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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita et al. (WO2016084820A1), hereinafter "Morita," in view of Geskes et al. (CN114976344A), hereinafter "Geskes," wherein English machine translations are used and cited herein.
Regarding claim 1, Morita teaches:
A power storage module ([0018]; corresponding to a battery module);
A plurality of power storage elements shown in a stacked arrangement (reference character 11, Fig. 1, [0018]; corresponding to a plurality of battery cells stacked in a first direction);
A cover attached to the power storage element group in a direction orthogonal to the stacking direction of the power storage elements (reference character 41, Fig. 9, 11, [0018]; corresponding to a cover body provided to cover the plurality of battery cells in a second direction orthogonal to the first);
A duct that communicates with the exhaust port and allows gas exhausted from the port to be vented (reference character 30, Fig. 1, 3-5, 9, 12-15, [0043]; corresponding to a duct through which gas discharged from each of the plurality of battery cells flows);
A cylindrical duct positioned on top of the plurality of storage elements (reference character 30, Fig. 1, 3-5) and disposed beneath the upper cover (reference character 41, Fig. 9, 11; corresponding to a duct main body portion disposed between each of the plurality of battery cells and the cover body in the second direction), which creates a flow space for gas by communication of a communication port (reference character 46, Fig. 12-15) with the interior of the cylindrical duct (Fig. 12-15, [0042]; corresponding to the duct main body extending in the first direction to form a flow space for the gas); and
A cylindrical duct extending in a direction parallel to the stacking direction of the power storage elements and possessing one end that is closed and one end that is open (reference character 30, Fig. 1, 3-5, 8-12, 15, [0041]; corresponding to a cylindrical portion to which a hose is able to be fitted, the cylindrical portion extending, in the first direction in a form of a cylinder, from one end portion of the duct main body portion in the first direction so as to have a tip with and opening).
Morita does not teach:
A projection with which an end portion of the hose fitted to the cylindrical portion is able to be brought into abutment, the projection protruding from an outer peripheral surface of the cylindrical portion at a position away from the opening of the cylindrical portion in the first direction; nor
The cover body has an anchoring portion anchored to the projection in the second direction.
However, Geskes teaches housing flanges (reference character 46, Fig. 6-7, [0067]; corresponding to the projection protruding from an outer peripheral surface) and a cover with a U-shaped profile (reference character 35) and legs (reference characters 36a and 36b), shown affixed to the housing flanges (Fig. 6-7; corresponding to the cover body has an anchoring portion anchored to the projection).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the housing flanges of Geskes to the peripheral surface of the cylindrical duct of Morita at a position away from the opening of the duct such that a hose may be brought into abutment with the housing flanges when fitted to the duct while simultaneously allowing the cover of Geskes to attach to the housing flanges, thereby reducing the technical complexity of the sealing structure and reducing manufacturing costs (Geskes, [0006]).
Regarding claim 2, the battery module suggested by Morita modified by Geskes would include a cover with a flat portion normal to the second direction (Morita, reference character 41, Fig. 9,11; corresponding to the cover body further has a flat plate portion disposed in parallel with a plane orthogonal to the second direction). Additionally, the anchoring portion of the suggested cover would include arm portions extending in the second direction (Geskes, reference characters 36a and 36b, Figs. 6-7; corresponding to the anchoring portion has an arm portion extending in the second direction from an peripheral edge portion of the flat plate portion and elastically deformable in a direction away from the outer peripheral surface of the cylindrical portion) and claw portions protruding from the tip of the arm portions (Geskes, reference character 37, Figs. 6-7; corresponding to a claw portion protruding from a tip portion of the arm portion in a direction toward the outer peripheral surface of the cylindrical portion).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita in view of Geskes as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lyu et al. (CN217086752U), hereinafter “Lyu,” wherein an English machine translation is used and cited herein.
Regarding claim 3, the battery module suggested by Morita modified by Geskes would include an end plate disposed at the end of the plurality of stacked power storage elements (Morita, reference character 25, Figs. 1-2, [0027]; corresponding to an end plate disposed beside an end portion of the plurality of battery cells in the first direction).
Morita modified by Geskes does not teach a duct extension portion extending, in one direction along the first direction, from the other end portion of the duct main body portion in the first direction, and a clip portion extending from the duct extension portion in the other direction along the first direction, the clip portion and the duct extension portion sandwiching the end plate in the second direction.
However, Lyu teaches a first connecting structure with a rolled edge that extends from a peripheral edge of an end cap (Lyu, reference character 213, Fig. 10, [0093]; corresponding to the claimed duct extension portion extending along the first direction from the other end portion of the duct main body portion in the first direction and a clip portion extending from the duct extension portion in the other direction along the first direction) that cooperates with a second connecting structure integral to the housing in order to affix the end cap to the housing (Lyu, reference character 222, Fig. 9, [0093]; corresponding to the clip extension portion sandwiching the end plate in the second direction).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the rolled edge first connecting structure of Lyu to the closed end of Morita’s cylindrical duct as well as to add Lyu’s second connecting structure integral to Morita’s end plate, the connecting structures configured such that the rolled edge first connecting structure sandwiches or clips onto the second connecting structure, thus incorporating the sealing structures on the exterior of the battery case and thereby reducing the size of the battery and increasing the efficiency of its assembly (Lyu, [0008]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J DUNCAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1177. 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.
/A.J.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights