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 .
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 1-2, 4, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Kim D. et al. discloses:
PNG
media_image1.png
764
546
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In Figure 2 above, a battery pack ([0011] line 1) comprising a battery module frame 100, i.e. lower case, provided with an accommodating cavity with an opening ([0033]).
In Figure 2 above, a battery cell which is disposed within the accommodating cavity ([0033]).
In Figure 2 above, a busbar 500, which is electrically connected with a battery cell ([0033]).
In Figure 2 above, an upper housing 400, i.e. cover, which is covered on the lower case 100 (inherently seals opening) ([0033]) and comprises a through opening 410, i.e. hole ([0036]).
In Figure 2 above, a busbar 500 and internal bolt 600, i.e. conductive member, passes through the through hole 410 and extends out of the accommodating cavity ([0036]).
Regarding claim 2:
PNG
media_image2.png
478
470
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In Figure 3 above, a terminal 700, i.e. conductor terminal, which is detachably disposed on the busbar/internal bolt 500/600, i.e. conductive member ([0036]) has a fastening part, i.e. connection portion 710, with an upper protrusion part, i.e. extension portion 730, where the connection portion is inserted into the through hole 410, and the extension portion extends in a direction far away from the upper housing 400, i.e. cover ([0040], [0042]).
In Figure 3 above, the conductor terminal comprises a polygonal sealing part 720, i.e. stopping portion, disposed around a periphery of the conductor terminal 700 and the upper protrusion part, i.e. extension portion 730 and located between the connection portion and the extension portion and the polygonal sealing part 720, i.e. stopping portion, abuts against the upper housing 400, i.e. cover ([0041]).
Regarding claim 4:
Kim D. et al. discloses in Figure 3 above, a fastening part 710, i.e. connection portion, passes through the through opening 410, i.e. through hole, and a surface of the fastening part passing through the through opening is raised above a surface of the upper housing 400, i.e. cover.
Regarding claim 16:
Kim D. et al. discloses in Figure 2 above, a busbar 500 and internal bolt 600, i.e. conductive member, that passes through the through hole 410 and extends out of the accommodating cavity ([0036]).
Kim D. et al. also discloses in Figure 3 above, a busbar 500, i.e. conductive bar, is disposed on an inner surface of the upper housing 400, i.e. cover; the internal bolt 600, i.e. stud, extends out of the through opening 410; the fastening part 710, i.e. connection portion, is provided with a threaded hole; the fastening part 710 is threadedly connected with the internal bolt 600; and a surface of the fastening part 710 inserted into the through opening 410 abuts against the busbar 500 ([0042], [0043]).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) in view of Kim H. et al. (KR 20180058552 A). It is noted that the disclosures of Kim H. et al. are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claim 3:
Kim D. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. does not teach at least one sealing groove disposed between the stopping portion and the upper cover, and the sealing groove is disposed around the through hole; and a sealing ring is further disposed within each sealing groove.
PNG
media_image3.png
552
565
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kim H. et al. teaches in Figure 4 above a sealing groove disposed between a stopping portion and a terminal cover 410, i.e. upper cover, and the sealing groove is disposed around the through hole ([0068]) so the deterioration or corrosion of O-rings, i.e. sealing rings, can be prevented ([0021] lines 3-7).
Kim H. et al. also teaches that an O-ring 200, i.e. sealing ring, is further disposed within each sealing groove ([0050], [0068]) so the sealing performance can be improved ([0042] lines 10-11).
In light of the motivation for using a sealing groove disposed between a stopping portion and a terminal cover, where the sealing groove is disposed around the through hole, and an O-ring is further disposed within each sealing groove disclosed by Kim H. et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a sealing groove disposed between a stopping portion and a terminal cover, where the sealing groove is disposed around the through hole, and an O-ring is further disposed within each sealing groove in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. in order to prevent deterioration or corrosion of the O-rings and improve sealing performance.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1).
Regarding claim 5:
Kim D. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
PNG
media_image4.png
327
323
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kim discloses that the terminal is shaped to efficiently utilize space within the battery pack ([0045]). Further, from Figures 3-4 above, it is clear that the height of the fastening part of connection portion will affect how much the terminal will protrude above the through hole. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a terminal with a connection portion that has a height, including that claimed, that minimizes space occupied by the terminal as well as minimizes protrusion of the terminal above the through hole while still properly fastening with the internal bolt.
Claims 6-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1).
Regarding claims 6-7 and 9:
Kim D. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
Kim D. et al. also teaches a fastening part 710, i.e. connection portion, fastened on the busbar and internal bolt 500 and 600, i.e. conductive member. A screw thread may be formed on an outer surface of the body part 610, and the nut-shaped fastening part 710 may have a screw thread formed on an inner surface of the indentation structure into which the body part 610 is inserted, i.e. connection portion is provided with a threaded hole ([0043]).
However, Kim D. et al. does not teach a hexagonal socket hole.
PNG
media_image5.png
696
512
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Henderson et al. teaches in Figure 2b above, the top of an enclosure 152 further includes a terminal receptacle 154-1 . . . 154-2, each adapted to receive a corresponding terminal 140 and has a non-circular shape for engaging a corresponding shape on the terminal, such as a hex or square ([0027] lines 2-7).
Henderson et al. also teaches that the above prevents rotation and over-torquing of wires or logs attached to the terminals, as the top 152 absorbs rotational force on the terminals, rather than the underlying control layer 126 (e.g. circuit board) ([0027] lines 7-11).
In light of the motivation for using a hex shape on the terminal disclosed by Henderson et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a hex shape on the terminal in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. in order to prevent over-torquing of wires or logs attached to the terminal.
Alternatively, while the extension portion of the terminal of Kim D. et al. would necessarily have a hole, there is no disclosure that this hole is in the shape of a hexagonal socket. However, as the specification is silent to unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the shape of the hole of the extension portion of the terminal of Kim D. et al. based on routine experimentation, for the purpose of optimizing operation of said terminal. Such modifications would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. It has been held that a change in configuration of shape of a device is obvious, absent persuasive evidence that a particular configuration is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Further, the threaded hole and the hexagonal socket hole would necessarily extend and communicate between the two ends of the conductor terminal.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) in view of Kim H. et al. (KR 20180058552 A) alone or alternatively in further view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1). It is noted that the disclosures of Kim H. et al. are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claim 8:
Kim D. et al. in view of Kim H. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
Further, Kim D. et al. also teaches a fastening part 710, i.e. connection portion, fastened on the busbar and internal bolt 500 and 600, i.e. conductive member. A screw thread may be formed on an outer surface of the body part 610, and the nut-shaped fastening part 710 may have a screw thread formed on an inner surface of the indentation structure into which the body part 610 is inserted, i.e. connection portion is provided with a threaded hole ([0043]).
However, Kim D. et al. in view of Kim H. et al. does not teach a hexagonal socket hole.
PNG
media_image5.png
696
512
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Henderson et al. teaches in Figure 2b above, the top of an enclosure 152 further includes a terminal receptacle 154-1 . . . 154-2, each adapted to receive a corresponding terminal 140 and has a non-circular shape for engaging a corresponding shape on the terminal, such as a hex or square ([0027] lines 2-7).
Henderson et al. also teaches that the above prevents rotation and over-torquing of wires or logs attached to the terminals, as the top 152 absorbs rotational force on the terminals, rather than the underlying control layer 126 (e.g. circuit board) ([0027] lines 7-11).
In light of the motivation for using a hex shape on the terminal disclosed by Henderson et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a hex shape on the terminal in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. in view of Kim H. et al. in order to prevent over-torquing of wires or logs attached to the terminal.
Alternatively, while the extension portion of the terminal of Kim D. et al. would necessarily have a hole, there is no disclosure that this hole is in the shape of a hexagonal socket. However, as the specification is silent to unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the shape of the hole of the extension portion of the terminal of Kim D. et al. based on routine experimentation, for the purpose of optimizing operation of said terminal. Such modifications would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. It has been held that a change in configuration of shape of a device is obvious, absent persuasive evidence that a particular configuration is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Further, the threaded hole and the hexagonal socket hole would necessarily extend and communicate between the two ends of the conductor terminal.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1).
Regarding claim 10:
Kim D. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
Kim D. et al. also teaches a fastening part 710, i.e. connection portion, fastened on the busbar and internal bolt 500 and 600, i.e. conductive member. A screw thread may be formed on an outer surface of the body part 610, and the nut-shaped fastening part 710 may have a screw thread formed on an inner surface of the indentation structure into which the body part 610 is inserted, i.e. connection portion is provided with a threaded hole ([0043]).
However, Kim D. et al. does not teach a hexagonal socket hole.
PNG
media_image5.png
696
512
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Henderson et al. teaches in Figure 2b above, the top of an enclosure 152 further includes a terminal receptacle 154-1 . . . 154-2, each adapted to receive a corresponding terminal 140 and has a non-circular shape for engaging a corresponding shape on the terminal, such as a hex or square ([0027] lines 2-7).
Henderson et al. also teaches that the above prevents rotation and over-torquing of wires or logs attached to the terminals, as the top 152 absorbs rotational force on the terminals, rather than the underlying control layer 126 (e.g. circuit board) ([0027] lines 7-11).
In light of the motivation for using a hex shape on the terminal disclosed by Henderson et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a hex shape on the terminal in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. in order to prevent over-torquing of wires or logs attached to the terminal.
Alternatively, while the extension portion of the terminal of Kim D. et al. would necessarily have a hole, there is no disclosure that this hole is in the shape of a hexagonal socket. However, as the specification is silent to unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the shape of the hole of the extension portion of the terminal of Kim D. et al. based on routine experimentation, for the purpose of optimizing operation of said terminal. Such modifications would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. It has been held that a change in configuration of shape of a device is obvious, absent persuasive evidence that a particular configuration is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Further, the threaded hole and the hexagonal socket hole would necessarily extend and communicate between the two ends of the conductor terminal.
Claims 11-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1) and further in view of Tang (CN 107985050 A). It is noted that the disclosures of Tang are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claims 11-12 and 14:
Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. does not teach an extension length of the threaded hole ranging from 7 mm to 10 mm.
Tang teaches a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm ([0026] line 17).
Tang also teaches a threaded hole can form 4 to 5 threads to ensure mechanical performance (the number of threads can be increased according to actual needs), and the thread grade reaches 10.9 through surface treatment ([0026] lines 17-20).
In light of the motivation for using a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm disclosed by Tang as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. in order to ensure mechanical performance.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) in view of Kim H. et al. (KR 20180058552 A) alone or alternatively in further view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1) and further in view of Tang (CN 107985050 A). It is noted that the disclosures of Kim H. et al. and Tang are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claim 13:
Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. and further in view of Kim H. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. and further in view of Kim H. et al. does not teach an extension length of the threaded hole ranging from 7 mm to 10 mm.
Tang teaches a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm ([0026] line 17).
Tang also teaches a threaded hole can form 4 to 5 threads to ensure mechanical performance (the number of threads can be increased according to actual needs), and the thread grade reaches 10.9 through surface treatment ([0026] lines 17-20).
In light of the motivation for using a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm disclosed by Tang as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. and further in view of Kim H. et al. in order to ensure mechanical performance.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1) and further in view of Tang (CN 107985050 A). It is noted that the disclosures of Tang are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claim 15:
Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. does not teach an extension length of the threaded hole ranging from 7 mm to 10 mm.
Tang teaches a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm ([0026] line 17).
Tang also teaches a threaded hole can form 4 to 5 threads to ensure mechanical performance (the number of threads can be increased according to actual needs), and the thread grade reaches 10.9 through surface treatment ([0026] lines 17-20).
In light of the motivation for using a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm disclosed by Tang as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a threaded hole with a thread length of 7.5 mm in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. in order to ensure mechanical performance.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) in view of Kim K. et al. (US 20160372736 A1) and Suzuki et al. (JP 2020038808 A). It is noted that the disclosures of Kim K. et al. and Suzuki et al. are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claim 17:
Kim D. et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. does not teach an inner surface of the upper cover is provided with a limit groove, and the conductive bar is accommodated within the limit groove; and/or, a thickness of the conductive bar is greater than or equal to 1.2 mm.
Kim K. et al. teaches a terminal bolt and the bus bar may be placed on the center plate, and an insert groove, i.e. limit groove, may be formed in the center plate, i.e. upper cover. In addition, a part of the bus bar may be inserted into the insert groove of the center plate ([0065] lines 4-9).
Kim K. et al. also teaches that due to the above, even though a strong torque is applied to the terminal bolt, it is possible to prevent the terminal bolt and peripheral parts from being damaged or deformed ([0066] lines 11-15)
Suzuki et al. teaches a thickness of the bus bar may be 0.5 mm to 3 mm, in order to effectively dampen vibrations ([0017] lines 4-5).
In light of the motivation for using an insert groove in the center plate and a bus bar thickness of 0.5 mm to 3 mm disclosed by Kim K. et al. and Suzuki et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an insert groove in the center plate and a bus bar thickness of 0.5 mm to 3 mm in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. in order to prevent the terminal bolt and peripheral parts from being damaged or deformed and effectively dampen vibrations.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1) and further in view of Ma et al. (CN 109309267 A).
Regarding claims 18 and 19:
Kim D. et al alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. does not teach a sealing member disposed on the hexagonal socket hole.
Ma et al. teaches that the battery cell is sealed into the battery cell cavity via the socket and fills the socket, i.e. a sealing member disposed on the hexagonal socket hole, thereby sealing the battery cell cavity and preventing leakage of cooling fluid as it passes through the battery cell cavity ([0012], [0034]).
In light of the motivation for using a battery cell sealed into the battery cell cavity via the socket, filling the socket disclosed by Ma et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a battery cell sealed into the battery cell cavity via the socket, filling the socket, in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. in order to prevent leakage of cooling fluid as it passes through the battery cell cavity.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim D. et al. (EP 3843173 A1) in view of Kim H. et al. (KR 20180058552 A) alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. (US 20160172653 A1) and further in view of Ma et al. (CN 109309267 A).
Regarding claim 20:
Kim D. et al. in view of Kim H. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. teaches a battery pack as set forth above.
However, Kim D. et al. in view of Kim H. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. does not teach a sealing member is disposed on the hexagonal socket hole.
Ma et al. teaches that the battery cell is sealed into the battery cell cavity via the socket and fills the socket, i.e. a sealing member disposed on the hexagonal socket hole, thereby sealing the battery cell cavity and preventing leakage of cooling fluid as it passes through the battery cell cavity ([0012], [0034]).
In light of the motivation for using a battery cell sealed into the battery cell cavity via the socket, filling the socket disclosed by Ma et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a battery cell sealed into the battery cell cavity via the socket, filling the socket, in the battery pack of Kim D. et al. in view of Kim H. et al. alone or alternatively in view of Henderson et al. in order to prevent leakage of cooling fluid as it passes through the battery cell cavity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON E. BROWN whose telephone number is (571)775-5984. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 5712721123. 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.
/MADISON ELIZABETH BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1787
/CALLIE E SHOSHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights