DETAILED ACTION
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
2. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4/25/2023 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
3. The drawings were received on 4/25/2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Election/Restrictions
4. Applicant's election of Group I (claims 1-15) in the reply filed on 5/18/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a)). Therefore, claims 1-15 are examined on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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.
8. Claim(s) 1 and 3-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 20230395877 A1) in view of Steinbroner (US 20060093890 A1), Wozniczka et al (US 5789091 A) and Sang et al (US 20160240881 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a method for assembling a vehicle battery pack comprising a plurality of battery modules (200) in a pack tray (100) [Fig. 1-2; paragraph 0031-0035]. Park remains silent that the battery modules are assembled in a banding strap. However, Steinbroner discloses a method for assembling a cell stack of a vehicle (traction) fuel cell pack comprising a strap assembly (110) that includes at least one compressive band (112) that extends around the end plates of the fuel cell stacks to compress the end plates toward each other and thereby provide compression to the fuel cells in the stack [Abstract; paragraph 0044-0043, 0054-0061]. Steinbroner remains silent about utilizing a fixture; however, Wozniczka teaches an electrochemical fuel cell stack comprising a plurality of fuel cell assemblies interposed between a pair of end plate assemblies. The mechanism for securing the stack in its compressed, assembled state includes at least one compression band which circumscribes the end plate assemblies and interposed fuel cell assemblies of the stack. Wozniczka further teaches that the compression band may be applied to the stack in various ways. For example, if the compression band is formed as a continuous structure (or if it is preferable to join the ends of it prior to fitting it around the stack), the stack may be slightly "over-compressed" in a fixture, one or more compression bands slipped around the stack, and the stack released from the fixture. If the compression band is sufficiently stretchable and resilient it may be stretched in order to fit it around the stack. The ends of the compression band may be joined after it is wrapped around the stack, in which case, to ensure a tight fit, it may be again desirable to over-compress the stack in a fixture until one or more bands are fitted. If the length of the compression band is adjustable, the band may be fitted and subsequently tightened [Abstract; column 4, line 55 to column 5, line 5]. Sang teaches that the compression bands may be applied to the stack in various ways, for example by slightly over-compressing the stack initially in a fixture during assembly, placing and then welding together the ends of the compression bands around the stack, and finally releasing the stack from the fixture [paragraph 0024].
The reference Steinbroner/Wozniczka/Sang are analogous art because they are from similar problem solving area of assembling the fuel cells/batteries. Even though, it is related to fuel cells, it would be obvious to a skilled artisan to apply the above teachings to the assembly of batteries.
Therefore, the claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art (KSR v. Teleflex, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)) and an ordinarily skilled artisan would have recognized such a substitution without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 3, Sang teaches that the cell stack is removed from the compression fixture after connecting the band [paragraph 0024].
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches providing plurality of cross beams (110) in the battery pack [Fig. 2].
Regarding claim 5, Steinbroner teaches installing a first and a second banding strap (112) about the cell stack [Fig. 6-7, 11].
Regarding claim 6, Steinbroner teaches that the second banding strap is applied about the cell stack in a direction that is transverse to the first banding strap [Fig. 11].
Regarding claim 8, Steinbroner teaches that the first banding strap extends over top of and beneath the cell stack [Fig. 6-7, 11].
Regarding claim 9, Steinbroner/Wozniczka/Sang teaches that applying the compressive force includes moving a first end plate and a second end plate of the compression fixture toward one another to compress the cell stack between a first compression plate and a second compression plate of the cell stack [Steinbroner: Abstract; paragraph 0044-0043, 0054-006] [Wozniczka: Abstract; column 4, line 55 to column 5, line 5] [Sang: paragraph 0024].
Regarding claim 10, Steinbroner teaches that the first banding strap (112) extends across the first compression plate (12) and the second compression plate (14) [Fig. 6-7].
Regarding claim 12, Sang teaches that connecting the first free end portion and the second free end portion of the first banding strap includes friction welding the first free end portion and the second free end portion together [paragraph 0024].
Regarding claims 14-15, Steinbroner/Wozniczka teaches that the banding strap comprised of plastic or polymeric materials [Steinbroner: paragraph 0054] [Wozniczka: claim 14].
Regarding claims 7, 11 and 13, receiving the second banding strap over the first cross-member beam and the second cross-member beam; hanging the free end portion of the banding strap over the end plates or cutting an excess material from the banding strap are within the technical grasp of a skilled artisan and would have been obvious.
9. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 20230395877 A1) in view of Steinbroner (US 20060093890 A1), Wozniczka et al (US 5789091 A) and Sang et al (US 20160240881 A1) as applied in claim 1 and further in view of Parkanzky et al (US 20210104793 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Steinbroner/Wozniczka/Sang remains silent that the cell stack includes at least a first battery cell packet, a second battery cell packet, and a structural thermal barrier between the first battery cell packet and the second battery cell packet. However, Parkanzky teaches providing the first thermal barrier 10A positioned between a first battery cell 14A and a second battery cell 14B. The second thermal barrier 10B is positioned between a first module 18A and a second module 18B in order to reflect radiant heat [Abstract; Fig. 1-2; paragraph 0016-0019]. Therefore, the claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art (KSR v. Teleflex, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)) and an ordinarily skilled artisan would have recognized such a substitution without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success.
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
Prosecution Insights