses a high voltage bus bar.
Per Claim 5, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 1. Fukuoka further teaches that the battery pack 10 includes:
an upper frame (see Annotated Fig. 3 below);
a lower frame on which the battery modules are located (see Annotated Fig. 3 below); and
a front side frame (see Annotated Fig. 2 below), a rear side frame (see Annotated Fig. 2 below), a left side frame (see Annotated Figs. 2, 3 below), and a right-side frame (see Annotated Figs. 2, 3 below) located between the upper frame and the lower frame (see Annotated Fig. 3 below), the front side frame, the rear side frame, the left side frame, and the right-side frame surrounding the stacked battery modules (see Annotated Figs. 2, 3 below).
Annotated Fukuoka Figs. 2 and 3
PNG
media_image4.png
697
1554
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Per Claim 6, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 5. Fukuoka further teaches that the lower frame, the front side frame, the rear side frame, the left side frame, and the right-side frame are integrally provided. (See Annotated Figs. 2, 3 above)
Per Claim 7, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 5. Fukuoka further teaches that the pair of retention bars 400 are coupled to the left side frame and the right-side frame. (See Annotated Fig. 3 above)
Per Claim 8, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 7. Fukuoka further teaches that,
the left side frame and the right-side frame each have a coupling protrusion 202 on an inner side facing the battery modules (see [0030], Annotated Fig. 3 above),
wherein the pair of retention bars 400 are coupled to upper surfaces of the coupling protrusions 202 to press the upper surface at the opposite ends of the battery modules 100. (see [0030]; Annotated Fig. 3 above)
Per Claim 9, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 8. Fukuoka further teaches that,
the left side frame and the right-side frame each include a fitting groove at an inner surface,
the fitting groove is configured to receive one side of a corresponding retention bar 430 of the pair of retention bars 400,
the fitting groove is located above the coupling protrusion 202, and
wherein one side of the corresponding retention bar 430 is fitted to the fitting groove, and the corresponding retention bar 430 is coupled to the upper surface of the coupling protrusion 202 by a fastening member. (See [0030]; Annotated Fig. 2 above, which is a top-down view of the pack case, and illustrates the corresponding retention bar 430 coupled to the upper surface of coupling protrusion 202)
Per Claim 10, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 8. Fukuoka further teaches that,
each retention bar of the pair of retention bars comprises an upper plate and a bending portion bent downward from the upper plate (see [0019]; Annotated Fig. 3 above), and
the upper plate presses the upper surface at a corresponding opposite end of the battery modules (see Annotated Fig. 3 above) and
the bending portion is located in a gap between an inner surface of the left side frame and the right-side frame and the corresponding opposite end of the battery modules (see [0019]; Annotated Fig. 3 above),
the pair of retention bars are coupled to the left side frame and the right-side frame by a fastening member passing through the upper plate and the bending portion of a corresponding retention bar so as to be coupled to the coupling protrusion. (see [0030]; Annotated Fig. 3 above)
Per Claim 11, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 10. Fukuoka further teaches that,
the inner surface of the left side frame and the right-side frame each include a fitting groove above the coupling protrusion 202, (see Annotated Fig. 2 above)
wherein one side of the upper plate of the corresponding retention bar 430 is fitted to the fitting groove. (see [0030]; Annotated Fig. 2 above)
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.
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.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuoka (US 2020/0106066 A1), as applied to Claims 1-11 above, further in view of Seo (US 2020/0194851 A1).
Regarding Claims 12-15, Fukuoka teaches the limitations of Claim 1-11, as addressed above.
However, Fukuoka does not disclose the following:
an adhesive resin layer filled between the battery modules and the lower frame
an adhesive resin layer filled between the battery modules and the upper frame
a heat sink located between the upper frame and the adhesive resin layer filled between the battery modules and the upper frame
an insulating member located between the upper frame and the heat sink
Seo discloses (see Seo [0033]) a battery module 10 comprising a plurality of battery cells 100, an insulating member 700, and heatsinks 500, 600. Seo further discloses that the insulating member 700 may be provided in a pair, with the pair of insulating members 700 being provided between the first heatsink 500 and the top plate 200 and between the second heatsink 600 and the bottom plate 250, respectively (see Seo [0061]; Seo Fig. 2 below)
Seo Fig. 2
PNG
media_image5.png
720
1027
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fukuoka and Seo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of battery packs. A skilled artisan would have been capable of modifying the battery module, as taught by Fukuoka, such that an insulating member was provided between a heatsink and the upper frame, as taught by Seo, for the purpose of improving cooling performance of the battery module (see Seo [0020]). The composition of the insulating member (i.e., resin) would be a matter of design choice, and the result of improved cooling performance of the battery module would have been reasonably predictable (see Seo [0020]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the battery modify the battery module, as taught by Fukuoka, by providing a resin layer between the battery modules and the upper and lower frame, a heat sink between the upper frame and the resin layer, and an insulating member between the upper frame and the heat sink, as disclosed by Seo, because such a modification would improve cooling and battery performance. (See MPEP 2143).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEROME J NASH whose telephone number is (571)272-3025. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/J.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726