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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 12/26/23 and 10/8/24 have been considered by the examiner.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando (US 2022/0320626) in view of Nagai et al. (US 2022/0271386).
Regarding claim 1, Ando teaches a battery module comprising:
a battery stack, or cell unit (30), in which a plurality of battery cells (50) are stacked (Figures 10-12, [0096]);
a pair of plate-shaped members, or walls of the casing (41), provided at both ends of the stack (30a) in a stacking direction (Figure 12);
a cushioning material, or multilayer sheet (1), disposed between two of the plurality cells (50) (Figure 12);
the cushioning material (1) comprising a pair of first elastic members, or heat conductive sheets (11) having bending (i.e. elastic) properties, arranged on both outer sides in the stacking direction and a second elastic member, or rubber sheet (13), disposed between the pair of first elastic members (Figure 3, [0062], [0066]).
Further regarding claim 1, Ando teaches that the second elastic member is a cushioning material ([0066]) but is silent on a spring constant of the member.
Nagai teaches a battery module comprising a battery cell stack (1) having a plurality of stacked battery cells (14) with a cushioning material, or spacer (20), provided between the plurality of cells (Figure 1). Nagai further teaches that the spring constant of the spacer (20) is 0.03 MPa/mm to 5.4 MPa/mm, and that the spring constant of the spacer is result effective for suppression of a decrease in capacity of the batteries due to repeated charging and discharging and suppression of discharge of electrolyte ([0048]-[0049]).
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to form the second elastic member of Ando with a spring constant of 0.03 MPa/mm to 5.4 MPa/mm, and to further optimize the spring constant of the material such as taught by Nagai in order to effectively suppress undesired consequences of the battery use. It has been held that it is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05 II A
Regarding claims 2-3, Ando teaches that the second elastic member, or rubber sheet (13), is sponge-like, i.e. porous ([0067]).
Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama et al. (US 2022/0320665) in view of Nagai.
The teachings of Nagai as discussed above are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 1, Nakayama teaches a battery module, or power storage module (100), comprising:
a battery cell stack in which a plurality of battery cells, or power storage cells (101), are stacked (Figure 2);
a pair of plate-shaped members, or insulating sheets (300), provided at both ends of the battery cell stack in the stacking direction (Figure 2);
a cushioning material, or restriction unit (500), disposed between the plurality of battery cells (101) (Figure 2);
the cushioning material comprising a pair of first elastic members, or flat plates (510) which may deform by application of a load, i.e. are elastic ([0052]), and a second elastic member, or filled materials (530, 531), disposed between the first elastic members (Figure 5, [0073]).
Further regarding claim 1, Nakayama teaches that the second elastic member is a cushioning material that deforms ([0060], [0073]), but is silent on the spring constant of the second elastic member.
Nagai teaches a battery module comprising a battery cell stack (1) having a plurality of stacked battery cells (14) with a cushioning material, or spacer (20), provided between the plurality of cells (Figure 1). Nagai further teaches that the spring constant of the spacer (20) is 0.03 MPa/mm to 5.4 MPa/mm, and that the spring constant of the spacer is result effective for suppression of a decrease in capacity of the batteries due to repeated charging and discharging and suppression of discharge of electrolyte ([0048]-[0049]).
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to form the second elastic member of Nakayama with a spring constant of 0.03 MPa/mm to 5.4 MPa/mm, and to further optimize the spring constant of the material such as taught by Nagai in order to effectively suppress undesired consequences of the battery use. It has been held that it is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05 II A
Regarding claims 4-5, the second elastic member of Nakayama comprises a corrugated plate (530) which is a wave-shaped leaf spring (Figures 4-5).
As for claim 6, the second elastic member of Nakayama comprises a resin (531) ([0073]).
With regard to claim 7, Nakayama teaches that the cells may be solid-state batteries ([0082]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALIX ECHELMEYER EGGERDING whose telephone number is (571)272-1101. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 4:30pm.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
/ALIX E EGGERDING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights