DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-8 are presented for examination, wherein claims 7-8 are withdrawn.
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 Group I in the reply filed on June 1, 2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because it appears that some numbered items point to components/locations that are inconsistent with the instant specification. Merely for illustrative purposes, the examiner respectfully provides the following.
For example, in Figures 4-6, item 26 (buffer material) points to a location that should be item 24 (double-sided tape), instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0023-25, 29-32, and 51-52 plus e.g. Figure 8).
As another example, in Figures 4-6, item 9 (battery) points to a location that should be item 21 (recess), see Id, at e.g. ¶¶ 0043 and 51-53 plus e.g. Figure 8).
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 disclosure is objected to because it appears that there are inconsistencies between the instant specification disclosure and the instant Figures. Merely for illustrative purposes, the examiner respectfully provides the following.
For example, the instant specification provides the z-direction in Figures 3-4 is reversed from that of Figure 2. However, it appears the intent was to indicate that the z-direction of Figures 3-4 is reversed from that of Figure 1.
[0041] As illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4 (A vertical direction (Z direction) is reversed from that in FIG. 2.), battery pack 7 includes battery case 8 and battery 9 housed in battery case 8. Battery pack 7 is housed on a front side in a depth direction of a bottom surface of second housing 3.
(Instant specification, at e.g. ¶0041, emphasis added, see further Figures 1-4.) Appropriate correction is respectfully required.
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 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al (US 2013/0157084).
Regarding independent claim 1, Bang teaches a battery pack (e.g. item 100) with a compact structure that provides long-term use and portability, suitable for use in e.g. a laptop computer, said battery pack comprising
(i) a battery array (e.g. item 30) including two or more, such as three, pouch-shaped secondary battery cells (e.g. items 32),
wherein each cell may have an approximately hexahedral, plate-shaped structure with a small thickness to width ratio,
wherein each cell may have an upper flat surface and a lower flat surface;
(ii) a pack case in which said battery array is disposed, wherein said pack case is composed of a lower case (e.g. item 10) and an upper case (e.g. item 20), said upper case covering said lower case to fix said battery array in place; and
(iii) a pair of upper spacers (e.g. items 52) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each upper flat surface of said cells,
each of said upper spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said upper flat surface of said cell and an inner surface of said upper case,
a first space between said pair of upper spacers forming a space above each said cell, said first space accommodating an increase in thickness of said cell during charging and discharging; plus,
(iv) a pair of lower spacers (e.g. items 50) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each lower flat surface of said cells,
each of said lower spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said lower flat surface of said cell and an inner surface of said lower case,
a second space between said pair of lower spacers forming a space below each said cell, said second space accommodating an increase in thickness of said cell during charging and discharging,
wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be double-sided tape, such as Nomex
(e.g. ¶¶ 0001, 09-12, 21, 38-40, 46-47, 64-70 plus e.g. Figures 1-2), reading on “battery pack,” said battery pack comprising:
(1) said pack case in which said battery array is disposed, wherein said pack case is composed of said lower case (e.g. item 10) and said upper case (e.g. item 20), said upper case covering said lower case to fix said battery array in place (e.g. supra), reading on “a battery case;” and,
(2) said battery array (e.g. item 30) including two or more, such as three, pouch-shaped secondary battery cells (e.g. items 32), said battery array fixed within said pack case,
wherein each cell may have said approximately hexahedral, plate-shaped structure with said small thickness to width ratio, each of said cells including said upper flat surface and said lower flat surface, (e.g. supra),
said taught lower flat surface corresponding with the claimed “first plane;” and,
said taught upper flat surface corresponding with the claimed “second plane,”
reading on “a battery housed in the battery case, the battery being configured of a pouch type cell having a first plane and a second plane disposed on an opposite side of the first plane;” and,
(3) said pair of upper spacers (e.g. items 52) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each upper flat surface of said cells,
each of said upper spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said upper flat surface of said cell and said inner surface of said upper case
said first space between said pair of upper spacers forming said space above each said cell, said first space accommodating an increase in thickness of said cell during charging and discharging; plus,
said pair of lower spacers (e.g. items 50) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each lower flat surface of said cells,
each of said lower spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said lower flat surface of said cell and said inner surface of said lower case
said second space between said pair of lower spacers forming said space below each said cell, said second space accommodating an increase in thickness of said cell during charging and discharging,
wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be double-sided tape (e.g. supra),
said taught upper spacer being said double-sided tape and/or said lower spacer being double-sided tape corresponding with the claimed “adhesive layer,”
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, “at least one,” see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “an adhesive layer arranged between at least one of the first plane and the second plane of the battery and an inner surface of the battery case” and “the adhesive layer being arranged in a shape of a frame along an outer edge of the battery.”
Regarding claim 2, Bang teaches the battery pack of claim 1, wherein said pair of upper spacers (e.g. items 52) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each upper flat surface of said cells, each of said upper spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said upper flat surface of said cell and said inner surface of said upper case; and, said pair of lower spacers (e.g. items 50) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each lower flat surface of said cells, each of said lower spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said lower flat surface of said cell and said inner surface of said lower case,
wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be double-sided tape (e.g. supra),
an exterior one of said pair or lower spacers (which may be said double-sided tape)—located to a distal side of said taught battery array corresponds with the claimed “adhesive layer;” and,
an interior one of said pair or lower spacers (which may be said double-sided tape)—located proximal to a center of said taught battery array , which may be said double-sided tape, corresponds with the claimed “double-sided layer,”
reading on “the inner surface of the battery case includes a first inner surface facing the first plane and a second inner surface facing the second plane, the adhesive layer is arranged on the first plane and the second plane of the battery, the first inner surface of the battery case and the first plane of the battery are fixed with each other by a double-sided tape disposed on an inner side of the adhesive layer,” as claimed,
wherein said first space between said pair of upper spacers forming said space above each said cell, said first space accommodating an increase in thickness of said cell during charging and discharging; and, said second space between said pair of lower spacers forming said space below each said cell, said second space accommodating an increase in thickness of said cell during charging and discharging, wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be said double-sided tape (e.g. supra), so each of said first and second spaces would have a thickness that is about equal to one another (i.e. a thickness of said double-sided tape), said teaching is sufficiently close to the claimed relationship “larger than,” to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a distance between the second inner surface of the battery case and the second plane of the battery is larger than a distance between the first inner surface of the battery case and the first plane of the battery,” as claimed.
Regarding claim 5, Bang teaches the battery pack of claim 1, wherein said pair of upper spacers (e.g. items 52) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each upper flat surface of said cells, each of said upper spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said upper flat surface of said cell and said inner surface of said upper case;
said pair of lower spacers (e.g. items 50) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each lower flat surface of said cells, each of said lower spacers mounted and fixed between its respective outer lateral edge of said lower flat surface of said cell and said inner surface of said lower case;
wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be double-sided tape, such as Nomex
(e.g. supra), noting
an exterior one of said pair or upper spacers (which may be said double-sided tape)—located to a distal side of said taught battery array corresponds with the claimed “adhesive layer;” and,
an interior one of said pair or upper spacers (which may be said double-sided tape)—located proximal to a center of said taught battery array , which may be said double-sided tape, corresponds with the claimed “buffer material,”
reading on “the second plane of the battery includes a buffer material,” wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be said double-sided tape, so would have identical properties, including elastic coefficient, sufficiently close to the claimed relationship “smaller,” to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “having a smaller elastic coefficient than the adhesive layer,” as claimed.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bang et al (US 2013/0157084), as provided supra, in view of Suzuki (US 2014/0023909).
Regarding claim 3, Bang teaches the battery pack of claim 1 , wherein said pair of upper spacers (e.g. items 52) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each upper flat surface of said cells; plus, said pair of lower spacers (e.g. items 50) oppositely mounted and fixed on outer lateral edges of each lower flat surface of said cells,
wherein each of said upper spacers and said lower spacers may be double-sided tape (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitation “the adhesive layer has a width dimension of 0.5 mm or more and 10 mm or less.”
However, teaches a Suzuki teaches a battery pack that is formed by connecting a plurality of secondary unit batteries that include two strips of two-sided adhesive tape (e.g. items 460) attached to an upper main surface of a unit battery (e.g. items 100),
wherein said two-sided adhesive tape (e.g. items 460) are used to fix a first unit battery (e.g. item 100), which is attached to a holder member (e.g. item 200), to a second unit battery (e.g. item 100), which is to be attached to said holder member,
wherein said two-sided adhesive tape may have a width of 6 mm (e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 105, 109-122, and 136 plus e.g. Figures 11-12, and 14-16).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the Suzuki tape, with said width of 6 mm, for the Bang tape, since Suzuki teaches its tape is suitable for use in a battery pack, said Suzuki tape with said width of 6 mm establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the adhesive layer has a width dimension of 0.5 mm or more and 10 mm or less.”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, none of the timely art of record teaches or suggests the claimed battery of claim 3, said adhesive layer of claim 1 with the property of a maximum tensile stress of 2 N/m2 or more and 5 N/mm2 or less. See further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0048 and 57.
Regarding claim 6, none of the timely art of record teaches or suggests the claimed components and relationships therebetween of the battery of claim 6, including the limitations of independent claim 1 and intervening claim 5. See further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0020, 23, 31-32, and 47.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Baek (US 2023/0216157);
Yoo et al (US 2020/0343499);
Lee (US 2020/0044202);
Lee et al (US 2018/0269436);
Moon (US 2007/0065718);
Watanabe et al (US 2005/0130030); and,
Kaneda et al (US 6743546).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights