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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Electrified powertrain (14) in Fig 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-17 are 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.
Claims 1 and 13 recite the limitation “short circuit condition" in “anode in a short circuit condition”. It is not clear if “short circuit condition” in the limitation “anode in a short circuit condition” refers to the previously recited short circuit condition. The limitation should be amended as follows: “the anode in [[a]] the short circuit condition”. Claims 2-12, 14 and 15-17 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1 and 13.
Regarding claims 11 and 17, it is not clear if the previously recited first battery cell is included in the plurality of battery cells. A possible amendment is as follows: “wherein the first battery cell is one of
Regarding claim 14, the limitation “the weld” lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examination, the examiner is viewing this is a typographical error in which the applicant intended claim 14 to depend from claim 13 rather than 12.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1) see attached machine translation for text citation, in view of Zeng et al. (US 10573876).
Regarding claim 1, Kohlberger discloses a battery module for an electrified vehicle, the battery module comprising (para 0001 “battery module and a vehicle having a such a battery cell”): a first battery cell (para 38 “the battery cell 10”) including: a housing (para 38, housing 14); a cathode 17 disposed in the housing (para 38, positive electrode 17, fig 1); a positive end lead arranged on the housing and electrically connected to the cathode (para 39, “terminals 21, 23 for electrical connection; fig 1); an anode 18 disposed in the housing (para 38, negative electrode 18, fig 1) ; a negative end lead 21 arranged on the housing (para 38-39, “terminals 21, 23 for electrical connection”; fig 1); an isolator disposed between the housing and the negative end lead, the isolator inhibiting voltage from passing between the housing and the anode (para 39, “the negative electrode 18 additionally has a bushing insulation 24 which isolates the connection bushing 21 from the housing cover 16”).
Kohlberger fails to disclose a fuse electrically connected between the anode and the negative end lead, the fuse configured to fail as a result of a short circuit condition in the battery module, whereby voltage is inhibited from passing between the housing and the anode in a short circuit condition due to the failed fuse and the isolator.
Zeng, drawn also the battery art, discloses a fuse 335 design for a battery module, comprising: a fuse 335 electrically connected between the anode and the negative end lead (claim 1), the fuse configured to fail as a result of a short circuit condition in the battery module (C8, L20-31), whereby voltage is inhibited from passing between the housing and the anode in a short circuit condition due to the failed fuse and the isolator (C4, L31-41). This in turn reduces the risk of, and potential damage from, a short circuit condition (C4, L17-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger such that a fuse is electrically connected between the anode and the negative end lead, the fuse configured to fail as a result of a short circuit condition in the battery module, whereby voltage is inhibited from passing between the housing and the anode in a short circuit condition due to the failed fuse and the isolator as taught by Zeng above as doing such reduces the risk of, and potential damage from, a short circuit condition as detailed above.
Regarding claim 2, Zeng discloses a first electrical connection between the fuse and the negative end lead (C1, L48-50).
Regarding claim 3, Zeng discloses a second electrical connection formed between the fuse and the anode (C1, L48-50).
Claims 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1) and Zeng et al. (US 10573876), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Olashaw (US 4181396 A).
Regarding claim 4 and 5, Zeng discloses the connection between fuse and the negative end lead and the connection between fuse and the anode (claim 1). Zeng fails to disclose the first connection comprises a first welding and second connection comprises a second welding, but Olashaw discloses that it was known to marry electrical joints through welding (Abstract, C2, L10-20). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that the electrical connections are comprised of a first welding and a second welding as taught by Olashaw above as doing such would expectedly allow for the creation of electrical joints, and moreover, would have yielded long lasting joints with high integrity (C1, L10-20; C2 L17-20).
Regarding Claim 6, Zeng discloses fuse formed of aluminum (C3, L58-61).
Regarding Claim 7, Zeng discloses an aluminum anode lead (C4, L15-16). Further, Olashaw teaches that aluminum to aluminum welds reduce the risk of cold flow (C1, L20-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that the first welding is an aluminum-to-aluminum weld as taught by Olashaw above as doing such reduces cold flow risk (C1, L11-15).
Regarding claim 8, Kohlberger discloses anode formed of copper (para 19). Kohlberger fails to disclose aluminum to copper weld. Olashaw discloses a weld between an aluminum insert and a copper plate (Abstract, C1, L20-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that copper anode is welded to aluminum resulting in aluminum to copper weld as taught by Olashaw above as doing such expectedly joins copper anode and aluminum fuse (C1, L20-45).
Regarding claim 9, Olashaw discloses aluminum insert friction welded to a copper plate (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that copper anode is friction welded to aluminum fuse as taught by Olashaw above as doing such results in considerable success compared to other welding techniques (C1, L32-34).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1) and Zeng et al. (US 10573876), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ling et al. (US 20180159098A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Kohlberger discloses an isolator 24. Kohlberger fails to disclose isolator formed of elastomeric material. Ling discloses an isolator layer 225 comprised of silicone rubber (C4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that isolator is formed of elastomeric material as taught by Ling above as doing such expectedly inhibits voltage from affecting the housing.
Regarding Claim 11, Kohlberger discloses battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells electrically connected in a series (para 25).
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1) and Zeng et al. (US 10573876), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Han et al. (US 20040142246 A1).
Zeng discloses a film membrane disposed within the housing (C6, L48-51). Zeng fails to disclose a polyester film membrane. Han discloses a polyester film membrane (para 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that the polyester film membrane is made of polyester as taught by Han above as doing such allows ions included in the electrolytic solution to migrate smoothly (para 45).
Claims 13-14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1) see attached machine translation for text citation, in view of Zeng et al. (US 10573876) and further in view of Olashaw (US 4181396 A).
Regarding Claim 13, Kohlberger discloses a battery module for an electrified vehicle, the battery module comprising (para 0001 “battery module and a vehicle having a such a battery cell”): a first battery cell (para 38 “the battery cell 10”) including: a housing (para 38, housing 14); a cathode 17 disposed in the housing (para 38, positive electrode 17, fig 1); the cathode formed of aluminum (paragraph 18); a positive end lead arranged on the housing and electrically connected to the cathode (para 39, “terminals 21, 23 for electrical connection”; fig 1); an anode 18 disposed in the housing (para 38, negative electrode 18, fig 1); the anode formed of copper (para 19) ; a negative end lead arranged on the housing (para 38-39, “terminals 21, 23 for electrical connection”; fig 1); an isolator disposed between the housing and the negative end lead, the isolator inhibiting voltage from passing between the housing and the negative end lead (para 39, the negative electrode 18 additionally has a bushing insulation 24 which isolates the connection bushing 21 from the housing cover 16”).
Kohlberger fails to disclose a positive end lead formed of aluminum; negative end lead formed of aluminum; an aluminum fuse electrically connected between the anode and the negative end lead; and a weld formed between the aluminum fuse and the copper anode; wherein the fuse is configured to fail as a result of a short circuit condition in the battery module whereby voltage is inhibited from passing between the housing and the anode in a short circuit condition due to the failed fuse and the isolator.
Zeng discloses a positive end lead formed of aluminum (C3, L58-60); a negative end lead formed of aluminum (C4, L9-16); an aluminum fuse electrically connected between the anode and the negative end lead (Claim 1; C3, L58-61); wherein the fuse is configured to fail as a result of a short circuit condition in the battery module (C8, L20-31), whereby voltage is inhibited from passing between the housing and the anode in a short circuit condition due to the failed fuse and the isolator (C4, L31-41). This in turn reduces the risk of, and potential damage from, a short circuit condition (Zeng, C4, L17-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger such that a positive end lead is formed of aluminum; a negative end lead is formed of aluminum; an aluminum fuse electrically connected between the anode and the negative end lead; wherein the fuse is configured to fail as a result of a short circuit condition in the battery module, whereby voltage is inhibited from passing between the housing and the anode in a short circuit condition due to the failed fuse and the isolator as taught by Zeng above as doing such reduces the risk of, and potential damage from, a short circuit condition as detailed above.
Zeng discloses connection between the fuse and the negative end lead, and the fuse and the anode (C1, L48-50). Zeng fails to disclose a weld formed between the aluminum fuse and the copper anode.
Olashaw discloses a weld between an aluminum insert and a copper plate (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that copper anode is welded to aluminum resulting in aluminum to copper weld as taught by Olashaw above as doing such joins expectedly joining copper anode and aluminum fuse (C1, L20-45).
Regarding Claim 14, Olashaw discloses aluminum insert friction welded to a copper plate (Abstract, (C1, L20-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that copper anode is friction welded to aluminum fuse as taught by Olashaw above as doing such results in considerable success compared to other welding techniques (C1, L20-45).
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1), Zeng et al. (US 10573876), and Olashaw (US 4181396 A), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Bazzarella et al. (US 20190058184 A1).
Zeng discloses a fuse (Claim 1). Zeng fails to disclose battery module wherein the fuse defines holes therein. Bazzarella discloses elongated or other types of holes defined in fuses (para 62, fig. 2D). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the fuse of Zeng such that fuse defines the holes fuse as disclosed by Bazzarella above as doing such configures fuse to deform, break, melt (Abstract).
Claim 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohlberger (DE 10214204497A1), Zeng et al. (US 10573876), and Olashaw (US 4181396 A), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Han et al. (US 20040142246 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, Zeng discloses a film membrane disposed within the housing (C6, L48-51). Zeng fails to disclose a polyester film membrane. Han discloses a polyester film membrane (para 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the battery module of Kohlberger and Zeng such that the film membrane is made of polyester as taught by Han above as doing such allows ions included in the electrolytic solution to migrate smoothly (para 45).
Regarding Claim 17, Kohlberger discloses battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells electrically connected in a series (para 25).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARTI KHANAL whose telephone number is (571)272-8608. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-5pm.
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, Michael N Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746