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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 2022-168090, filed on 2022-10-20 .
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.
Claims 1-3, 4, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hashimoto, et al. (US 2014/0023906 A1).
Claim 1: Hashimoto teaches a first embodiment of a battery stack having a plurality of rectangular shaped rechargeable battery cells stacked together arranged side by side, each of the plurality of battery cells having a rectangular shape (Figs. 1, 6, 8, Elements 5, 1; Abst.; ¶¶ 0054, 56), interpreted here as the “battery module comprising: a plurality of battery cells arranged side by side in a first direction, each of the plurality of battery cells having a prismatic shape” recited in Claim 1, with the direction of side-by-side battery arrangement being interpreted here as the first direction recited in Claim 1. Hashimoto further teaches that the battery cells are held in place by two fastening members (Figs. 1, 2, 4, 5 Element 4; ¶¶ 0062) that are disposed along both sides of a battery stack, interpreted here as the “two restraint members that each restrain the plurality of battery cells along the first direction, each of the two restraint members being provided to be arranged side by side with the plurality of battery cells in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction”, with the direction orthogonal to the plane of the main section of the fastening members (Figs. 2-4, Element 41; ¶ 0062) interpreted here as the second direction recited in Claim 1. Hashimoto also teaches three connecting bars, which Hashimoto also refers to as plate connecting portions, which hold the fastening members together at the bottom, and which are located at and symmetrically about the middle of the fastening members along their long axis (Fig. 5, Element 50; ¶¶ 0072, 0073). Each connecting bar is interpreted here as “a coupling member in a form of a strip, the coupling member extending in the second direction at an intermediate portion in the first direction to couple the two restraint members to each other,” recited in Claim 1. Hashimoto further teaches that each connecting bar has two bent ends, each bent end has an engaging hole (Fig. 5, Elements 50, 51; ¶¶ 0072, 0073), and that the engaging holes on these bent ends lock together with engaging pieces of fastening connecting portions which project outward from the bottom edges of the fastening members such that the planes of the bent ends are parallel to the planes of the main sections of the fastening members (Figs. 3, 4 Elements 44, 4, 41; ¶ 0071). Each connecting bar with the engaging holes on its bent ends is interpreted here as “the coupling member [which] has a first engagement portion and a second engagement portion that are respectively engaged with the two restraint members” recited in Claim 1.
Claim 2: Hashimoto teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Hashimoto also teaches a cooling plate which covers the bottom of the battery stack having a plurality of battery cells (Figs. 2-3, Element 61; ¶¶ 0075) in a direction which is orthogonal to both the direction of side-by-side battery cell arrangement and the direction orthogonal to the plane of the main section of the fastening members. The cooling plate is interpreted here as “a cover member provided to cover the plurality of battery cells in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction” recited in Claim 2. Hashimoto further teaches that each connecting bar has a longer central portion and two bent ends (Figs. 3, 5, Elements 50-51; ¶ 0073), and that the longer central portion overlaps the cooling plate on a side opposite to the plurality of battery cells, with the bent ends protruding away from the longer central portion in the direction orthogonal to the plane of the cooling cover, with each bent end having an engaging hole (Figs. 3, 5, Elements 50-51; ¶ 0073). This is interpreted here as “the coupling member includes a main body portion and a flange portion, the main body portion extending in a second direction at a position overlapping with the cover member on a side opposite to the plurality of battery cells, the flange portion being provided with the first engagement portion and the second engagement portion” recited in Claim 2.
Claim 3: Hashimoto teaches all of the limitations of Claim 1. Hashimoto further teaches a third embodiment of a battery stack where the cooling plate which covers the bottom of the battery stack having a plurality of battery cells is attached to the fastening members in the vicinity of four fastening connections which are bent underneath the fastening members toward the cooling plate to form small, narrow flanges with two such flanges disposed about the middle portion of each fastening member (Figs. 19, 20, Element 4, 44; ¶¶ 0094, 0095). This is interpreted here as the “battery module according to claim 1, wherein each of the two restraint members includes a main body portion, and a first flange portion and a second flange portion each protruding from the main body portion in the second direction, the first flange portion [being] provided to overlap with a plurality of battery of battery cells in the third direction, a protruding amount of the second flange portion from the main body portion, and the first engagement and the second engagement portion are provided in a vicinity of the first flange portion” recited in Claim 3.
Claim 4: Hashimoto teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Hashimoto further teaches endplates which attach to the bent pieces at each end of each fastening member and serve to bind the battery stack together (Figs. 2-5, Elements 3, 42, 5; ¶ 0061). These are interpreted here as “further comprising a case that accommodates the plurality of battery cells, that supports the battery cells in at least the first direction, and that forms a unit including the plurality of battery cells” as recited in Claim 4.
Claim 6: Hashimoto teaches all the limitations of Claim 1. Hashimoto also teaches a cooling plate which covers the bottom of the battery stack having a plurality of battery cells (Figs. 2, 3, 5, Element 61; ¶¶ 0061) in a direction which is orthogonal to both the direction of side-by-side battery cell arrangement and the direction orthogonal to the plane of the main section of the fastening members. The cooling plate is interpreted here as “a cover member provided to cover the plurality of battery cells in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction” recited in Claim 6. Hashimoto further teaches endplates which attach to the bent pieces at each end of each fastening member and serve to bind the battery stack together (Figs. 2-5, Elements 3, 42, 5; ¶ 0061). These are interpreted here as “further comprising… a case that accommodates the plurality of battery cells, that supports the battery cells in at least the first direction, and that forms a unit including the plurality of battery cells” as recited in Claim 6. Hashimoto additionally teaches that the cooling plate is attached to the fastening connection portions of fastening members by the connecting bars (Figs. 2, 3, 5, Elements 61, 44, 4, 50; ¶¶ 0086-0088). This is interpreted here as “the cover member and the case are connected with each other” recited in Claim 6.
Claim 8: Hashimoto teaches all of the limitations of Claim 1. Hashimoto further teaches a third embodiment of a battery stack where the cooling plate which covers the bottom of the battery stack having a plurality of battery cells is attached to the fastening members in the vicinity of four fastening connections which are bent underneath the fastening members toward the cooling plate to form small, narrow flanges with two such flanges disposed about the middle portion of each fastening member (Figs. 19, 20, Element 4, 44; ¶¶ 0094, 0095). This is interpreted here as “The battery module according to claim 1, wherein each of the two restraint members includes a main body portion, and a first flange portion and a second flange portion each protruding from the main body portion in the second direction, the first flange portion [being] provided to overlap with a plurality of battery of battery cells in the third direction, a protruding amount of the second flange portion from the main body portion, and the first engagement and the second engagement portion are provided in a vicinity of the first flange portion” recited in Claim 8. Hashimoto further teaches a cooling plate which covers the bottom of the battery stack having a plurality of battery cells (Figs. 2-3, Element 61; ¶ 0075) in a direction which is orthogonal to both the direction of side-by-side battery cell arrangement and the direction orthogonal to the plane of the main section of the fastening members. The cooling plate is interpreted here as “a cover member provided to cover the plurality of battery cells in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction” recited in Claim 8. Hashimoto further teaches endplates which attach to the bent pieces at each end of each fastening members and serve to bind the battery stack together (Figs. 1, 5, Elements 3, 42, 5; ¶ 0061). These are interpreted here as comprising ”a case that accommodates the plurality of battery cells, that supports the battery cells in at least the first direction, and that forms a unit including the plurality of battery cells” recited in Claim 8. Hashimoto also teaches a cooling plate which covers the bottom of the battery stack having a plurality of battery cells (Figs. 2, 3, 5, Element 61; ¶ 0075). This is interpreted here as “the cover member and the case are connected with each other” recited in Claim 8.
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 5, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto, et al. (US 2014/02023906 A1) in light of Koishikawa, et al. (JP2003308830A, machine translation).
Claim 5: Hashimoto teaches all the limitations of Claim 4. Hashimoto further teaches a battery stack having a plurality of battery cells, which is interpreted here as “the unit [including] two or more battery cells” recited in Claim 5. Hashimoto is silent as to output density, so one of ordinary skill at the time of filing would have looked to the related art to find operative output densities. Koishikawa teaches a cylindrical lithium-ion secondary battery (Abstr.) with an output density of over 8000 W / L (Pg. 4, 9th Full ¶) which can also be made in prismatic and other polygonal shapes (Pg. 5, 2nd Full Thus, it would have been obvious at the time of filing of the instant invention to have used batteries with output densities of over 8000 W / L as the particular batteries of Hashimoto because Koishikawa teaches that they are suitable output densities for operating secondary batteries.
Claim 7: Hashimoto teaches all the limitations of Claim 6. Hashimoto further teaches a battery stack having a plurality of battery cells, which is interpreted here as “the unit [including] two or more battery cells” recited in Claim 7. Hashimoto does not teach battery cells having an output density 8000 W / L or more. Koishikawa teaches a cylindrical lithium-ion secondary battery (Abstr.) with an output density of over 8000 W / L (Pg. 4, 9th Full ¶) which can also be made in prismatic and other polygonal shapes (Pg. 5, 2nd Full ¶). Hashimoto is silent as to output density, so one of ordinary skill at the time of filing would have looked to the related art to find operative output densities. Thus, it would have been obvious to use batteries with output densities of over 8000 W / L because Koishikawa teaches that they are suitable output densities for operating secondary batteries.
Claim 9: Hashimoto teaches all the limitations of Claim 8. Additionally, Koishikawa teaches a cylindrical lithium-ion secondary battery (Abstr.) with an output density of over 8000 W / L (Pg. 4, 9th Full ¶) which can also be made in prismatic and other polygonal shapes (Pg. 5, 2nd Full ¶). Thus, in order to achieve the specified battery cell output density of 8000 W / L or more it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Koishikawa and Hashimoto to obtain the predictable result of “[a] unit [including] two or more battery cells [having] an output density of 8000 W / L or more” recited in Claim 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TREVOR MICHAEL SACCUCCI whose telephone number is (571)270-1867. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Michael B Cleveland can be reached at (571)272-1418. 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.
/TREVOR MICHAEL SACCUCCI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1712 /MICHAEL B CLEVELAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights