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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ogasawara et al. (US 20130071721 A1), hereinafter “Ogasawara”.
Regarding claim 1, Ogasawara teaches a power source composed of a battery assembly (corresponding to the claimed battery module) where the battery assembly is made of a plurality of batteries (corresponding to the claimed plurality of stacked battery cells) ([0002]);
a cover member attached to the bus bar module (corresponding to the claimed cover body) ([0002]), which is shown provided to cover the plurality of battery cells (batteries) (Fig. 1);
a bus bar module 6 and main body 8 (corresponding to the claimed attachment-target member) ([0075], Fig. 1 and 2), to which the cover body (cover member) is attached,
the cover member comprises a plurality of cover portions (corresponding to the claimed plurality of divided cover portions) ([0016]), and the cover portions are arranged in parallel to each other (corresponding to the claimed cover portions being arranged side by side) ([0090]), with gaps (corresponding to the claimed clearance) to each other in the arranging direction ([0090]) corresponding to the claimed clearance (gap) being provided between the plurality of divided cover portions (cover portions) in a first direction (arranging direction), the plurality of divided cover portions being divided from each other where the arranging direction is Ogasawara’s X direction ([0065]);
a plurality of elastically deforming portions 14 (corresponding to the claimed elastic deformation portion) ([0089]), which can be seen extending between the divided cover portions (cover portions) adjacent to each other in the first direction (X direction) (Fig. 1-3, 5) and are described connecting movably the cover portions adjacent to each other ([0089]) in the arranging direction of the bus bar accommodating portions, namely, the overlapping X direction of the batteries ([0097]) where Ogasawara’s X direction is the longitudinal direction X of the battery assembly (corresponding to the claimed first direction) ([0087]);
each of the elastically deforming portions may be elastically deformed so that both ends in the width direction are moved close to or away from each other ([0097]) corresponding to the claimed the elastic deformation portion (elastic deforming portions) being elastically deformable to change a size of the clearance (gap),
a lock receiving portion 12 including a through hole into which the projection of the locking portion 30 is inserted (corresponding to the claimed first and second connection portion, labeled “first connection portion” and “second connection portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) ([0094]); both are shown provided in a first and second divided cover portion (labeled “first cover portion” and “second cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) both of which can be seen being disposed at one end portion in the first direction (X direction) or the other end portion in the first direction (X direction) in Ogasawara’s Fig. 3 and the examiner annotated figure below;
the lock receiving portion is locked with the locking portion, thereby the cover portions are fixed to the bus bar accommodating portions ([0095]), corresponding to the claimed first and second connection portions (lock receiving portion and locking portion) being connected to the attachment-target member (bus bar module which includes the bus bar accommodating portions) so as to be fixed in the first direction (X direction);
a positioning hole 11 into which the positioning projection 29 is inserted (corresponding to the claimed third connection portion and labeled “third connection portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) ([0092]) which Fig. 3 shows provided in each of the divided cover portions (“first cover portion” and “second cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) so as to be disposed between the first and second connection portions (“first connection portion” and “second connection portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) in the first direction (X direction);
where the positioning hole is formed larger than the positioning projection in the X direction allowing the positioning projection inserted into the positioning hole to be relatively movable in the overlapping X direction of the batteries ([0093]) corresponding to the claimed third connection portion (the positioning hole 11 and positioning projection 29) being connected to the attachment-target member (bus bar module) so as to be slidable in the first direction (X direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
673
1528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, in Fig. 3 Ogasawara further depicts the first and second divided cover portions (“first cover portion” and “second cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) being provided with the third connection portion (“third connection portion” in the examiner annotated figure below);
an intermediate cover portion (Fig. 3, red box labeled “third cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below), corresponding to the claimed third divided cover portion, is shown disposed between the first divided cover portion (labeled “first divided cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) and the second divided cover portion (labeled “second cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) in the first direction (X direction);
where the intermediate cover portion (red box labeled “third cover portion” in the examiner annotated figure below) corresponding to the claimed third divided cover portion is shown provided with a plurality of the third connection portions (Fig. 3, labeled “third connection portions” in the examiner annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
673
1527
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Ogasawara further depicts the elastically deforming portions 14 (Fig. 3, 5, labeled in red in the examiner annotated figure below), corresponding to the claimed elastic deformation portion, as being curved between the divided cover portions (cover portions) adjacent to each other in the first direction (X direction).
PNG
media_image3.png
624
958
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Ogasawara further depicts the batteries 4 (corresponding to the claimed plurality of battery cells) as being stacked in the first direction (X direction) (Fig. 1, 2),
the lower face of the cover portions (corresponding to the claimed plurality of divided cover portions) are seen to face the plurality of battery cells (batteries 4) in the Y direction (corresponding to the claimed second direction) ([0083], Fig. 1-2) orthogonal to the first direction (X direction) (Fig. 1, 2);
the elastically deforming portions 14 (corresponding to the claimed elastic deformation portion), are shown provided to project from each of the divided cover portions (cover portions) in the Z direction (corresponding to the claimed third direction) ([0093], Fig. 1-2) orthogonal to the first direction (X direction) and the second direction (Y direction) (Fig. 5) as depicted in the examiner annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image4.png
625
962
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Ogasawara further depicts the batteries (corresponding to the claimed plurality of battery cells) being stacked in the first direction (X direction), arranged side by side continuously in the first direction (X direction) (Fig. 1, 2), and in paired units (corresponding to the claimed battery cell units having a plurality of battery cells) aligned adjacent to each other longitudinally in the X direction (corresponding to the claimed plurality of battery cell units arranged side by side in the first direction) (Fig. 1, 2, 6, 7, battery pairs depicted in green and batteries labeled in blue in the examiner annotated figure below);
PNG
media_image5.png
732
1092
media_image5.png
Greyscale
the lower faces of Ogasawara’s cover portions (corresponding to the claimed cover portions) are depicted oriented towards the battery pairs (corresponding to the claimed plurality of battery cells) in the Y direction (corresponding to the claimed second direction) ([0083], Fig. 1-2) which is orthogonal to the X direction (corresponding to the claimed first direction) (Fig. 1, 2);
the battery pairs (corresponding to the claimed battery cell units) are depicted accommodated in a case body (Fig. 6, blue square labeled “one case body unit” in the examiner annotated figure below) with a gap (corresponding to the claimed clearance) (red double-headed arrow in the examiner annotated figure below) shown aligned with the boundary between the case bodies adjacent to each other (Fig. 6, green dashed line in the examiner annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
732
1092
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogasawara as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ishikawa (WO 2020184068 A1), where an English machine translation of Ishikawa is used and cited herein.
Regarding claim 5, Ogasawara depicts the cover member (corresponding to the claimed cover body) formed in one piece (Ogasawara, Fig. 1-3) but is silent on the material of the cover body.
However, Ishikawa teaches a resin bus bar cover (corresponding to the claimed cover body formed in one piece using a resin material) that covers the plurality of bus bars from above, and plays a role of electrically insulating the plurality of bus bars (Ishikawa, [0042]). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to substitute Ogasawara’s cover body material with Ishikawa’s resin in order to provide a cover body capable of electrically insulating the covered bus bar as taught by Ishikawa (Ishikawa, [0042]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogasawara as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ryota et al. (US 10461302 B2), hereinafter “Ryota”.
Regarding claim 7, Ogasawara further teaches a plurality of bus bars connecting the positive and negative electrodes of the batteries adjacent to each other (corresponding to the claimed bus bar that is connected to the battery cells and that electrically connects the battery cells) (Ogasawara, [0003]) and is shown connecting battery cells adjacent to each other in Ogasawara’s X direction (corresponding to the claimed first direction) (Ogasawara, Fig. 2, 4);
an electric wire for detecting the voltage of each battery connected to each of the bus bars (the examiner considers the portion of the bus bar connected to the wire to correspond to the claimed tab terminal connected to the bus bar and the rest of the bus bar to correspond to the claimed bus bar) (Ogasawara, [0076]) and the bus bar can be seen to be tab shaped and facing the cover member (corresponding to the claimed cover body) in Ogasawara’s Y direction (corresponding to the claimed second direction) (Fig. 4).
Ogasawara does not teach each of the divided cover portions further has a protrusion protruding, in a direction toward the battery cells in the second direction, from an edge portion of the divided cover portion forming the clearance, the protrusion being provided along the tab terminal when viewed in the second direction.
However, Ryota teaches two cover portions where each covers an opening of the bus bar housing portion (Ryota, col. 2, ln. 3) and where the first cover portion is provided with a tongue piece (corresponding to the claimed protrusion) that extends from the first cover portion toward the second cover portion (corresponding to the claimed protrusion protruding from an edge portion of the divided cover portion forming the clearance) (Ryota, col. 2, ln. 10-12). The tongue piece is shown to extend from the bottom edge of Ryota’s cover portion at the gap between cover portions and toward the battery cells (corresponding to the claimed protrusion being in a direction toward the battery cells in the second direction) (Ryota, Fig. 3). The taught tongue piece configuration causes the insulation distance (spatial distance) between the electrode of the secondary battery in the bus bar housing portion and a conductive part arranged above the cover portion to be wrapped around the tongue piece of the first cover portion, so that the insulation distance can be prolonged (Ryota, col. 2, ln. 14-19. Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add Ryota’s tongue piece to each of Ogasawara’s battery cover portions such that the tongue piece covered the bus bar thereby extended between adjacent cover portions (corresponding to the claimed protrusion being provided along the tab terminal when viewed in the second direction) increasing the insulation distance between Ogasawara’s bus bar and a foreign conducting piece (Ryota, col. 2, ln. 14-19) and protecting the battery from electrical failure.
Double Patenting
Claim 1 of this application is patentably indistinct from claim 2 of Application No. 18/490,701. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of copending Application No. 18/490,701, hereinafter “the 701 application”, in view of Suenaga et al. (US 20220013852 A1), hereinafter “Suenaga”, and You et al. (US 20210305651 A1), hereinafter “You”.
Claim 2 of the 701 application recites a battery module (corresponding to the claimed battery module), a plurality of battery cells (corresponding to the claimed plurality of battery cells) stacked in a first direction (corresponding to the claimed first direction), two cover bodies arranged side by side (corresponding to the claimed cover body which has a plurality of divided cover portions arranged side by side) where the first cover body corresponds to the claimed first divided cover portion and the second cover body corresponds to the claimed second divided cover portion (see claim 1 of the 701 Application),
the first cover body has a first connection portion (corresponding to the claimed first connection portion provided in a first divided cover portion) and the second cover body has a second connection portion (corresponding to the claimed second connection portion provided in a second divided cover portion), the first connection portion and second connection portion being connected to the attachment-target member (corresponding to the claimed attachment-target member) so as to be fixed in the first direction (corresponding to the claimed first and second connection portions being connected to the attachment-target member so as to be fixed in the first direction);
a third connection portion (corresponding to the claimed third connection portion) provided in at least one of the first cover body and the second cover body (corresponding to the claimed third connection portion being provided in each of the divided cover portions) where the third connection portion is disposed between the first connection portion and the second connection portion in the first direction (corresponding to the claimed third connection portion being disposed between the first connection portion and the second connection portion in the first direction) and the third connection portion being connected to the attachment-target member so as to be slidable in the first direction (corresponding to the claimed third connection portion being connected to the attachment-target member so as to the slidable in the first direction).
The 701 application does not claim a clearance between the cover bodies or an elastic deformation portion.
However, Suenaga teaches a gap (corresponding to the claimed clearance) between two wall plates (corresponding to the claimed cover portions) where the gap acts as a gas discharge channel (Suenaga, [0124]) which can be made large due to increased internal pressure allowing the gas discharge flow rate to be secured (Suenaga, [0126]). You teaches a plurality of elastic deforming portions (corresponding to the claimed elastic deformation portions) convexly protruding out of the cover frame (corresponding to the claimed cover body) and capable of extending the cover frame (You, [0042]) in order to prevent the inner pressing force of the battery module when the plurality of battery cells are inflated (You, [0043]). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the gap taught by Suenaga and the elastic deforming portion taught by You to the battery recited by the 701 application in order to provide a battery capable of releasing internal pressure through gas discharge as taught by Suenaga (Suenaga, [0126]) and physical deformation of the battery housing as taught by You (You, [0042]).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Toshioka (US 2021226293 A1) teaches a plurality of cover portions with elastic deformation. Yamashiro et al. (US 2021351452 A1) teaches a plurality of cover portions with elastic deformation portions but does not cover the bus bars). Shimizu et al. (US 2020381683 A1) teaches fixed connection portions. Fan (US 20150280186 A1) teaches multiple cover portions connected by flexible hinges.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMRAN S SAUND whose telephone number is (571)270-0845. 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.
/SIMRAN S. SAUND/Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights