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 .
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2023/0268600).
As to claim 1, Lee discloses a power storage (figure 1 #10, battery module, [0040], discussed throughout) comprising: a stack including a plurality of cells stacked on one another (figure 2 #100, battery cell assembly, [0041], discussed throughout); a case where the stack is accommodated, the case being provided with an opening (figure 4 #211, bottom case, #217, first side case, #218 second side case; [0047]-[0051], discussed throughout); a lid portion fixed to an opening end of the case to cover the opening (figures 5 or 15 #220 or #221, second case cover, [0052], discussed throughout); and an elastic member located between the stack and the lid portion (figure 15 #340, expansion sheet, [0075]), wherein the elastic member includes a first elastic portion (figures 9 and 10 #341 or #341 and #343, [0086], discussed throughout) and a second elastic portion (figures 9 and 10 #342 or #342 and #343, [0086], discussed throughout), the first elastic portion including a portion of the elastic member located most distant from the opening end in a second direction orthogonal to a first direction which is a direction in which the stack and the lid portion are opposed to each other (figures 9, 10 and 15, [0086], discussed throughout), the second elastic portion being located on opposing sides of the first elastic portion in the second direction (figures 9, 10 and 15, [0086], discussed throughout), and an elastic modulus in the first direction of the first elastic portion is lower than an elastic modulus in the first direction of the second elastic portion ([0090]-[0091], discussed how the materials within the expansion sheet are required to be placed, i.e. the thermal expansion rate of #341 is greater than the thermal expansion rate of #343 which is greater than the thermal expansion rate of #342, Next, [0081] discussed the material for the expansion sheet #340, this shows that there is overlapping situations wherein an elastic modulus in the first direction of the first elastic portion is lower than an elastic modulus in the first direction of the second elastic portion for example when #341 is EVA (ethylene vinyl acetate), #343 is PVC (polyvinyl chloride) and #342 is glass wool, NOTE there are more combinations than this one as a result of having to pick and choose from different lists the rejection is presented as obviousness)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention pick different material from Lee as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I).
As to claim 2, Lee discloses wherein, the elastic member is accommodated in the case as being compressed in the first direction, and in the first direction, an amount of compression of the first elastic portion is equal to or larger than an amount of compression of the second elastic portion (figures 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10 and 15, the pressure would be equal as the top is flat as is the expansion sheet, discussed throughout).
As to claim 3, Lee discloses wherein, in the first direction, a dimension of a free length of the first elastic portion is equal to or larger than a dimension of a free length of the second elastic portion (figures 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10 and 15, the pressure would be equal as the top is flat as is the expansion sheet, discussed throughout).
As to claim 4, Lee discloses wherein, the lid portion includes a first plate portion aligned with the first elastic portion in the first direction and a second plate portion aligned with the second elastic portion in the first direction, and the first plate portion is located nearer to the stack than the second plate portion (figures 5 and 15, #220, and/or #320, and/or #330, discussed throughout).
As to claim 5, Lee discloses wherein, when viewed in the first direction, the first elastic portion is larger in area than the second elastic portion (figures 9 and 10 wherein #343 is a part of the first elastic portion, discussed throughout).
As to claim 6, Lee discloses wherein, when viewed in the first direction, the second elastic portion surrounds the first elastic portion (figures 9 and 10, discussed throughout).
As to claim 7, Lee discloses wherein, when viewed in the first direction, the opening in the case is provided such that a longitudinal direction of the opening extends in the second direction, and in a third direction orthogonal to both of the first direction and the second direction (figures 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10 and 15). Lee is silent to wherein the first elastic portion extends from one end to the other end of the elastic member. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have the first elastic portion extends from one end to the other end of the elastic member as a mere change in shape (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B).
Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taga (US 2024/0170780).
As to claim 1, Taga discloses a power storage (figure 1 #10, [0022], discussed throughout) comprising: a stack including a plurality of cells stacked on one another (figure 1 #16, [0024], discussed throughout); a case where the stack is accommodated, the case being provided with an opening (figure 1 #30, [0020], discussed throughout); a lid portion fixed to an opening end of the case to cover the opening (figure 1 #2, [0023], discussed throughout); and an elastic member located between the stack and the lid portion (figure 1 #12 and #4, [0023], [0027], discussed throughout), wherein the elastic member includes a first elastic portion (figure 1 #12, [0027], discussed throughout) and a second elastic portion (figure 1 #4, [0023], discussed throughout), the first elastic portion including a portion of the elastic member located most distant from the opening end in a second direction orthogonal to a first direction which is a direction in which the stack and the lid portion are opposed to each other, the second elastic portion being located on opposing sides of the first elastic portion in the second direction (figure 1, seen throughout). Taga does not explicitly state an elastic modulus in the first direction of the first elastic portion is lower than an elastic modulus in the first direction of the second elastic portion. However, given that the first elastic member is made of a resin ([0027]) and the second elastic material is made of a metal ([0023]), one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the resin to have a lower elastic modules. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have the first elastic member have a lower elastic modules then the second elastic modules because the first elastic material is being used for pushing wherein the second elastic material is used for structure.
As to claim 2, Lee discloses wherein, the elastic member is accommodated in the case as being compressed in the first direction, and in the first direction, an amount of compression of the first elastic portion is equal to or larger than an amount of compression of the second elastic portion (figures 1-3, the pressure should be equal or larger for the first elastic member as it is a pushing member).
As to claim 3, Lee discloses wherein, in the first direction, a dimension of a free length of the first elastic portion is equal to or larger than a dimension of a free length of the second elastic portion (figures 1-3, dimension of a free length of the first elastic portion is equal to or larger than a dimension of a free length of the second elastic portion because the first elastic member as it is a pushing member).
As to claim 5, Lee discloses wherein, when viewed in the first direction, the first elastic portion is larger in area than the second elastic portion (figures 1-3).
As to claim 6, Lee discloses wherein, when viewed in the first direction, the second elastic portion surrounds the first elastic portion (figures 1-3, the left and right sides).
As to claim 7, Lee discloses wherein, when viewed in the first direction, the opening in the case is provided such that a longitudinal direction of the opening extends in the second direction, and in a third direction orthogonal to both of the first direction and the second direction, the first elastic portion extends from one end to the other end of the elastic member (figures 1-3).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724