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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Misspelling of the word inner as “inners”
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
It is stated on page 8 of applicant’s remarks “…Kim does not disclose or suggest the claimed structure in which a least one bushing gasket is configured to connect the case try and the tray cover, and support the case tray at a plurality of points, as recited in claim 1.” this is incorrect, see annotated Fig.5 of Kim below, element 125 connects element 130 and 110. And as copied from the rejection of claim 1 (“In the circumference of the tray assembly, and the circumference and gasket of the cover member, multiple fasteners which are interconnected so that the first fastening member is inserted are punched from the respectively. ”, Kim, Page 5, Bottom).
PNG
media_image1.png
372
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is stated on page 8 of applicant’s remarks “… Kim does not clearly disclose the specific structural assembly recited in claim 1, namely that the at least one bushing gasket includes a gasket member and a bushing member, the gasket member includes a gasket body provided with a bushing member insert hole and a pair of guide pins, with the pair of guide pins being disposed with the bushing member insert hole interposed therebetween.” this is incorrect, see annotated Fig.5 of Kim below, element 120 as a gasket and element 125 as a bushing and the space between element 120 and element 150 where the bushing resides as the bushing member insert hole. Kim makes obvious the at least on guide pin provided as a pair and the pair of guide pins are disposed with the bushing member insert hole interposed therebetween as there is no significance in the duplication of the guide pin.
PNG
media_image1.png
372
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is stated on page 8 of applicant’s remarks “…Kim fails to disclose or suggest the bushing gasket, and that the at least one guide pin is provided as a pair, and the pair of guide pins are disposed with the bushing member insert hole interposed therebetween.”, Kim directly discloses the bushing gasket (see rejection of claim 1 and Kim Fig.5) and makes obvious the at least on guide pin provided as a pair and the pair of guide pins are disposed with the bushing member insert hole interposed therebetween as there is no significance in the duplication of the guide pin.
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 1, 4, and 6-15 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation "at least one guide pin", and the claim also recites "the at least one guide pin is provided as a pair" which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claims 4 and 6-15 are rejected due to their dependence on the indefinite claim 1.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4, and 6-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (KR 20160058440A, hereinafter Kim, as filed in IDS dated 08/28/2023).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches all of the following elements:
A battery pack comprising: (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
at least one battery module including at least one battery cell; (“…the battery pack which the battery cells of the device 1 per unit one or three or four are used it is obvious and includes middle and large-sized battery module connecting electrically the multiple battery cells ...”, Kim, Page 4, Middle)
a case tray configured to support the at least one battery module; (“The tray assembly in which the battery module assembly including multiple battery cells is mounted in the upper side. ”, Kim, Page 5, Middle)
a tray cover coupled to the case tray; (“With the cover member in which the circumference combines the battery module assembly with the state had in the upper side of the tray assembly with the circumference and face to face of the tray assembly , Kim, Page 5, Middle)
and at least one bushing gasket configured to connect the case try and the tray cover and to support the case tray on a plurality of points. (“In one detailed example, it can be the structure where the metal bushing is mounted in the inner periphery of the fastener of the gasket.”, Kim, Page 6, Top and “In the circumference of the tray assembly, and the circumference and gasket of the cover member, multiple fasteners which are interconnected so that the first fastening member is inserted are punched from the respectively. ”, Kim, Page 5, Bottom)
wherein the at least one bushing gasket includes: a gasket member configured to support the case tray (120, Kim, Fig. 5) ;
and a bushing member inserted into the gasket member (125, Kim, Fig. 5),
wherein the gasket member includes: a gasket body provided with a bushing member insert hole into which the bushing member is inserted (120, Kim, Fig. 5);
and at least one guide pin provided on the gasket body (126, Kim, Fig. 5),
Kim does not teach the following elements of claim 1:
wherein the at least one guide pin is provided as a pair,
and wherein the pair of guide pins are disposed with the bushing member insert hole interposed therebetween.
However, the instant claim describes a duplication of the guide pin onto the other side of the bushing member insert hole. In re Hazda, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to duplicate the guide pin from one side of the bushing member insert hole to the other or any other location.
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 4:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
the at least one guide pin is formed to protrude from one side of the gasket body to a predetermined length. (126, Kim, Fig. 5)
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 6:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
the gasket member includes a gasket bead provided on the gasket body and provided along a circumference of the bushing member insert hole. (Shown below, Kim, Fig. 5)
PNG
media_image2.png
333
577
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 7:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the bushing member includes: (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
a bushing body inserted into the bushing member insert hole; (125, Kim, Fig. 5)
and a bushing opening formed in the bushing body configured to allow a nut member to pass therethrough. (Shown below, Kim, Fig. 4)
PNG
media_image3.png
438
416
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 8:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
the tray cover is provided with a nut member insert hole through which a nut member passes. (Shown below, Kim, Fig. 5)
PNG
media_image4.png
349
584
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 9:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
the bushing gasket is provided in plurality, and wherein the plurality of bushing gaskets are spaced apart from each other by a predetermined difference. (““In the circumference of the tray assembly, and the circumference and gasket of the cover member, multiple fasteners which are interconnected so that the first fastening member is inserted are punched from the respectively. ”, Kim, Page 5, Bottom)
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 10:
A vehicle comprising at least one battery pack according to claim 1. (Kim, claim 17)
Regarding claim 11, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 2, as shown above. Kim is silent on the following elements of claim 11:
The battery pack according to claim 2, wherein the plurality of points include at least three points.
The instant claim gives a range interpreted to be greater than or equal to three. Kim teaches a plurality, taken to mean a range greater than or equal to two. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to choose the plurality of points of Kim to include at least three points.
Regarding claim 12, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 12:
The battery pack according to claim 1, further comprising: (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
a bolting member disposed on one side of the gasket member; (140, Kim, Fig. 5)
and a nut member fastened with the bolting member and configured to pass through the bushing member on another side of the gasket member. (150, Kim, Fig. 5)
Regarding claim 13, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 13:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein (100, Kim, Fig. 1)
the gasket member includes a gasket bead provided on the gasket body and provided along the inner circumference of the bushing member insert hole, (Shown above, Kim, Fig. 5)
and wherein the bushing member includes a bushing body having an a peripheral groove to couple to the gasket bead. (Shown below, Kim, Fig. 5)
PNG
media_image5.png
436
707
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following element of claim 14:
The battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the at least on bushing gasket includes a first end and a second end that are located in opposite directions from each other (Shown below, Kim, Fig.5),
And wherein the pair of guide pins are disposed between the first and the second end (126, Kim, Fig. 5 and duplication of parts mentioned in claim 1).
PNG
media_image6.png
372
701
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 8, as shown above. Kim additionally teaches all of the following elements of claim 15:
The battery pack according to claim 8, wherein the nut member contacts an inners surface of the tray cover (See regions highlighted below, Kim, Fig.5).
The number member 150 is in thermal contact with the inners surface of the tray cover 110 through the element 125 as shown below.
PNG
media_image7.png
372
701
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSHUA P BISTANY-RIEBMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9591. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-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, Nicholas A Smith can be reached at 5712728760. 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.
/JOSHUA P BISTANY-RIEBMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights