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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7 November 2023, 18 December 2024, 16 January 2025, 19 February 2025, 19 February 2025, and 22 August 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5: lines 2 and 3 recite “provided in one of the coupling protrusion portion and the coupling concave portion” and instead should recite “provided in either the coupling protrusion portion or the coupling concave portion”.
Claim 11: line 3 recites “provided in one of the coupling protrusion portion and the coupling concave portion” and instead should recite “provided in either the coupling protrusion portion or the coupling concave portion”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 6-9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 111416076 (Jin et al., hereinafter, Jin) in view of EP 3567650 (Chi et al., hereinafter, Chi).
Regarding claim 1, Jin teaches a battery module comprising:
A battery module comprising:
a battery cell assembly including two or more longitudinal unit cells (Jin Fig. 1 and 2, four longitudinal unit cells on each side), each of the two or more longitudinal unit cells including two or more battery cells (Jin Fig. 1 and 2 each longitudinal unit cell is made of multiple cells) arranged in a row in a longitudinal direction, wherein the battery cell includes a pair of electrode leads at both ends in the longitudinal direction (Jin Fig. 1, electrode leads shown on each end in the longitudinal direction), and each of the two or more longitudinal unit cells are stacked in two or more columns in a thickness direction of the battery cell (Jin Fig. 1, longitudinal unit cells stacked in the thickness direction of the battery cells); and
a module case accommodating the battery cell assembly,
wherein the module case includes a first side plate and a second side plate which are arranged perpendicular with respect to the thickness direction of the battery cell, cover both side surfaces of the battery cell assembly, and are disposed opposite to each other (Jin Fig. 1, foldable side plates 200, perpendicular to the thickness direction of the battery cells).
Jin does not teach coupling protrusion on the first side plate, and coupling concave portion in which the coupling protrusion portion is fitted on the second side plate.
In a related field of endeavor, Chi teaches a fitting protrusion 121c and a fitting groove 222c (Chi ¶ “First, referring to FIG. 7). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to modify the side plates of Jin with the fitting protrusions and fitting grooves of Chi in order to reinforce the coupling force of the side surfaces between battery modules (Chi ¶ “The coupling between the side plates”).
Regarding claim 2, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module of claim 1, wherein a plurality of the coupling protrusion portions and the coupling concave portions are provided in the same number at positions corresponding in parallel to each other in a longitudinal direction of each of the first side plate and the second side plate (Chi Fig. 7, one fitting protrusion 121c corresponds to one fitting groove 222c, in parallel, in the longitudinal direction).
Regarding claim 3, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module of claim 2, wherein the coupling protrusion portions and the coupling concave portions are provided at each of a front end portion, a middle portion, and a rear end portion of each of the first side plate and the second side plate (Chi Fig. 7 and 5, Fig. 7 shows the fitting protrusions and fitting grooves to be in-line with the H1 and H2 coupling holes. Fig. 5 shows that there are multiple coupling holes across the side plates including a front, middle, and rear portion of the plates. If a set of fitting protrusions and grooves exists at each location that there are coupling holes, then there would be coupling protrusion and coupling concave portions also at the front middle and rear portions of the side plates. Otherwise, if there were only one set, it would be obvious to add multiple sets of fitting protrusions and fitting grooves throughout the side plates, and the court has held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 4, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module of claim 2, wherein the coupling protrusion portions and the coupling concave portions are provided in pairs on each of an upper portion and a lower portion of each of the first side plate and the second side plate. (Chi Fig. 7 and 5, see above rejection for claim 3. If there are multiple sets of fitting protrusions and grooves at each coupling hole location, then Fig. 5 shows that there can be two pairs of fitting protrusions and grooves, and Fig. 7 shows that there are upper, middle, and lower fitting protrusions and grooves to represent the pairs of upper and lower portion coupling protrusion and coupling concave portions. Otherwise, it would be obvious to add more sets of fitting protrusions and fitting grooves to create pairs in the side plates, and the court has held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 6, Jin in view of Chi teaches a battery module stack comprising: a plurality of the battery modules of claim 1 stacked in the thickness direction of the battery cell, wherein the plurality of the battery modules are coupled as the coupling protrusion portion provided on the first side plate of one battery module is fitted into the coupling concave portion of the second side plate of adjacent battery module (Chi Abstract, plurality of unit battery modules…wherein the side plates of any one unit battery module and another unit battery module adjacent thereto are engaged with each other, ¶ “First, referring to FIG. 7” a fitting groove 222c may be provided to the other side thereof so that the fitting protrusion 121c may be fitted thereto).
Regarding claim 7, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module stack of claim 6 wherein: each of the plurality of the battery modules comprises a plurality of the coupling protrusion portions and the coupling concave portions provided in the same number at positions corresponding in parallel to each other in the longitudinal direction of each of the first side plate and the second side plate (Chi ¶ “Three unit battery modules” the three unit battery modules depicted are all of the same structure. Therefore, the side plates and coupling protrusion portions and coupling concave portions also in the same position and number in a parallel and longitudinal direction) and
the plurality of the battery modules are coupled as the coupling protrusion portions provided on the first side plate of one battery module are fitted into the coupling concave portions at a corresponding positions of the second side plate of the adjacent battery module (Chi Abstract, plurality of unit battery modules…wherein the side plates of any one unit battery module and another unit battery module adjacent thereto are engaged with each other, ¶ “First, referring to FIG. 7” a fitting groove 222c may be provided to the other side thereof so that the fitting protrusion 121c may be fitted thereto).
Regarding claim 8, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module stack of claim 7, wherein: the coupling protrusion portions and the coupling concave portions are provided at each of a front end portion, a middle portion, and a rear end portion of each of the first side plate and the second side plate (Chi Fig. 7 and 5, Fig. 7 shows the fitting protrusions and fitting grooves to be in-line with the H1 and H2 coupling holes. Fig. 5 shows that there are multiple coupling holes across the side plates including a front, middle, and rear portion of the plates. If a set of fitting protrusions and grooves exists at each location that there are coupling holes, then there would be coupling protrusion and coupling concave portions also at the front middle and rear portions of the side plates. Otherwise, if there were only one set, it would be obvious to add multiple sets of fitting protrusions and fitting grooves throughout the side plates, and the court has held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04), and
the plurality of the battery modules are coupled as the coupling protrusion portions provided on the first side plate of one battery module are fitted into the coupling concave portions at a corresponding positions of the second side plate of the adjacent battery module (Chi Abstract, plurality of unit battery modules…wherein the side plates of any one unit battery module and another unit battery module adjacent thereto are engaged with each other, ¶ “First, referring to FIG. 7” a fitting groove 222c may be provided to the other side thereof so that the fitting protrusion 121c may be fitted thereto).
Regarding claim 9, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module stack of claim 6, wherein: the coupling protrusion portion and the coupling concave portion are provided in pairs on each of an upper portion and a lower portion of each of the first side plate and the second side plate (Chi Fig. 7 and 5, see above rejection for claim 8. If there are multiple sets of fitting protrusions and grooves at each coupling hole location, then Fig. 5 shows that there can be two pairs of fitting protrusions and grooves, and Fig. 7 shows that there are upper, middle, and lower fitting protrusions and grooves to represent the pairs of upper and lower portion coupling protrusion and coupling concave portions. Otherwise, it would be obvious to add more sets of fitting protrusions and fitting grooves to create pairs in the side plates, and the court has held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04), and
the plurality of the battery modules are coupled as the coupling protrusion portion provided on the first side plate of one battery module is fitted into the coupling concave portion at a corresponding position of the second side plate of the adjacent battery module (Chi Abstract, plurality of unit battery modules…wherein the side plates of any one unit battery module and another unit battery module adjacent thereto are engaged with each other, ¶ “First, referring to FIG. 7” a fitting groove 222c may be provided to the other side thereof so that the fitting protrusion 121c may be fitted thereto).
Regarding claim 10, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module stack of claim 6, wherein the plurality of the battery modules are coupled as the coupling protrusion portion provided on the first side plate of one battery module is fitted into the coupling concave portion of the second side plate of the adjacent battery module with a predetermined gap therebetween (Chi ¶ “The coupling between the side”, Here, the shapes of the fitting protrusion 121c and the fitting groove 222c are not limited to those of FIG. 7, and any shape may be used as long as they are able to be fitted. Thus, it would be obvious to select a shape for the fitting portions that leaves a gap).
Regarding claim 12, Jin in view of Chi teaches a battery pack comprising: the battery module stack of claim 6 (Chi Abstract, a battery pack, which includes a plurality of unit battery modules).
Claims 5, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 111416076 (Jin) in view of EP 3567650 (Chi) further in view of US 20170331089 (Hashimoto et al., hereinafter, Hashimoto).
Regarding claim 5, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module of claim 1, but does not teach a venting hole communicating with an outside of the battery module is provided in one of the coupling protrusion portion and the coupling concave portion. In a related field of endeavor, Hashimoto teaches a power source device with coupling portions that are designed to be fitted to each other and are provided directly over the vent, allowing for gas discharged from the pouch cell to flow through the coupling hole of the coupling portion and out of the battery (Hashimoto ¶ 40, 47, Figs. 5-7, 9).
Regarding claim 11, Jin in view of Chi teaches the battery module stack of claim 10, but does not teach a venting hole communicating with an outside of the battery module stack is provided in one of the coupling protrusion portion and the coupling concave portion, nor that when the coupling protrusion portion provided on the first side plate of one battery module is coupled to the coupling concave portion of the second side plate of the adjacent battery module, the venting hole communicates with the predetermined gap. In a related field of endeavor, Hashimoto teaches a power source device with coupling portions that are designed to be fitted to each other and are provided directly over the vent, allowing for gas discharged from the pouch cell to flow through the coupling hole of the coupling portion and out of the battery, with the coupling hole and duct portions functioning as the predetermined gap between adjacent battery modules (Hashimoto ¶ 40, 47, Figs. 5-7, 9).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to modify the battery of Jin in view of Chi with the vent of Hashimoto with the motivation to easily specify a gas discharge position and guide the gas discharged from the pouch cell to a predetermined position (Hashimoto ¶ 5, 47).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL FANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8815. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-0604. 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.
/M.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1784
/HUMERA N. SHEIKH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights