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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “tensioning device” (in claim 2) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The use of the term “Velcro”, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application (see pages 10, 11, and 17 of the specification). The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the 10th line of claim 10, add “,” before “which” for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the stacking direction" in the 4th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace "a stack direction" with "a stacking direction" in the 2nd line of claim 1 to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the stacking direction" in the 11th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace "a stack direction" with "a stacking direction" in the 2nd line of claim 1 to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 3rd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the entire surface" in the 4th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “an” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 6, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 7, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 8 contains four instances of the trademark/trade name “Velcro”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a hook-and-loop fastener and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the first contact surface" in the 2nd line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “a” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the second contact surface" in the 3rd line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “a” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the provision" in the 5th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to delete “the” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the at least one second battery cell" in the 3rd line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 12, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 3rd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the entire surface" in the 4th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “an” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the entire surface" in the 5th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “an” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 3rd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the entire surface" in the 4th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “an” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the entire surface" in the 5th line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “an” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the friction-increasing film" in the 1st line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “a” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 17, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the friction-increasing film" in the 1st line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “a” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 18, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the friction-increasing film" in the 1st line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “a” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 19, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the friction-increasing film" in the 1st line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace “the” with “a” to obtain proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 20, the phrase "such as" (in this instance, “in particular” in the 2nd line) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 10 2019 201 126 A1 in view of EP 3 934 017 A1, of which complete copies of both German documents with respective English abstracts were provided with the Information Disclosure Statement dated July 24, 2023, and with respective machine translations provided with this Office Action.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 10, DE ‘126 discloses a battery module having a cell stack that has multiple battery cells arranged next to one another in a stacking direction, as well as a method of producing the battery module (abstract; pages 2-7 of translation under the heading Description; and Figures 1 and 2), in which the battery module (10) includes the following structural features:
providing a cell stack which has (multiple) battery cells (12) comprising (at least) first and second battery cells (12) that are arranged adjacent to one another in the stacking direction (see abstract; the last three paragraphs on page 6 of translation; the first four paragraphs on page 7 of translation; and Figure 1);
providing a cell separating element (20) for electrically and thermally insulating the first and second battery cells (12) from one another and being arranged at least between the first and second battery cell (12) – see abstract; the last two paragraphs on page 6 of translation; the first four paragraphs on page 7 of translation; and Figures 1 and 2; and
arranging the cell separating element (20) to lie flat against the first and second battery cells (12), wherein a connection is present between the cell separating element (20) and at least the first battery cell (12), which connection is operable to at least partially counteract a relative movement of the at least one first battery cell (12) and the cell separating element (20) perpendicular to the stacking direction, wherein there is no material connection between the first battery cell (12) and the cell separating element (20) – see abstract; the last two paragraphs on page 6 of translation; the first four paragraphs on page 7 of translation; and Figure 1.
DE ‘126 does not explicitly disclose that the connection between the cell separating element and at least the first battery cell is a frictional connection.
However, EP ‘017 discloses a battery pack and its method of production (see abstract; pages 2-5 of translation under the heading Disclosure of the invention; and Figures 1c, 1d, and 2-4), in which the battery pack and method include providing at least two battery cells (10) and at least one fastening element (20) made of an elastic material, wherein the battery cells (10) are frictionally fastened to the fastening element (20) and to a cell holder (30), for the purpose of securely connecting the battery cells in position (see abstract; and last three paragraphs on page 2 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicant’s invention was made to modify the battery module and its method of production, as disclosed by DE ‘126, by providing frictional fastening to the battery cells via the fastening element, as taught by EP ‘017, in order to securely connect the battery cells in position (EP ‘017; abstract; and last three paragraphs on page 2 of translation).
Regarding claim 2, although DE ‘126 does not explicitly disclose a tensioning device operable for tensioning the cell stack in the stacking direction, EP ‘017 discloses that the battery module includes inwardly compressing forces that would necessarily occur from a “tensioning” device (see Figure 1c of EP ‘017 that illustrates arrows that indicate converging compression directions (50), as disclosed in the paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention), by means of which the cell stack is tensioned in the stacking direction, so that the tensioning device exerts a tensioning force (compression directions (50)) on the battery cells (10) in and against the stacking direction, which compresses the cell stack, for the purpose of compressing the fastening elements (20) against the battery cells (10), thus improving alignment and positioning (EP ‘017; paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, and in referring to the rejection of independent claim 1 above, the combined teachings of DE ‘126 and EP ‘017 disclose and/or suggest that a frictional connection is present between the cell separating element and the second battery cell, which connection counteracts a relative movement of the at least one second battery cell and the cell separating element perpendicular to the stacking direction, and wherein there is no material connection between the second battery cell and the cell separating element (DE ‘126 – see abstract; the last two paragraphs on page 6 of translation; the first four paragraphs on page 7 of translation; and Figure 1; and EP ‘017 – see abstract; and the paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention).
Regarding claims 4, 12, and 13, the combined teachings of DE ‘126 and EP ‘017 disclose and/or suggest that the first battery cell ((12) of DE ‘126; and (10) of EP ‘017) has a first contact surface and the cell separating element ((20) of DE ‘126) has a second contact surface, wherein the first and second contact surfaces rest completely against one another, wherein (as shown in Figure 1 of DE ‘126) the first contact surface represents an entire surface of the first battery cell (12) contacting the cell separating element (20) and the second contact surface represents the entire surface of the cell separating element (20) contacting the first battery cell (12) – see abstract; the last two paragraphs on page 6 of translation; the first four paragraphs on page 7 of translation; and Figure 1 of DE ‘126, as well as Figures 1b, 1c, and 2-4 of EP ‘017).
Regarding claims 5-7, 9, and 14-20, although DE ‘126 discloses that the cell separating element (20) of the battery module includes an elastically deformable and compressible layer (24), as shown in Figure 1 and disclosed in the abstract, as well as in the last paragraph on page 6 of translation, DE ‘126 does not explicitly disclose a friction-increasing film applied onto the first and/or second contact surface, including that the friction-increasing film is designed with a natural or artificial rubber coating.
However, EP ‘017 discloses that the battery pack includes at least two battery cells (10) and at least one fastening element (20) made of an elastic material that is dimensionally stable and electrically insulating, wherein the battery cells (10) are frictionally fastened to the fastening element (20) and to a cell holder (30) having pockets (40) having rubberized inner walls (wherein the rubberized inner walls of EP ‘017 would be a friction-increasing coating and/or film on the pockets (40) of either natural or artificial rubber), in order to obtain frictional fixation of the battery cells (10) within the pockets (40), thus further improving alignment and positioning (EP ‘017; paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicant’s invention was made to modify the elastically deformable and compressible layer of the separating element of the battery module, as disclosed by DE ‘126, by providing a friction-increasing film applied onto the first and/or second contact surface, including that the friction-increasing film is designed with a natural or artificial rubber coating, as taught by EP ‘017, in order to obtain frictional fixation of the battery cells, thus further improving alignment and positioning (EP ‘017; paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention).
Regarding claim 8, and in referring to the rejection of claims 1 and 5-7 above, although the combined teachings of DE ‘126 and EP ‘017 disclose and/or suggest that that the frictional connection would be a friction-increasing film applied onto the first and/or second contact surface, including that the friction-increasing film is designed with a natural or artificial rubber coating, neither DE ‘126 nor EP ‘017 discloses a Velcro connection, wherein a first contact surface is formed with a first Velcro connection part and a second contact surface is formed with a second Velcro connection part corresponding to the first Velcro connection part. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that selection of a Velcro connection rather than the frictional connection of rubberized inner walls (as taught by EP ‘017) would also be considered as a friction-increasing coating and/or film, thereby serving the same purpose of further improving alignment and positioning (see EP ‘017 in the paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention). Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that selection of any one among a group of frictional connections would have been obvious to try with a finite number of predictable solutions under a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve alignment and positioning (see EP ‘017 in the paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of translation under the heading Embodiments of the invention).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN P KERNS whose telephone number is (571)272-1178. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN P KERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735 February 3, 2026