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 Status
Claims 4-6 and 18-20 have been cancelled and claims 1, 7, 10, 12, 14, and 15 were amended. Claims 1-3 and 7-17 are currently pending.
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 7 is 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the cross members" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (U.S. 20190207174) in view of Lee et al. (U.S. 20240413470) and Miller (U.S. 20060152906).
With respect to claim 1, Zhang discloses a stackable battery module mounting system (1 – lower casing) (Fig. 4), comprising:
a side wall structure (111 – enclosing wall) (Fig. 4);
a plurality of cross members (13 – support plate) extending between opposite sides of the side wall structure (111) (Fig. 4), the plurality of cross members (13) each having a plurality of first spaced apertures (fh – fixing hole) (Fig. 4);
a plurality of battery modules (2) each having a face plate (211 - side wall) on opposite sides thereof (Fig. 2 – above) and, the face plates (211) including a second apertures (TH – through hole) aligned with a respective one of the first spaced apertures (fh) of the plurality of cross members (13) (Fig. 4); and
a plurality of bolts (3 – fastener) each received in corresponding ones of the second apertures (TH) and the first spaced apertures (fh) for securing the plurality of battery modules (3) to the plurality of cross members (13) (Fig. 4); and
base panel (12) connected to the sidewall structure (111) (Fig. 4), and a plurality of upper cross members (13) are connected to the sidewall structure (111) (Fig. 4), wherein battery modules are connected to the plurality of upper cross members (13) (Fig. 4; [0053]).
Zhang does not disclose that each face plate having a plurality of protruding sections which nest with protruding sections of the face casting of adjacent battery modules, wherein the protruding sections include the second apertures of the protruding sections, the plurality of cross members include a plurality of lower cross members that are connected to the base panel, that the upper cross members are connected to the side walls by brackets, or that the plurality of battery modules include a first plurality of battery modules connected to the plurality of lower cross members and a second plurality of battery modules stacked on top of the plurality of first battery modules and connected to the plurality of upper cross members..
Lee discloses face plates (241 – reinforcement plates combine to form 240) on either side of neighboring battery modules (10) (Figs. 2 and 3) and teaches that each face plate (241) has a plurality of protruding sections (241a1 and 241b1 – first and second reinforcement ribs) which nest with protruding section of a face casting of adjacent battery modules (projections 241a1 of face plate 241a nest with projections 241b1 of face plate 241b) (Fig. 8), and that the projections (241a1 and 241b1) include second apertures (2411h – through holes) (Fig. 8). Lee further teaches that this coupling arrangement allows proper alignment of neighboring face plates in order to form one strip where they are to be coupled ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to modify the coupling arrangements of the face plates of the battery modules disclosed by Zhang to the plurality of projections nested and secured together as taught by Lee in order to allow proper alignment of neighboring face plates in order to form one strip where they are to be coupled.
Miller discloses a stackable battery module mounting system (10 – storage system or rack) comprising a base panel (110/112 – base plates) connected to a sidewall structure (102 – opposed end supports) connected to upper cross members (50 – middle) which are connected to upper (second) batteries (90) (Fig. 11) and teaches lower cross members (50 – lower) connected to both the base panel (110/112) (via gussets 116) and a lower (first) plurality of batteries (90) stacked below an upper (second) plurality of batteries (Fig. 11) and that the upper cross members (50 – middle) are connected to the sidewall structure (102) via mounting brackets (58 – tabs and 234 – slots) above the lower cross members (50 – lower) (Fig. 6). Miller further teaches that th mounting system described above is preferable because it occupies a minimum space while being relatively affordable ([0006]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to apply the vertical stacking mechanism including a lower cross members, brackets, and vertically stacked modules as taught by Miller to the stackable battery mounting system disclosed by modified Zhang in order to have a mounting system which occupies a minimum space while being relatively affordable.
With respect to claim 7, modified Zhang discloses face plates with protruding sections as demonstrated by the above 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1. Once combined, the projections with second apertures would necessarily be spaced upward from a bottom of the batter modules by a distance equal to a vertical heigh of the cross members, as it is disclosed that the second apertures in the projections of the face plate align with the first spaced apertures on the cross members in order to be connected by a bolt (Fig. 4 of Zhang). Therefore, once combined, the plurality of projections taught by Lee applied to the rail (R) of Zhang would necessarily read on claim 7.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, modified Zhang discloses face plates with protruding sections as demonstrated by the above 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1. Once combined, the number of protrusion as shown in Fig. 7 of Lee show 4 protrusions (2411) on each face plate (241a and 241b), thus falling into the claimed range of 2 and 10. Further, as shown in Fig. 7 of Lee, there necessarily are recesses formed between adjacent projections (2411) of each face plate (214a and 241b). Lee further teaches the plurality of projections and recesses allows for easier alignment of same-shaped projections to fit together and be formed into a single strip ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include the 4 projections on each face plate as taught by Lee to the face plates disclosed by modified Lee in order to ensure alignment of the face plates to form a single strip.
With respect to claim 15, Zhang discloses a stackable battery module mounting system (1 – lower casing) (Fig. 4), comprising:
a side wall structure (111 – enclosing wall) (Fig. 4);
a plurality of cross members (13 – support plate) extending between opposite sides of the side wall structure (111) (Fig. 4), the plurality of cross members (13) each having a plurality of first spaced apertures (fh – fixing hole) (Fig. 4);
a plurality of battery modules (2) each having a face plate (211 - side wall) on opposite sides thereof (Fig. 2 – above) and, the face plates (211) including a second apertures (TH – through hole) aligned with a respective one of the first spaced apertures (fh) of the plurality of cross members (13) (Fig. 4); and
a plurality of bolts (3 – fastener) each received in corresponding ones of the second apertures (TH) and the first spaced apertures (fh) for securing the plurality of battery modules (3) to the plurality of cross members (13) (Fig. 4); and
base panel (12) connected to the sidewall structure (111) (Fig. 4), and a plurality of upper cross members (13) are connected to the sidewall structure (111) (Fig. 4), wherein battery modules are connected to the plurality of upper cross members (13) (Fig. 4; [0053]).
Zhang does not disclose that each face plate having a plurality of protruding sections which nest with protruding sections of the face casting of adjacent battery modules, wherein the protruding sections include the second apertures of the protruding sections, the plurality of cross members include a plurality of lower cross members that are connected to the base panel, that the upper cross members are connected to the side walls by brackets, or that the plurality of battery modules include a first plurality of battery modules connected to the plurality of lower cross members and a second plurality of battery modules stacked on top of the plurality of first battery modules and connected to the plurality of upper cross members..
Lee discloses face plates (241 – reinforcement plates combine to form 240) on either side of neighboring battery modules (10) (Figs. 2 and 3) and teaches that each face plate (241) has a plurality of protruding sections (241a1 and 241b1 – first and second reinforcement ribs) which nest with protruding section of a face casting of adjacent battery modules (projections 241a1 of face plate 241a nest with projections 241b1 of face plate 241b) (Fig. 8), and that the projections (241a1 and 241b1) include second apertures (2411h – through holes) (Fig. 8). Lee further teaches that this coupling arrangement allows proper alignment of neighboring face plates in order to form one strip where they are to be coupled ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to modify the coupling arrangements of the face plates of the battery modules disclosed by Zhang to the plurality of projections nested and secured together as taught by Lee in order to allow proper alignment of neighboring face plates in order to form one strip where they are to be coupled.
Miller discloses a stackable battery module mounting system (10 – storage system or rack) comprising a base panel (110/112 – base plates) connected to a sidewall structure (102 – opposed end supports) connected to upper cross members (50 – middle) which are connected to upper (second) batteries (90) (Fig. 11) and teaches lower cross members (50 – lower) connected to both the base panel (110/112) (via gussets 116) and a lower (first) plurality of batteries (90) stacked below an upper (second) plurality of batteries (Fig. 11) and that the upper cross members (50 – middle) are connected to the sidewall structure (102) via mounting brackets (58 – tabs and 234 – slots) above the lower cross members (50 – lower) (Fig. 6). Miller further teaches that th mounting system described above is preferable because it occupies a minimum space while being relatively affordable ([0006]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to apply the vertical stacking mechanism including a lower cross members, brackets, and vertically stacked modules as taught by Miller to the stackable battery mounting system disclosed by modified Zhang in order to have a mounting system which occupies a minimum space while being relatively affordable.
While neither Zhang, Lee, or Miller teach that the protruding section of the battery modules rest upon a respective one of the plurality of cross members, once Zhang and Lee are combined, the resultant art would arrive at the nesting, protruding sections of Lee necessarily resting upon the cross members of Zhang, as the battery modules of Zhang already disclose one, elongated projection on the module face resting upon the cross members. Therefore, once the nesting protrusions of Lee have been applied to the faces of the battery modules, they would necessarily rest upon the cross members.
Claim(s) 2, 10, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. in view of Lee et al. and Miller as applied to claims 1, 5, and 15 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. 20110165451).
With respect to claim 2 and 16, Zhang discloses a plurality of battery modules (2) stacked together (Fig. 3, [abstract]), but does not disclose the battery modules are stacked upon each other.
Kim discloses a battery mounting system for a batter pack (300) comprising cross members (60, 160, and 260 – reinforcement plates/70 and 170 – brackets) (Fig. 1) and teaches the battery modules (1, 100, 200) are stacked vertically via the cross members (60, 160, 260 and 70, 170) (Fig. 2). Kim further teaches that this arrangement helps to fix battery modules together in either a vertical or lateral stacked orientation without additional supports, thus limiting the weight ([0034]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to allow for the stacking of the battery modules disclosed by Zhang to be in a vertical orientation as taught by Kim as the taught arrangement allows for the vertical or lateral stacked orientation without the inclusion of further support, thus limiting the weight.
With respect to claim 10, Zhang discloses a stackable battery module mounting system (1 – lower casing) (Fig. 4), comprising:
a side wall structure (111 – enclosing wall) (Fig. 4);
a plurality of cross members (13 – support plate) extending between opposite sides of the side wall structure (111) (Fig. 4), the plurality of cross members (13) each having a plurality of first spaced apertures (fh – fixing hole) (Fig. 4);
a plurality of battery modules (2) each having a face plate (211 - side wall) on opposite sides thereof (Fig. 2 – above) and, the face plates (211) including a second apertures (TH – through hole) aligned with a respective one of the first spaced apertures (fh) of the plurality of cross members (13) (Fig. 4); and
a plurality of bolts (3 – fastener) each received in corresponding ones of the second apertures (TH) and the first spaced apertures (fh) for securing the plurality of battery modules (3) to the plurality of cross members (13) (Fig. 4).
Zhang does not disclose that each face plate having a plurality of protruding sections which nest with protruding sections of the face casting of adjacent battery modules, wherein the protruding sections include the second apertures.
Lee discloses face plates (241 – reinforcement plates combine to form 240) on either side of neighboring battery modules (10) (Figs. 2 and 3) and teaches that each face plate (241) has a plurality of protruding sections (241a1 and 241b1 – first and second reinforcement ribs) which nest with protruding section of a face casting of adjacent battery modules (projections 241a1 of face plate 241a nest with projections 241b1 of face plate 241b) (Fig. 8), and that the projections (241a1 and 241b1) include second apertures (2411h – through holes) (Fig. 8). Lee further teaches that this coupling arrangement allows proper alignment of neighboring face plates in order to form one strip where they are to be coupled ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to modify the coupling arrangements of the face plates of the battery modules disclosed by Zhang to the plurality of projections nested and secured together as taught by Lee in order to allow proper alignment of neighboring face plates in order to form one strip where they are to be coupled.
Miller discloses a stackable battery module mounting system (10 – storage system or rack) comprising a base panel (110/112 – base plates) connected to a sidewall structure (102 – opposed end supports) connected to upper cross members (50 – middle) which are connected to upper (second) batteries (90) (Fig. 11) and teaches lower cross members (50 – lower) connected to both the base panel (110/112) (via gussets 116) and a lower (first) plurality of batteries (90) stacked below an upper (second) plurality of batteries (Fig. 11) and that the upper cross members (50 – middle) are connected to the sidewall structure (102) via mounting brackets (58 – tabs and 234 – slots) above the lower cross members (50 – lower) (Fig. 6). Miller further teaches that th mounting system described above is preferable because it occupies a minimum space while being relatively affordable ([0006]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to apply the vertical stacking mechanism including a lower cross members, brackets, and vertically stacked modules as taught by Miller to the stackable battery mounting system disclosed by modified Zhang in order to have a mounting system which occupies a minimum space while being relatively affordable.
Meanwhile, as demonstrated in the above rejection of claim 6, Zhang modified by Lee and Kim teaches vertically stacked battery modules with lower and upper cross members to secure the modules. Kim further teaches that the bottom cross member (60 and 70 – using hole 60a) secures a lower battery module, while an upper cross member (260 and 70 – using hole 260a) secures a second batter module stacked upon the lower battery module (Fig. 2). Once this stacked sequence of Kim is applied to modified Zhang, the plurality of upper and lower cross members would apply to the plurality of vertically stacked battery modules disposed adjacent to one another.
Therefore, the first spaced apertures of the lower cross members would be 60a shown in Fig. 2 of Kim, the second spaced apertures of the upper cross members would be 260a shown in Fig. 2 of Kim, the third aperture would be TH on the bottom rail (R) of Fig. 2 of Zhang, and the fourth aperture would be TH on the upper rail (R) of Fig. 2 of Zhang. Once combined, the lower rail of Zhang modified with Lee (in order to read on nested protrusions) would be secured with a bolt to the lower cross members (60 and 70) of Kim, and the upper rail of Zhang modified with Lee (in order to read on nested protrusions) would be secured with a bot to the upper cross members (260 and 70) to form a plurality of double-stacked adjacent battery modules connected to side wall structure via cross members.
With respect to claim 12, modified Zhang discloses face plates with protruding sections as demonstrated by the above 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1. Once combined, the projections with second apertures would necessarily be spaced upward from a bottom of the batter modules by a distance equal to a vertical heigh of the cross members, as it is disclosed that the second apertures in the projections of the face plate align with the first spaced apertures on the cross members in order to be connected by a bolt (Fig. 4 of Zhang). Therefore, once combined, the plurality of projections taught by Lee applied to the rail (R) of Zhang would necessarily read on claim 7.
With respect to claims 13 and 14, modified Zhang discloses face plates with protruding sections as demonstrated by the above 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1. Once combined, the number of protrusion as shown in Fig. 7 of Lee show 4 protrusions (2411) on each face plate (241a and 241b), thus falling into the claimed range of 2 and 10. Further, as shown in Fig. 7 of Lee, there necessarily are recesses formed between adjacent projections (2411) of each face plate (214a and 241b). Lee further teaches the plurality of projections and recesses allows for easier alignment of same-shaped projections to fit together and be formed into a single strip ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include the 4 projections on each face plate as taught by Lee to the face plates disclosed by modified Lee in order to ensure alignment of the face plates to form a single strip.
Claim(s) 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. in view of Lee et al. as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Yoon (U.S. 20250149713).
With respect to claims 3 and 17, Zhang discloses a plurality of upper cross members (13) connected to the side wall structure (111) (Fig. 4), but does not disclose how the cross members are connected to the side wall structure.
Yoon discloses cross members (200 – side plates) connected to a side wall structure (620 – side frames) (Fig. 3 and 8) and teaches the cross members (200) are connected to the side wall structure (620) via brackets (400 – end bracket) (Fig. 9). Yoon further teaches that the bracket is useful for securing the cross members (200) to the side wall structure (620) in order to secure it to the rest of the pack case ([0060]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to use the brackets taught by Yoon to secure the cross members to the side wall structure disclosed by Zhang in order to secure the cross members to the pack case.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Yoon (U.S. 20250149713).
With respect to claim 11, Zhang discloses a plurality of upper cross members (13) connected to the side wall structure (111) (Fig. 4), but does not disclose how the cross members are connected to the side wall structure.
Yoon discloses cross members (200 – side plates) connected to a side wall structure (620 – side frames) (Fig. 3 and 8) and teaches the cross members (200) are connected to the side wall structure (620) via brackets (400 – end bracket) (Fig. 9). Yoon further teaches that the bracket is useful for securing the cross members (200) to the side wall structure (620) in order to secure it to the rest of the pack case ([0060]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to use the brackets taught by Yoon to secure the cross members to the side wall structure disclosed by Zhang in order to secure the cross members to the pack case.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-15 of response, filed 04/13/2026, with respect to claims 1, 7, 10, 12, and 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1, 7, 10, and 12 and the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 10 and 15 have been withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10, and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The arguments regarding the upper and lower cross members connected to a first and second stacked battery modules, a base panel, and brackets connected the upper cross members and sidewall structure all rely on new prior art (Miller) to teach their obviousness.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments are premised on the assertion that the connection of the cross members and projection sections of the battery module faces is not taught by the prior art. However, as mentioned in the above rejection of claim 15, the connection of the projections and cross members is necessarily taught due to the combination of the elongated face plate projection of Zhang being connected to the cross member of Zhang, and the plurality of nesting projections of Lee being applied to the elongated face projection of Zhang. Zhang already discloses the necessary connection between the face plate and cross members, therefore once the plurality of nesting projections of Lee is applied to the face plate of Zhang, the projections necessarily connect and rest upon the cross member.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)272-1330. 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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights