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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A, claims 1-5, 9-15 and 19-20, in the reply filed on June 5, 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 § 818.01(a)).
Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 5, 2026. Claims 19-20 are hereby withdrawn from further consideration since claim 17, upon which claims 19-20 depend, was not elected. As a result, claims 1-5 and 9-15 are being examined on the merits in this office action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the structural relationship between the reinforcing member (13) and the cavity (131) is not clearly shown. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 5, 10 and 13 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.
In claim 5, according to claim languages, it is unclear whose “a bottom” it is. It can refer to a bottom of the reinforcing plate, a bottom of the two adjacent battery cells, or the battery array. For purposes of examination, it is interpreted as referring to a bottom of the battery array. This issue applies similarly to claims 10 and 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
Claims 1-2, 9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Anandarajah et al. (US 20220131117 A1, hereafter Anandarajah).
Regarding claim 1, Anandarajah teaches a battery array comprising:
at least one battery module (See dotted rectangular area, below) comprising a plurality of battery cells (605) arranged in a first direction and disposed between opposite end plates (See [0047]: “battery cells 605 as previously described”, and “end beams 160 a and 160 b” in Fig. 1, [0032]);
a reinforcing member (620, [0035]) at least partially disposed between two adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells (See Fig. 6); and
an electronic component (e.g., an electronics module 625) arranged on in the reinforcing member (See Fig. 6 and [0048]).
PNG
media_image1.png
525
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Anandarajah teaches the battery array according to claim 1, wherein the battery array furthers comprises a fixing structure for fixing the at least one battery module and the fixing structure comprises a tensioning band that circumferentially surrounds the at least one battery module and/or a fixing frame that abuts sides of the at least one battery module (See, e.g., longitudinal beam 110 + end beams 160a, 160b + side beam 117 (or 115) in Fig. 1; [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, Anandarajah teaches the battery array according to claim 1, wherein at least the reinforcing member is fixed ([0048]: “620 may seat within the base 615 at recesses 618”) to a tray (615) of a battery assembly (entire structure of Fig. 6) comprising the battery array.
Regarding claim 11, Anandarajah teaches the battery array according to claim 1, wherein the two adjacent battery cells are bonded together through the reinforcing member (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 12, Anandarajah teaches a battery assembly (battery pack 600, or the entire structure in Fig. 6) comprising:
a tray (615, Fig. 6);
a plurality of battery arrays (battery cells between each pair of lateral walls 620 is considered a battery array; lateral walls 620 may be more than one pair, see [0048]) mounded to the tray ([0048]; Fig. 6), each of the plurality of battery arrays comprising at least one battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells arranged in a first direction and disposed between opposite end plates (See the rejection of claim 1);
a reinforcing member mounted to the tray (([0048]: “620 may seat within the base 615 at recesses 618”) and at least partially disposed between two adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells (Fig. 6); and
a fixing structure for fixing the at least one battery module (See the rejection of claim 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 10 and 13-15 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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHONGQING WEI whose telephone number is (571)272-4809. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6:00.
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 (571)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.
/ZHONGQING WEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights