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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application and under consideration on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 27 September 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maurer et al. (DE 10201821450 A1, “Maurer”).
Regarding claim 1,
PNG
media_image1.png
748
627
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Maurer teaches a battery cell (ref. 100, [0023]) comprising a stack (battery cell stack, ref. 108, [0005]) enclosed in an interior space (cell stack receiving zone, ref. 106, [FIG. 1], [0023]) of a housing wherein the housing includes a base and a plurality of side wall as shown above in FIG. 1. The battery cell further comprises a compensation device (resilient expansion limiter, ref. 124, [FIG. 1], [0011]) located between the housing and the stack [0011] that compensated for a change in the size of the stack [0023].
Regarding claim 2, Maurer teaches the battery cell according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of side walls include a first side wall, a second side wall spaced from the first side wall, a third side wall, and a fourth side wall spaced from the third side wall, the third side wall and the fourth side wall extending between and connecting the first side wall and the second side wall as shown above in FIG. 1. The compensation device is located between the housing and the stack as shown above in FIG. 1 [0011].
Regarding claim 4,
PNG
media_image2.png
749
627
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Maurer teaches the battery cell according to claim 2, wherein the compensation device includes a first surface mounted to the one of the first side wall and the second side wall and a support plate (second surface, ref. 122, [0026]) opposite the first surface as shown above in FIG. 1.
Regarding claim 5, Maurer teaches the battery cell according to claim 4, wherein the support plate is a thin, dimensionally stable or rigid plate (shown above in FIG. 1, [0012]).
Regarding claim 6, Maurer teaches the battery cell according to claim 4, wherein the support plate is curved [0013].
Regarding claim 7, Maurer teaches the battery cell according to claim 4, wherein the compensation device includes at least one elastic spring (spring element, ref. 120, [0010], [0025]).
Regarding claim 8, Maurer teaches the battery cell according to claim 2, wherein two compensation devices are arranged on opposite sides of the housing between the housing and the stack (shown above in FIG. 1, [0010]).
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.
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 1-4, 5, and 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (US 20140255760 A1, “Han”), in view of Kim et al. (US 20230282923 A1, “Kim”).
Han teaches a battery pack comprising first batteries (battery cell, ref. 10, [0039]) having first surfaces and second surfaces (shown below in FIG. 1, [0039]) wherein the first surfaces have a larger surface area than the second surfaces ([Abs], [0010]). The battery pack further includes a housing (base and the plurality of side walls,, ref. 70, [0043]) that houses the stacked first batteries and second batteries in an accommodation space [0043].
PNG
media_image3.png
641
735
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Han fails to teach a resilient expansion limiter arranged at one of the plurality of side walls in the cell stack receiving zone, specifically being mounted to one of the first side wall and the second side wall to control expansion of the battery cell stack. Han further fails to teach the resilient expansion limiter including a first surface mounted to the one of the first side wall and the second side wall and a second surface opposite the first surface, wherein the second surface is a substantially planar surface and includes a honeycomb structure.
Kim teaches a battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells (ref. 105, [0032]), a battery cell assembly (battery cell stack, ref. 100, [0030-0031]), a base plate (base, ref. 200, [0030]), a cover plate, side beams, and an elastic bead unit (resilient expansion limiter, ref. 400, [0030]). The elastic bean unit is for controlling cell swelling of the battery cells of the battery assembly and is disposed between the cover plate and the battery cell assembly [0037]. The elastic bead unit comprises a contact plate (second surface opposite the first surface, ref. 410, [0040-0041]), wherein the contact plate has a substantially flat plate shape [0041] which reads on the limitation recited in claim 5.
Kim further teaches the elastic bead unit comprising an elastic deformation unit that include a first elastic member and a second elastic member that is provided in a concave-convex shape so that convex portions and concave portions are arranged alternately (shown below in FIG. 2, [0011-0013]).
PNG
media_image4.png
253
604
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Han and Kim each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the battery cell of Han to comprise the elastic bead unit of Kim to control the cell swelling of the battery cells (Kim, [0037]). One of ordinary skill in the art would like to reduce the swelling to maintain dimensional stability, maintain mechanical integrity, and extends cycle life and performance.
Regarding claim 3, Han in view of Kim teaches the battery cell of claim 2 as discussed above.
Han further teaches the first surfaces (e.g. side surfaces) of the first batteries having a larger surface area than the second surfaces (e.g. bottom surfaces) of the first batteries ([0010], [0039]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (US 20140255760 A1, “Han”), in view of Kim et al. (US 20230282923 A1, “Kim”), and further in view of Kang et al. (US 12278355 B2, “Kang”).
Han in view of Kim teaches the battery cell according to claim 1 as described above.
Han in view of Kim fails to teach a compression pad arranged between the resilient expansion limiter and the one of the plurality of side walls.
Kang teaches a battery module comprising a battery cell stack (ref. 120, col. 4, ln. 53-55) and a module frame accommodating the battery cell stack (col. 4, ln. 53-56). The battery module further comprises a compression pad located on the outermost side of the battery cells and the side surface part of the module frame (col. 5, ln. 33-37).
Han, Kim, and Kang each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the battery cell of Han in view of Kim to be modified to comprise a compression pad as taught in Kang, arranged between the battery cell stack and a side surface of the module frame to alleviate deformation of the thickness of the battery cell due to swelling and changed of the battery cell due to an external impact (Kang, col. 5, ln. 38-41). One of ordinary skill in the art would like alleviate deformation of the thickness of the battery cell to improve structural stability and safety.
Claims 11-12 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mita et al. (JP H11180172 A, "Mita"), in view of Maurer et al. (DE 10201821450 A1, “Maurer”).
Mita teaches an electric vehicle (ref. V, [0011]) provided with left and right from wheels and left and right rear wheels (plurality of wheels, ref. WFL, WFR, WRL, and WRR, [0011]) connected to a pair of left and right side frames of a vehicle frame (body, ref. 4, [FIG. 1], [0011]). The electric vehicle further comprises a motor (drive unit, ref. 5, [0011] is mounted between the left and right frames wherein the motor is integrally provided with a differential gear [0011]. The differential gear comprises drive shafts that are connected to the left and right front wheels [0011]. The electric vehicle further comprises batteries (battery assembly, ref. 10, [0015]) that are mounted in a battery box and a power drive unit (PDU) wherein the power drive unit and the motor are connected [0015].
Mita fails to teach the battery assembly including a plurality of battery cells, each of the plurality of battery cells having: a cell can including a base, a plurality of side walls connected to the base, the base and the plurality of side walls defining a cell stack receiving zone; a battery cell stack arranged in the cell stack receiving zone, specifically being mounted to one of the first side wall and the second side wall to control expansion of the battery cell stack. Mita further fails to teach the resilient expansion limiter including a plurality of spring elements and including a first surface mounted to the one of the first side wall and the second side wall and a second surface opposite the first surface, wherein the second surface is a curvilinear surface.
Maurer teaches a traction battery for a vehicle having multiple battery modules wherein the battery modules comprise multiple battery cells [0007]. Maurer further teaches a battery cell (ref. 100, [0023]) comprising a stack (battery cell stack, ref. 108, [0005]) enclosed in an interior space (cell stack receiving zone, ref. 106, [FIG. 1], [0023]) of a housing wherein the housing includes a base and a plurality of side wall as shown above in FIG. 1. The battery cell further comprises a compensation device (resilient expansion limiter, ref. 124, [FIG. 1], [0011]) located between the housing and the stack [0011] that compensated for a change in the size of the stack [0023].
Maurer further teaches the limitations recited in claims 12 and 14-18 as discussed above regarding claims 2 and 4-8, as the limitations are the same.
Mita and Maurer each constitute prior art which is analogous to the claimed invention – vehicles and batteries used in vehicles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the vehicle of Mita to include the traction battery of Maurer to supply electric drive systems with electrical energy (Maurer, [0035]), to provide a battery cell with a dimensionally stable housing (Maurer, [0005]), and to provide a compensation device to exert a force on the battery cell stack to ensure a thermally conductive contact between the stack (Maurer, [0008]).
Claims 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mita et al. (JP H11180172 A, "Mita"), in view of Han (US 20140255760 A1, “Han”), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230282923 A1, “Kim”).
Regarding claim 13, Mita in view of Han and further in view of Kim teaches the vehicle according to claim 12 as described above.
Mita in view of Han and further in view of Kim fails to teach the first side wall including a first area, the third side wall including a second area wherein the first area being greater than the second area.
Han in view of Kim teaches the first side wall including a first area, the third side wall including a second area wherein the first area being greater than the second area as discussed above regarding claim 3.
Regarding claim 20, Mita in view of Han and further in view of Kim teaches the vehicle according to claim 11 as described above.
Mita in view of Han and further in view of Kim fails to teach the resilient expansion limiter including a honeycomb structure.
Han in view of Kim teaches the resilient expansion limiter including a honeycomb structure as discussed above regarding claim 10.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mita et al. (JP H11180172 A, "Mita"), in view of Han (US 20140255760 A1, “Han”), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230282923 A1, “Kim”), and even further in view of Kang et al. (US 12278355 B2, “Kang”).
Regarding claim 19, Mita in view of Han and further in view of Kim teaches the vehicle according to claim 11 as described above.
Mita in view of Han and further in view of Kim teaches fails to teach a compression pad arranged between the resilient expansion limiter and the one of the plurality of side walls.
Kang teaches a compression pad arranged between the resilient expansion limiter and the one of the plurality of side walls as discussed above regarding claim 9.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Jin (CN 115668609 A) teaches a battery module (battery cell, ref. 1, [0035]) including a battery cell stack (ref. 10, [0035]) and a module housing (cell can, ref. 20, [0035]). The battery cell stack comprises at least one expansion absorption pads (resilient expansion limiter, ref. 12, [0037], [0045]) disposed on the outermost sides of the battery cell stack [0027]. The expansion absorption pad can be compressed to absorb the volume expansion of the battery cell [0037]. Further, the expansion absorption pad may have a flat shape [0038] or a curved surface [0047].
Fujiwara (US 20200194753 A1) teaches a power storage device comprising a plurality of secondary batteries (battery cell, ref. 11, [0016]), a pair of end plates, and compression springs (resilient expansion limiter, ref. 30, [0015] serving as a pressurizing unit for pressurizing the battery laminate [0015]. The battery laminate comprises an electrode assembly (battery cell stack, ref. 12 [0019]) and an exterior body (cell can, ref. 13, [0019]) housing the electrode assembly [0019].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANDRA BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-0345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday 6:00 am - 4:45 pm EST.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571) 272-8935. 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.
/SANDRA BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/Alicia Chevalier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights