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 Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informality:
"and extend" should read "and the adhesive part extends".
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the windows" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as it depends on claim 10, which only recites “a window”.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the windows" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as it depends on claim 18, which only recites “a window”.
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 1-4, 8-9, 12-15, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Egashira et al. (US 2022/0013827 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Egashira teaches a battery module (battery module 1), comprising: a battery cell array (battery stack 2); an outer side plate (constraining member 12), disposed on an outer side of the battery cell array (Fig. 1); and an insulator (side separator 10; Par. 0041, side separators 10 are insulative), disposed between the outer side plate and the battery cell array (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 2, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 1, wherein the outer side plate comprises a side plate (flat surface portion 54), and the insulator comprises an insulation barrier (first portion 50; Fig. 6); the side plate is disposed corresponding to at least one surface on an outer side of the battery cell array in a circumferential direction (Par. 0054, “first portion 50 is interposed between the side surface of the battery stack 2 and flat surface portion 54 of constraining member 12”; Fig. 6); the insulation barrier protrudes above the battery cell array (Fig. 6, first portion 50 extends above the battery cells before curving inward).
Regarding claim 3, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 1, wherein the insulator is provided on the outer side plate (Fig. 6, side separator 10 is directly disposed on the constraining member 12; Par. 0041, the side separators insulate the constraining members from the battery stack).
Regarding claim 4, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 2, wherein the insulation barrier comprises an insulation layer (first portion 50) disposed on the side plate and an insulation sheet (biasing portion 53; Par. 0042, biasing portion 53 is a part of the side separator 10) disposed on the insulation layer (Par. 0042), the insulation sheet protrudes toward a side of the battery cell array to a position above the battery cell array (Fig, 6; Par. 0062, “biasing portions 53 protrude toward battery stack 2 from the end portion region on an upper side of first portion 50. Biasing portions 53 protrude toward battery stack 2 above the upper surface of battery stack 2”).
Regarding claim 8, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 4, wherein an included angle between the insulation sheet and an inner wall of the side plate is 82° to 98° (Fig. 6; biasing portion 53 extends perpendicularly from the flat surface portion 54 of the constraining member 12).
Regarding claim 9, Egashira fails to teach a cantilever length of the insulation sheet. However, the only difference between the insulation sheet of Egashira and the claimed insulation sheet is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed insulation sheet. A device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the sheet taught by Egashira, as the insulation sheet of Egashira performs the same function of extending from the insulation layer to a position above the battery cells. Thus, the claimed insulation sheet is not patentably distinct from that of Egashira.
Regarding claim 12, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 2, wherein the battery module further comprises a top plate (bus bar plate 28; Par. 0034, “Bus bar plate 28 is placed on the upper surface of battery stack 2”), the side plate is disposed corresponding to at least one surface on an outer side of the battery cell array in a circumferential direction (Fig. 6), and the top plate is disposed in an insulated manner on a top of the battery cell array (Par. 0034, “Bus bar plate 28 is placed on the upper surface of battery stack 2”; Fig. 7, bus bar plate 28 has protrusions 28a which are in contact with the insulating biasing portion 53); the insulator comprises an insulation flange (Par. 0042, second portion 51), and the insulation flange extends along the top plate (Fig. 6, second portion 51 extends to the bus bar plate 28; Par. 0042, “Second portion 51 has a strip shape extending in stacking direction X”) to a position between the side plate and the battery cell array (Par. 0057; second portion 51 extends from the first portion 51 to a position over the battery cells, thus encompassing a position between the side plate and battery cell array).
Regarding claim 13, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 12, wherein the insulation flange is detachably fixed on the top plate (Fig. 6-7; the second portion 51 and bus bar plate 28, protrusions 28a are not integrally formed, thus the second portion may be detached).
Regarding claim 14, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 12, wherein the side plate is circumferentially disposed on an outer side of the battery cell array in a circumferential direction (Par. 0043; “flat surface portion 54 extends in stacking direction X”) in an insulated and sealing manner (Par. 0054, “the side surfaces of respective batteries 14 and flat surface portion 54 are electrically insulated from each other”).
Regarding claim 15, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 12, wherein the insulation flange comprises an inclined segment (Fig. 6, second portion 51) and a vertical segment (Fig. 6, inclined segment extends from a vertical portion), the vertical segment is hung between the side plate and the battery cell array (Fig. 6), and one end of the inclined segment is connected to an upper part of the vertical segment (Fig. 6, both parts are formed as one piece), and the other end of the inclined segment is inclined from bottom to top to one side away from the side plate (Fig. 6), and is connected to the top plate (Fig. 7, second portion 51 and biasing portion 53 are formed together, and the biasing portion 53 is connected to a protrusion 28a of the bus bar plate 28; thus, the second portion 51 and bus bar plate 28 are indirectly connected).
Regarding claim 20, Egashira teaches an electrical device (Par. 0038; the battery module may be used in a vehicle) comprising a working part (Par. 0070; the battery module is mounted in a vehicle; the module would then be connected to a working part), and further comprising the battery module of claim 1, wherein the working part is electrically connected to the battery module to obtain electric energy support (a battery module in a vehicle would only be used for electrical connection).
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.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egashira, in view of Bai et al. (US 2024/0396173 A1, priority date of 2/28/2022).
Regarding claim 5, Egashira fails to teach the insulation sheet being integrally formed with the insulation layer or bonded to the insulation layer through an adhesive part. Egashira teaches that the two parts are connected, but does not explicitly teach how they are connected.
However, Bai teaches an insulation sheet (folding portion 263, Par. 0083 states that this is part of an insulator 26) and an insulation layer (first insulating potion 261) which are bonded to each other through an adhesive part (Par. 0087).
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery module taught by Egashira by using an adhesive to bond the two insulation parts, as taught by Bai. Using adhesives to connect two parts is a known technique in the art, and one of ordinary skill would have known that using an adhesive would yield the predictable result of a connection between the two insulating parts (See MPEP 2143(I)(E)).
Regarding claim 6, modified Egashira fails to teach an adhesive part which is bonded to the insulation layer, and extends from a root of the insulation sheet.
However, Bai teaches an adhesive part which is bonded to the insulation layer (Par. 0087; first insulating portion 261), and the adhesive part extends upward and/or downward from a root of an insulation sheet (Fig. 5; the folding part 263 folds over the first insulating portion 261 to form a root, the overlapping portion, which is the only place where the two parts may be adhered).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery module taught by Egashira by incorporating an adhesive part at a root of an insulation sheet, as taught by Bai. This would be done because the root is the only place where the two parts may be adhered, as stated in Bai (Par. 0087, Fig. 5).
Egashira and Bai both additionally fail to teach the adhesive part being integrally formed with the insulation sheet.
However, the use of a one-piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in the combination of Egashira and Bai would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice (See MPEP 2144.04(V)(A)).
Claims 7 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egashira, in view of Ma et al. (CN 112838306 A).
Regarding claim 7, Egashira fails to teach a thickness range of the insulation sheet.
However, Ma teaches an insulating member (insulating member 30) with a thickness of 0.1-0.5 mm (Page 2, Par. 4; 50-200 μm corresponds to 0.05-0.2 mm, which overlaps the claimed range).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the insulation sheet taught by Egashira by providing it with a thickness range of 0.1-0.5 mm, as taught by Ma. This would be done in order to have a thin insulation sheet which ensures electrical stability while not increasing the module’s volume, as stated in Ma (Page 3, Par. 17).
Regarding claim 17, Egashira fails to teach an overlapping length of the insulation flange and the battery cell array which is greater than or equal to 5 mm. However, Egashira teaches an insulation flange which performs the same functions as the claimed insulation flange of insulating the gap between the top plate of the module and the side of the module. As the only difference between the overlap of the insulation flange and battery cell array of Egashira and the claimed overlap of the insulation flange and battery cell array is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed overlap, a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than that taught by Egashira. Thus, the claimed overlap is not patentably distinct from that of Egashira.
Egashira also fails to teach a thickness range of the insulation flange.
However, Ma teaches an insulating member (insulating member 30) with a thickness of 0.1-0.5 mm (Page 2, Par. 4; 50-200 μm corresponds to 0.05-0.2 mm, which overlaps the claimed range).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the insulation flange taught by Egashira by providing it with a thickness range of 0.1-0.5 mm, as taught by Ma. This would be done in order to have a thin insulation flange which ensures electrical stability while not increasing the module’s volume, as stated in Ma (Page 3, Par. 17).
Claims 10-11 & 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egashira, in view of Xu et al. (CN 217035868 U).
Regarding claim 10, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 4, wherein a housing of a battery cell of the battery cell array is covered with an insulation film (Par. 0028, “Each battery 14 has insulating film 26… Accordingly, insulating film 26 shrinks and covers two main surfaces, two side surfaces, and bottom surface 23”), and the insulation sheet protrudes above the insulation film (Par. 0062, “Biasing portions 53 protrude toward battery stack 2 above the upper surface of battery stack 2”; therefore, the biasing portion 53 would also protrude above the insulation film 26). Egashira fails to teach a window which is opened on the insulation film on the outer side of the battery cell array, where a surface of the battery cell housing is then bonded to the insulation layer.
However, Xu teaches a battery module (Page 3, Par. 6) comprising a battery cell array (cell assembly 10), wherein a housing of a battery cell (battery core 1) of the battery cell array is covered with an insulation film (Page 3, Par. 7), a window is opened on the insulation film of the battery cell on an outer side of the battery cell array (Page 3, Par. 7, a gap 11 is formed on the insulation film; Fig. 3), and a surface of the housing of the battery cell in the window is bonded to an insulation layer (Page 3, Par. 7, the battery cell 1 is bonded to a liquid cooling plate 2 through the gap 11; Page 3, Par.10, the liquid cooling plate is sprayed with a plastic spray layer for insulation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery module taught by Egashira by forming a window in the insulation film and bonding the battery cell housing to the insulation layer through the window, as taught by Xu. This would be done in order to improve the heat dissipation efficiency of the battery cells, as stated in Xu (Page 1, Par. 13 – Page 2, Par. 1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 10, wherein the battery cell array comprises a plurality of battery cells (plurality of batteries 14), and the insulation sheet blocks a position above each of the insulation films (Par. 0063, Fig. 7; the contact portions 53b of the biasing portions 53 abut against a top of each battery cell, blocking a region above the cells). Egashira fails to teach windows opened on the plurality of battery cells on a same side surface of the battery cell array.
However, Xu teaches windows opened on the plurality of battery cells on a same side surface of the battery cell array (Page 4, Par. 5; each battery has gaps 11 formed on both sides of the cell, thus the windows are opened on the same side surfaces of each cell in the battery cell array).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery module taught by Egashira by incorporating windows on the same side surfaces of the plurality of battery cells, as taught by Xu. This would be done in order to ensure uniform heat dissipation throughout the battery cell array, as stated in Xu (Page 5, Par. 3).
Regarding claim 18, Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 12, wherein a housing of a battery cell of the battery cell array is covered with an insulation film (Par. 0028, “Each battery 14 has insulating film 26… Accordingly, insulating film 26 shrinks and covers two main surfaces, two side surfaces, and bottom surface 23”), and the insulation flange at least partially covers the insulation film (Fig. 6, the flange extends over the battery cells, thus covering the film from above). Egashira fails to teach a window which is opened on the insulation film of the battery cell on the outer side of the battery cell array, and a surface of the housing of the battery cell in the window which is bonded to an inner wall of the side plate.
However, Xu teaches a battery module (Page 3, Par. 6) comprising a battery cell array (cell assembly 10), wherein a housing of a battery cell (battery core 1) of the battery cell array is covered with an insulation film (Page 3, Par. 7), a window is opened on the insulation film of the battery cell on an outer side of the battery cell array (Page 3, Par. 7, a gap 11 is formed on the insulation film; Fig. 3), and a surface of the housing of the battery cell in the window is bonded to an insulation layer (Page 3, Par. 7, the battery cell 1 is bonded to a liquid cooling plate 2 through the gap 11; Page 3, Par.10, the liquid cooling plate is sprayed with a plastic spray layer for insulation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery module taught by Egashira by forming a window in the insulation film and bonding the battery cell housing to the insulation layer through the window, as taught by Xu. This would be done in order to improve the heat dissipation efficiency of the battery cells, as stated in Xu (Page 1, Par. 13 – Page 2, Par. 1).
Regarding claim 19, modified Egashira teaches the battery module of claim 19, wherein the battery cell array comprises a plurality of the battery cells (plurality of batteries 14), the insulation flange extends along an arrangement direction of the battery cell array (Par. 0042, “Second portion 51 has a strip shape extending in stacking direction X”), so as to at least partially cover a position between the battery cells on the same side and the side plate (As the second portion 51 extends along the stacking direction, the piece covers the battery cells and positions between the cells). Egashira fails to teach windows which are opened on the plurality of battery cells on a same side surface of the battery cell array.
However, Xu teaches windows opened on the plurality of battery cells on a same side surface of the battery cell array (Page 4, Par. 5; each battery has gaps 11 formed on both sides of the cell, thus the windows are opened on the same side surfaces of each cell in the battery cell array).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery module taught by Egashira by incorporating windows on the same side surfaces of the plurality of battery cells, as taught by Xu. This would be done in order to ensure uniform heat dissipation throughout the battery cell array, as stated in Xu (Page 5, Par. 3).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egashira et al..
Regarding claim 16, Egashira fails to teach an angle between the inclined segment and top plate of 60° to 80°.
However, Egashira teaches that the second portion 51 extends in an inclined manner from the side of the module up to the bus bar plate 28. While Egashira is silent on the relative proportions of the angle between the two parts, the second portion 51 can be seen inclining at an approximate angle between 0° and 90°, which encompasses the claimed range of 60° to 80°. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON M BAIRD whose telephone number is (571)272-9742. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/CAMERON M BAIRD/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights