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 without traverse of Invention II, claims 8-20 in the reply filed on 3/18/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/18/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 8-12, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2012209135A, refer to English machine translation.
Regarding claim 8, JP2012209135A discloses a battery module (battery pack, [0001], Fig. 1-7), comprising:
a battery cell assembly (unit cell group 15 [0021], Fig. 2);
an adapting plate disposed on the battery cell assembly and connected to tabs of the battery cell assembly (external connector 12 connected to unit cell group 15 [0019]-[0021], Fig. 2);
a fastening frame provided with an accommodating cavity (exterior case [0019], Fig. 1-3);
the adapting plate is further provided with a chip (protection circuit board 14 or connector support board 13 [0020]-[0021], Fig. 2); the adapting plate, the chip, and at least part of the battery cell assembly are accommodated in the accommodating cavity (core pack 16 including unit cell group, protection circuit board and external connector 12 stored in the storage space of outer case [0020], Fig. 2); and
a filler is disposed in a gap between an inner side of the accommodating cavity and the battery cell assembly or the adapting plate (potting resin portion filled between inner surface of the outer case [0023]).
Regarding claim 9, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses the filler comprises glue (potting resin portion filled between inner surface of the outer case [0023]).
Regarding claim 10, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses the fastening frame comprises a top wall, two side walls, and two end walls; the top wall, the two side walls, and the two end walls enclose the accommodating cavity; the battery cell assembly comprises a plurality of battery cells, each battery cell comprises a body and tabs, and the tabs of the each battery cell are at least partially accommodated in the accommodating cavity (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses the body of the each battery cell is at least partially accommodated in the accommodating cavity (unit cell group stored in the storage space of outer case [0020], Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses a limiting step is provided on the top wall, and the limiting step abuts against the adapting plate (Fig. 1-3 show upper case 10 including a limiting step and abutting against external connector 12).
Regarding claim 18, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses the limiting step abuts against a plate body of the adapting plate not connected to the tabs (Fig. 1-3 show upper case 10 including a limiting step and abutting against external connector 12).
Regarding claim 19, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses battery pack, comprising a battery housing and a battery module according to claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2012209135A, refer to English machine translation, as applied to claims 8-12, 18-19 above, in view of Hase et al. (US 2019/0348648A1).
Regarding claim 13, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, JP2012209135A does not further disclose the battery module further comprises a wire harness, one end of the wire harness is connected to the battery cell assembly or the adapting plate accommodated in the accommodating cavity, and the other end extends out of the accommodating cavity.
Hase discloses a power storage device comprising wires connected to sensors/monitoring unit and drawn out from an opening of the housing ([0089]-[0092], [0094], Fig. 1-2,8-9).
An obviousness determination is not the result of a rigid formula disassociated from the consideration of the facts of a case. Indeed, the common sense of those skilled in the art demonstrates why some combinations would have been obvious where others would not. Leapfrog Enterprises Inc. v. Fisher-Price Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also KSR v. Teleflex, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007).
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.
The claim would have been obvious because “a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If the leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.”
It has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is generally within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 14, modified JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hase further discloses the wire harness comprises a power wire harness and a sampling wire harness; the power wire harness is connected to the tabs on the outside of the battery cell assembly; and the sampling wire harness is electrically connected to the adapting plate (wires connected to sensors and monitoring unit [0089]-[0092], [0094], Fig. 1-2,8-9).
Regarding claim 15, modified JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified JP2012209135A further discloses a support sheet is provided on the adapting plate (see Fig. 2 of JP2012209135A), the power wire harness is connected to the battery cell assembly by the support sheet; an escape groove is provided in the accommodating cavity, the support sheet is accommodated in the escape groove (wires drawn out from an opening of the housing [0089]-[0092], [0094], Fig. 1-2,8-9).
Regarding claim 16, modified JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hase further discloses a bottom wall of the escape groove is further provided with a harness outlet running through the top wall; the power wire harness passes through the harness outlet and extends out of the fastening frame (wires drawn out from an opening of the housing [0089]-[0092], [0094], Fig. 1-2,8-9).
Regarding claim 17, modified JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Hase further discloses the top wall is provided with a wire harness hole configured to fastening the sampling wire harness, the sampling wire harness passes through wire harness hole (wires drawn out from an opening of the housing [0089]-[0092], [0094], Fig. 1-2,8-9).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2012209135A, refer to English machine translation, as applied to claims 8-12, 18-19 above, in view of Ahn et al. (US 2016/0325829A1).
Regarding claim 20, JP2012209135A discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2012209135A further discloses hybrid electric vehicles and electric vehicles using the claimed battery pack ([0045]), but does not disclose an unmanned aerial vehicle, wherein the unmanned aerial vehicle comprises a vehicle body and a battery pack disposed in the vehicle body, wherein the battery pack supplies power to the vehicle body.
Ahn discloses unmanned aerial vehicles including a battery module (see Title, Abstract).
An obviousness determination is not the result of a rigid formula disassociated from the consideration of the facts of a case. Indeed, the common sense of those skilled in the art demonstrates why some combinations would have been obvious where others would not. Leapfrog Enterprises Inc. v. Fisher-Price Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also KSR v. Teleflex, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007).
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.
The claim would have been obvious because “a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If the leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.”
It has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is generally within the skill of the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached at (571)270-3879. 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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 4/3/2026
Prosecution Insights