CTNF 18/278,757 CTNF 84574 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 8/24/2023 and 1/23/2024 has/have been received and complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner, and a copy with initials is attached herewith. Drawings 06-37 AIA 4. The drawings were received on 8/24/2023 . These drawings are acceptable . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 5. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 6. 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. 07-23-aia AIA 7. 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. 07-21-aia AIA 8. Claim (s) 1-7 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20120133310 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a battery cell module (42) comprising two end battery cells (52) and a number of intermediate battery cells (52) arranged between the two end battery cells (52) to form a row (bank) of battery cells (52), wherein at least one of the two end battery cells (52) is electrically coupled in parallel with at least one intermediate battery cell (52) and wherein the row (bank) of battery cells (52) comprises two or more remaining battery cells (52) being electrically coupled in series with each other (first portion of the plurality of battery cells 52 may be arranged in parallel and a second portion of the battery cells 52 may be arranged in series) [Fig. 5-6; paragraph 0016-0020, 0072-0073, 0079-0083, 0088-0090]. Although, here in Lee all the battery cells are designated as (52), however, it reads on the claimed invention and would have been obvious. Regarding claims 2-3, Lee teaches that two end battery cells (52) are electrically coupled in parallel with same or different intermediate battery cell (52) (first portion of the plurality of battery cells 52 may be arranged in parallel) [paragraph 0073]. Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches that at least two intermediate battery cells (52) arranged between the two end battery cells (52) to form the row (bank) of battery cells (52), and wherein all remaining battery cells (52) of the row of battery cells (bank) are electrically coupled in series with each other (a second portion of the battery cells 52 may be arranged in series) [paragraph 0073]. Regarding claims 5-6, Lee teaches that at least one of the two end battery cells (52) or an intermediate battery cell (52) closer to an end battery cell (52) is electrically coupled in parallel with at least one center battery cell (52) (first portion of the plurality of battery cells 52 may be arranged in parallel) [paragraph 0073]. Hereby, it should be mentioned that due to missing position details for the "center battery cell", the term "center battery cell" has to be interpreted by the person skilled in the art very broadly and therefore, any intermediate battery cell can be considered as a "center battery cell". Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches that row (bank) of battery cells (52) comprises an even number of battery cells [Fig. 5-6]. Regarding claim 12, Lee teaches a vehicle (electric vehicles) comprising a battery cell module (42) wherein the battery cell module (42) comprising two end battery cells (52) and a number of intermediate battery cells (52) arranged between the two end battery cells (52) to form a row (bank) of battery cells (52), wherein at least one of the two end battery cells (52) is electrically coupled in parallel with at least one intermediate battery cell (52) and wherein the row (bank) of battery cells (52) comprises two or more remaining battery cells (52) being electrically coupled in series with each other (first portion of the plurality of battery cells 52 may be arranged in parallel and a second portion of the battery cells 52 may be arranged in series) [Fig. 5-6; paragraph 0016-0020, 0072-0073, 0079-0083, 0088-0090] . 07-21-aia AIA 9. Claim (s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20120133310 A1) as applied in claim 1 and further in view of Capati et al (US 20190081294 A1) . Regarding claims 8-10, Lee remains silent about spatial distance between two adjacent battery cells; however, Capati teaches a battery cell module (100) comprising end battery cells (110), intermediate battery cells (110), row (105) of battery cells (110) wherein a spatial distance between two adjacent battery cells (110) varies in the row (105) of battery cells (110), dependent on the distance to the end battery cells (110), decreases towards the end battery cells (110) [Fig. 1-3, 5; paragraph 0023-0024, 0045-0046, 0082-0083]. Regarding claim 11, Capati teaches that battery cells (110) of the battery cell module (100) are prismatic battery cells [paragraph 0023] . 07-21-aia AIA 10. Claim (s) 13 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20120133310 A1) . Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches a method for coupling battery cells (52) of a battery cell module (42) comprising two end battery cells (52) and a number of intermediate battery cells (52) arranged between the two end battery cells (52) to form a row ("bank") of battery cells (52), the method comprising electrically coupling least one of the two end battery cells (52) in parallel with at least one intermediate battery cell (52); and electrically coupling two or more remaining battery cells of the row of battery cells in series with each other [Fig. 5-6; paragraph 0016-0020, 0072-0073, 0079-0084, 0088-0090]. Regarding claims 15-16, Lee teaches that two end battery cells (52) are electrically coupled in parallel with same or different intermediate battery cell (52) (first portion of the plurality of battery cells 52 may be arranged in parallel) [paragraph 0073]. Regarding claims 17-18, Lee teaches that at least one of the two end battery cells (52) or an intermediate battery cell (52) closer to an end battery cell (52) is electrically coupled in parallel with at least one center battery cell (52) (first portion of the plurality of battery cells 52 may be arranged in parallel) [paragraph 0073]. Hereby, it should be mentioned that due to missing position details for the "center battery cell", the term "center battery cell" has to be interpreted by the person skilled in the art very 07-21-aia AIA 11. Claim (s) 14 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20120133310 A1) as applied in claim 1 and further in view of Capati et al (US 20190081294 A1) . Regarding claims 14 and 19-20, Lee remains silent about spatial distance between two adjacent battery cells; however, Capati teaches a battery cell module (100) comprising end battery cells (110), intermediate battery cells (110), row (105) of battery cells (110) wherein a spatial distance between two adjacent battery cells (110) varies in the row (105) of battery cells (110), dependent on the distance to the end battery cells (110), decreases towards the end battery cells (110) [Fig. 1-3, 5; paragraph 0023-0024, 0045-0046, 0082-0083]. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD S SIDDIQUEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3719. 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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. /MUHAMMAD S SIDDIQUEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723 Application/Control Number: 18/278,757 Page 2 Art Unit: 1723