DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-13 are currently pending. The amended claim 5 is allowed. The amended claim 1 does overcome the previously stated 103 rejections and double patenting rejections. However, upon further consideration, claims 1-4 and 6-13 are rejected under the following new 103 rejection. This action is made FINAL as necessitated by the amendment.
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 1-4 and 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golubkov (EP 3327817) in view of Hidaka (WO 2018/142809 A1) using (US 2021/0143505) as an equivalent English translation, and further in view of Koehler et al et al (US 2015/0236312).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 6, and 7, Golubkov discloses a battery system “100” (battery module) comprising: 5a plurality of cell stacks, each of the cell stacks comprising:
a plurality of battery cells “80” (unit cells) arranged in a first direction; and
a first layer “61” (insulation member), made of an insulating plastic material, around the plurality of battery cells; and
a [battery system case “101” + case “93”] (module housing), in which a plurality of receiving parts are provided, each of the cell stacks from among the plurality of cell stacks being located in a receiving part from 10among the plurality of receiving parts,
wherein each of the receiving parts comprises submodule side plates “92” (fixing wall), the submodule side plates being around the cell stacks received therein and being in contact with the cell stacks,
wherein the case “93” comprises submodule front plates “91” (end walls) comprising a first front plate “91” (first end wall) and a second front plate “91” (second end wall) at respective sides of each of the receiving parts in the first direction to engage end surfaces of respective sides of the 15cell stacks received in the respective receiving part in the first direction,
wherein the first front plate “91” faces an sidewall “102” (outer wall) of the module housing and is spaced apart from the sidewall along the first direction, defining a first space between the first front plate and the sidewall, the sidewall is integral to the floor surface of the module housing ([0050]-[0052] and Fig. 3 and 5);
wherein each of the battery submodule “90” (cell stacks) further comprises a pair of submodule front plates “91” (end supports) at opposite end portions thereof in the first direction 20and having end surfaces corresponding to the end surfaces of the respective battery submodule ([0050] and Fig. 3).
However, Golubkov does not expressly teach end walls that are curved outwardly such that central portions thereof are located further from the end surfaces of the cell 15stacks than other portions of the end walls, defining a third space between the respective end surface and the respective end wall (claim 1).
Hidaka discloses reinforcing plates “52” (end walls) that are curved outwardly such that central portions “54” thereof are located further from the end surfaces of the cell 15stacks “20A” than other portions “53” of the reinforcing plates, defining a third space between the respective end surface and the respective reinforcing plate ([0058] and Fig. 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Golubkov battery module to include end walls that are curved outwardly such that central portions thereof are located further from the end surfaces of the cell 15stacks than other portions of the end walls, defining a third space between the respective end surface and the respective end wall in order to utilize end walls that allow for local expansion of the battery cell due to deterioration of the electrode assembly ([0058]).
However, Golubkov as modified by Hidaka does not expressly teach an outer surface of the end wall comprises a plurality of first ribs, wherein the plurality of first ribs extend in a third direction of the end wall and are spaced apart from each other in a second direction, wherein the plurality of first ribs extend from the floor surface in the third direction (claim 1); wherein the end support comprises a plurality of second ribs that protrude toward the end wall from the end surface (claim 6); wherein the plurality of second ribs are 10spaced apart from each other in a third direction of the end support in a lattice shape (claim 7).
Koehler et al teaches the concept of forming a rib structure (first ribs / second ribs) along the entire length of end wall “19”,”20” (end support), wherein the rib structure runs vertically (extend in third direction) of the end wall and the base (floor) and are spaced apart from each other in a second direction that is perpendicular to a first direction ([0044] and Figs. 1 and 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Golubkov/Hidaka battery module to include an outer surface of the end wall comprises a plurality of first ribs; wherein the plurality of first ribs extend in a third direction of the end wall and are spaced apart from each other in the second direction, wherein the plurality of first ribs extend from the floor surface in the third direction; wherein the end support comprises a plurality of second ribs that protrude toward the end wall from the end surface in order to impart a high degree of rigidity to the module housing ([0044]). In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Golubkov/Hidaka/Koehler battery module to include plurality of second ribs that are 10spaced apart from each other in a third direction of the end support in a lattice shape because the shape of the ribs is an obvious matter of design choice which one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to make in order to further improve the rigidity of the module housing (Concrete Unlimited Inc. v. Cementcraft Inc. 227 USPQ 784 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Kuhle 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Regarding claim 2, Golubkov also discloses a battery system case (module housing) further comprises a separation wall (not labeled) that extends in the first direction and partitions an inner space surrounded by sidewall “102” (outer wall) of the battery system case to form adjacent ones of the plurality of receiving parts along a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, and wherein the separation wall corresponds to a part of the fixing wall “102” of the adjacent ones of the plurality of receiving parts, and wherein the separation wall contacts a side surface of the respective battery submodules 25received in the adjacent ones of the plurality of receiving parts, the separation wall being integral with the floor surface of the module housing (Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
650
850
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Golubkov also discloses front plates “91” (end walls) comprise a first end wall “91” and a second end wall “91”, and -32-1164811wherein the first end wall faces the outer wall “102” of the battery module case and is spaced apart from the outer wall along the first direction, defining a first space between the first end wall and the outer wall (Fig. 5); wherein a first receiving part and a second receiving part from among the plurality of receiving parts are arranged along the first direction in the inner space of the battery module case, and wherein the second end walls of the first receiving part and the second receiving 10part are spaced apart from each other and face each other, defining a second space between the second end walls of the first and second receiving parts (Fig. 5).
Regarding claims 8 and 13, Koehler et al also discloses a battery tray (module housing) that is produced by a process such as injection module which would necessarily result in the separation wall, the end walls, and the outer wall being integral with the (base) floor surface of the battery tray ([0015]).
Regarding claims 915999 and 10, Golubkov also discloses cooling tubes “99” (cooling channel) under a floor surface of the battery module case, the cooling tubes being configured to accommodate a flow of coolant; wherein lateral walls of the cooling 20channel are integral with the floor surface of the battery module case ([0053]).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Golubkov also discloses a battery system case further comprising coupling parts “103”, wherein the coupling parts of the battery system case are capable of being coupled to coupling parts of an 25adjacent battery system case; wherein the coupling parts are at a first outer wall and a second outer wall of the battery system case in a second direction, and -34-1164811wherein a coupling part of the coupling parts at the second outer wall of the battery system case is configured to be coupled to a coupling part of the coupling parts at a first outer wall of the adjacent battery system case (Fig. 5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is allowed.
The reasons for allowance as set forth in the parent application no. 16/656,190 is also applicable to claim 5 of the present application.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY S CHUO whose telephone number is (571)272-0717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:30pm.
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 Leong can be reached on 571-270-1292. 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.
/T.S.C/Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 9/13/2026
Prosecution Insights