CTNF 18/292,299 CTNF 75637 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. DETAILED ACTION Remarks An Information Disclosure Statement was not found in the application file. However, copies of foreign references were found in the file. References have been not made of record unless cited on the PTO 892 mailed herewith. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 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 Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horikoshi (US 20160260939) in view of JP 2000306556 . Horikoshi teaches an electricity storage module comprising an electricity storage device wherein the storage device comprises an electrode body (1) of cylindrical shape, and a film exterior body comprising a housing part (21a, 22a) that wraps the electrode body and a sealing part (21b, 22b) that seals the housing part (Figs. 1A-3C). The reference does not expressly teach a holder that holds the storage device nor that the holder is bonded to the sealing part as recited in claim 1. JP ‘556 is directed to a framed battery. The battery comprises a pouch type battery cell that is bonded to a frame (5) by an adhesive ([0024]). Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing because the artisan would be motivated to incorporate a holder (frame) into the structure of Horikoshi and bond the sealing part of Horikoshi thereto. In [0008] of JP ‘556, the reference teaches that the rigidity of a battery using a film as an outer casing can be increased and safety ensured without impairing the advantages of such a battery, by using a frame and bonding the battery to the frame. Accordingly, the artisan would have been motivated to use a frame (holder) in Horikoshi and to bond the battery thereto. As such, claim 1 is rendered obvious . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minamitani (US 20160248052) in view of Horikoshi and JP 2000306556 . Regarding claim 1, Minamitani teaches an electricity storage module comprising an electricity storage device wherein the storage device comprises an electrode body (20) of elliptical shape, and a film exterior body comprising a housing part (166, 115) that wraps the electrode body and a sealing part (132) that seals the housing part (Fig. 14B and [0163]). Regarding claim 2, the storage device comprises a plurality of electrode bodies and a plurality of housing parts that respectively wrap the electrode bodies, wherein the sealing part seals each housing part and connects the plurality of the housing parts together (Fig. 14B). Minamitani does not expressly disclose that the electrode body is cylindrical as recited in claim 1. Horikoshi teaches an electricity storage module comprising an electricity storage device wherein the storage device comprises an electrode body (1) of cylindrical shape, and a film exterior body comprising a housing part (21a, 22a) that wraps the electrode body and a sealing part (21b, 22b) that seals the housing part (Figs. 1A-3C). Therefore, the limitation would have been obvious to one skilled in the art that the time of filing because the use of a cylindrical electrode body in Minamitani (as opposed to elliptical) would have been obvious as a matter of routine design choice as evidenced by Horikoshi which uses a cylindrical electrode body. Further, a change in shape has been held to be patentably insignificant unless a new or unexpected result can be shown (MPEP 2144.04). Accordingly, the limitation would be rendered obvious. Modified Minamitani does not expressly teach a holder that holds the storage device nor that the holder is bonded to the sealing part as recited in claim 1. JP ‘556 is directed to a framed battery. The battery comprises a pouch type battery cell that is bonded to a frame (5) by an adhesive. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing because the artisan would be motivated to incorporate a holder (frame) into the structure of modified Minamitani and bond the sealing parts of Minamitani thereto. In [0008] of JP ‘556, the reference teaches that the rigidity of a battery using a film as an outer casing can be increased and safety ensured without impairing the advantages of such a battery, by using a frame and bonding the battery to the frame. Accordingly, the artisan would have been motivated to use a frame (holder) in Minimatani and to bond the battery thereto. As such, claim 1 is rendered obvious . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horikoshi in view of JP 2000306556 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 63-42462Y2 . Modified Horikoshi does not expressly teach that the module further comprises a reinforcement plate connected to the holder as recited in claim 14. JP ‘462 is directed to a battery wherein a flat battery is joined to a surface of a frame (14). A sheet (15) is laminated on the top of the frame opposite to the battery. The purpose of the sheet is to increase bending strength (page 2 of translation), thus it functions as a reinforcement plate. Therefore, the invention would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing because the artisan would be motivated to use the sheet of JP ‘462 in the battery of modified Horikoshi, as doing so would have provided the above-noted reinforcing function. Accordingly, claim 14 is rendered obvious . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horikoshi in view of JP 2000306556 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2019182117 . Regarding claim 16, Horikoshi teaches electrode leads (3a, 4a) extending from the electrode body and protruding from the sealing part. However, modified Horikoshi does not expressly teach that the storage device comprises a plurality of electrode bodies, a respective plurality of leads, or an insulation member interposed between a plurality of the electrode leads and the holder (claim 16), or a three-piece bus bar structure including an insulating support plate and an insulating lid that sandwich a bus bar that electrically connects a plurality of leads (claim 17). WO 117 is directed to a plurality of battery cells oriented in the same direction and a busbar structure having a plurality of conductive layers (n layers) and insulating layers (n+1 layers) alternating with one another. Element 2 (8) functions as a holder in WO ‘117. Therefore, the invention would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing because the artisan would first be motivated to use a plurality of individual cells (i.e. individual storage devices including housing portions and sealing portions) of Horikoshi arranged in a row, each having its own frame, or alternatively, arranged in a common frame. Regarding the busbar and insulating structure recited in the claim, it is submitted that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art (from WO 117) and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR v. Teleflex , 82 USPQ2d 1385, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007). It is recognized that the leads of Horikoshi are oriented in opposite directions. The position is taken that the busbar structure of WO ‘117 could be readily modified to be of one polarity rather than two polarities, by removing two layers (thus, still having two insulating layers sandwiching a busbar). Accordingly, the claimed invention is rendered obvious . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 3-13, 15, and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 3 recites a plurality of electricity storage devices arranged in a second direction that intersects a first direction, the first direction being the direction in which a plurality of electrode bodies are aligned, the second direction also intersecting an axis direction of the electrode bodies; a plurality of holders being arranged in the second direction alternately with the plurality of the storage devices, wherein two of the holders adjacent to each other sandwich a sealing part and are both bonded to the sealing part. Minamitani in view of Horikoshi and JP 2000306556 is considered the closest prior art. While this combination may render obvious a storage device comprising a plurality of electrode bodies and a holder as set forth above, it does not fairly suggest a plurality of holders arranged alternately with a plurality of storage devices, wherein two adjacent holders sandwich a sealing part and are both bonded to the sealing part as claimed. Claim 5 recites a filler that is interposed between the storage device and the holder and of which the thermal conductivity at a first temperature is lower than the thermal conductivity at a second temperature that is lower than the first temperature. The art applied above does not teach or fairly suggest such a filler interposed between the storage device and holder. Furthermore, DE 102018202946 teaches a battery module having layers between battery cells that can have variable thermal conductivity including one layer (7, 8) that appears to meet the claimed relationship (page 6 of translation). However, there is no apparent reason to use such a layer between the battery and frame (holder) of modified Horikoshi or Minamitani, for at least the reason that the frames of the prior art combination are open (window-shaped). Claim 12 recites that the holder comprises, at an end in the axis direction of the electrode body, a plurality of click portions bent toward an adjacent storage device. The applied art also fails to teach or fairly suggest this limitation. Claim 15 recites that the reinforcement plate comprises a rib extending the aligning direction of the electricity storage device and the holder. None of Horikoshi, JP 556, or JP ‘462, applied to claim 14 above, teaches or fairly suggests this limitation, alone or in combination. Claim 18 recites that the lid (insulating lid covering the busbar) comprises a plurality of protrusions protruding toward the holder when viewed from an axis direction of the electrode body. The applied references do not teach or fairly suggest such a plurality of protrusions . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan Crepeau whose telephone number is (571) 272-1299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher, can be reached at (571) 270-3879. The phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 272-1700. Documents may be faxed to the central fax server at (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /Jonathan Crepeau/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 June 12, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/292,299 Page 2 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/292,299 Page 3 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/292,299 Page 4 Art Unit: 1725
Prosecution Insights