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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and subspecies A1, B2 and C1 in the reply filed on 08/21/2026 is acknowledged.
Upon reconsideration, the species requirement with respect to the method of electrically connecting the flexible current collector is withdrawn {i.e. Species C}, and claim 16, noted in the Restriction (mailed 05/21/2026) to be directed to non-elected subspecies C2, is considered in the rejection(s) below.
Claims 8 – 10, 14 and 19 – 24 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, subspecies A2 – A4 and subspecies B2, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/21/2026. {Examiner note: Species A4 established in the previous Office was mistakenly noted to be directed to claim 8. Since claim 10 recites the structure corresponding species A4 established in the Restriction based on the embodiment described in [0013] and [0040] of the instant specification, claim 10 is withdrawn due to being directed to a non-elected species.}
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation, “wherein the flexible current collector comprises one or more layers, the layers comprising: a pressure sensitive adhesive layer, a conductive layer comprising a patter defining a plurality of conductive regions, and an isolation layer; and” is an incomplete sentence. Appropriate correction is required.
For the purpose of this Office action, the examiner is interpreting claim 13 to recite: –wherein the flexible current collector comprises one or more layers, the layers comprising: a pressure sensitive adhesive layer, a conductive layer comprising a patter defining a plurality of conductive regions, and an isolation layer.—which is an interpretation supported by Fig. 8b and [0066] of the instant specification.
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.
Claims 5 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, in Claims 5 – 6, the recitation “comprising a first battery using the same components to produce a second battery further comprising adding capacity by increasing the number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies” and “comprising a first battery using the same using the same components to produce a second battery further comprising reducing capacity by decreasing the number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies”, respectively, render the claims indefinite due to reciting both a product and a process of using the product in the same claim [See MPEP 2173.05(p)].
Additionally, the recitation “a first battery” and “a second battery” in claims 5 –6 makes it unclear if the limitation is referring to the previously recited battery or if the limitation is referring to additional batteries included with/in the previously claimed battery.
A review of the instant specification reveals that the components of the battery can be varied in order to produce a battery with a different capacity/voltage (See [0040] of the instant specification). As such, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of [0040] of the instant specification, the examiner is interpreting Claim 5 to recite –wherein a capacity of the battery is added to by increasing a number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies—, and the examiner is interpreting Claim 6 to recite – wherein a capacity of the battery is reduced by decreasing a number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies--.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, in Claim 7, the recitation “comprising a first battery further comprising a first current collector, further comprising using the same components and a second current collector comprising different conductive regions electrically connected to produce a second battery having a different voltage than said first battery” renders the claims indefinite due to reciting both a product and a process of using the product in the same claim [See MPEP 2173.05(p)].
Additionally, the recitation “a first battery” and “a second battery” in claim 7 makes it unclear if the limitation is referring to the previously recited battery or if the limitation is referring to additional batteries included with/in the previously claimed battery.
A review of the instant specification reveals that the components of the battery can be varied in order to produce a battery with a different capacity/voltage (See [040] of the instant specification). As such, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of [040] of the instant specification, the examiner is interpreting Claim 7 to recite – wherein the battery is a first battery comprising a first current collector and a voltage of the first battery is different from a voltage of a second battery comprising all the same components of the first battery except for, in the second battery, the current collector is a second current collector comprising electrically connected conductive regions that are different from the electrically connected conductive regions of the first current collector--.
Claims 11 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, in Claims 11 – 12, the recitation “comprising a first battery comprising a first current collector, further comprising using the same components to and a second current collector comprising different conductive regions electrically connected to produce a second battery having a different voltage and adding capacity by increasing the number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies” and “comprising a first battery using the same using the same components to produce a second battery further comprising reducing capacity by decreasing the number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies”, respectively, render the claims indefinite due to reciting both a product and a process of using the product in the same claim [See MPEP 2173.05(p)].
Additionally, the recitation “a first battery” and “a second battery” in claims 11 and 12 makes it unclear if the limitations are referring to the previously recited battery or if the limitations are referring to additional batteries included with/in the previously claimed battery.
A review of the instant specification reveals that the components of the battery can be varied in order to produce a battery with a different capacity/voltage (See [040] of the instant specification). As such, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of [040] of the instant specification the examiner is interpreting Claim 11 to recite – wherein a voltage of the first battery is different from a voltage of a second battery comprising all the same components of the first battery except for, in the second battery, the current collector is a second current collector comprising electrically connected conductive regions that are different from the electrically connected conductive regions of the first current collector and a capacity of the second battery is added to by increasing a number of cells in the first and/or second assemblies in the second battery—, and the examiner is interpreting Claim 12 to recite --wherein a voltage of the first battery is different from a voltage of a second battery comprising all the same components of the first battery except for, in the second battery, the current collector is a second current collector comprising electrically connected conductive regions that are different from the electrically connected conductive regions of the first current collector and a capacity of the second battery is reduced by decreasing a number of cells in the first and/or second assemblies in the second battery--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebreux (US PG Pub. 2021/0028516 A1, cited in Restriction mailed 05/21/2026) and Strutt (WO2021074571A1, cited in Restriction mailed 05/21/2026).
Regarding Claim 1, Lebreux discloses a battery (battery pack; Fig. 4, 10; [0052];[0056]) comprising cells electrically connected to form a group, that is Lebreux teaches the battery pack being from battery modules connected in series and one with ordinary skill in the art would recognize/appreciate a battery module to necessarily be a group of electrically connected cells ([Fig. 4, 12; [0052];[0056 – 0057];[0075]); and groups of cells that are electrically connected to form first and second subassemblies, that is Lebreux teaches each battery module being formed from more than one sub-module referred to as “bricks” that each include a plurality of battery cells that are electrically connected in parallel and thus provide the claimed structure of groups of cells electrically connected to form first and second subassemblies (Refer to the plurality of bricks 40 shown in the battery module in Figs. 4 – 5 and 7; [0075 – 0076]).
Each brick is taught to include electrical insulators 76 and 74 and the cells are disposed between and held within electrical insulators 76 and 74; therefore, Lebreux further discloses wherein the first and second subassembly comprise a lower tray {i.e. electrical insulator 76} and upper tray {i.e. electrical insulator 74} between which first/second groups of cells are disposed.
Lebreux further discloses wherein the first subassembly and second subassembly have first (Refer to top surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7) and second face (Refer to bottom surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7).
Lebreux teaches that the cells of each brick are connected via a positive and negative current collector and the negative current collector of one brick 40 is connected to the positive current collector of an adjacent brick and that each current collector is formed from a sheet of conductive material and possess a plurality of contact portions for conductively connecting the current collector to the positive/negative terminal of each cell ([0086 – 0071];[0075 – 0077]). As an alternate embodiment for the current collectors, Lebreux suggests having adjacent current collectors 88a and 84b of the bricks (refer to Fig. 7) be formed from a single conductive sheet folded in half ([0077]), and thus appears to suggest the battery including a flexible current collector comprising two or more conductive regions {i.e. portions for conductively connecting to terminals of the battery cells}, but does not explicitly disclose/show an embodiment of such a collector.
Strutt, directed to a battery pack including a plurality of battery modules including cylindrical battery cells (Figs. 1 – 3 and 4A-4B; pg. 11, lines 27 – 30; pg. 12, lines 1 – 15; and pg. 16, lines 25 – 28), teaches that having at least partially flexible current collectors connecting battery modules provides more reliable connections and increases resilience to torsional stress (Pg. 3, lines 5 – 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the current collectors from a single, foldable conductive sheet, and thus obtain a current collector that is flexible and thus within the claimed scope, because such modification would be (1) a modification that would make the two collector sheets integral with one another [See MPEP 2144.04(V)]; (2) is already recognized by the prior to provide a suitable current collector structure (Lebreux: [0077]); and (3), as taught by Strutt, would have a reasonable expectation of success in providing a battery module connection configuration that is more reliable and resilient to torsional stress.
As established above, the current collector of modified Lebreux, is formed of one conductive, foldable sheet (Lebreux: [0077]).The current collector functions to connect the bricks in parallel and further allows for the bricks to be connected in series so that the voltage of the battery module is the voltage of the sum of voltages of the bricks ([0075]); therefore, in modified Lebreux, the first and second subassemblies {i.e. bricks} are electrically connected to build voltage and the flexible current collector electrically connects the first and second subassemblies.
Further, as established above, Lebreux teaches that the positive and negative electrode terminals of the battery cells included in each brick are electrically connected to the positive electrode current collector and negative current collector via contact portions belonging to each respective collector ([0086 – 0071]). The contact portions of the positive current collector and the contact portions of the negative current collector, as established above, correspond to the claimed two or more conductive regions. Lebreux further teaches that a first bus bar 116 is connected to the positive current collector of the first brick to form a positive terminal 24 of the battery module and a third bus bar is connected negative current collector of another brick within the module to form the negative terminal of the module 22 ([0078 – 0080]), as such, modified Lebreux, which has the positive current collector and negative current collector formed from one folded sheet, provides the claimed structure of the battery comprising positive and negative terminals electrically connected to the first and second conductive regions and, respectively, to form positive and negative terminals of the battery (Also see the negative terminals 22 and positive terminals 21 in Figs. 1 and 4).
Modified Lebreux further discloses a battery management system (Lebreux: Fig. 4, 46; [0081]) electrically connected to the flexible current collector (Lebreux: [0086 – 0087]) and positive and negative terminals adapted to control the flow of energy through the battery {i.e. charge path} ([0078 – 00081];[0086]).
Additionally, the battery bricks, which include the current collectors of the battery, are taught to be accommodated in a battery module housing 48 (Fig. 4; [0056]); therefore, in modified Lebreux, the flexible current collector is disposed within a casing to provide environmental protection to the battery. {Examiner note: the limitation “to provide environmental protection” established an intended use for the housing. The Courts have held that if the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, the battery module housing in Lebreux is capable of performing the function of providing environmental protection because it is a structure that houses/ encloses the battery cell groups and current collector of Lebreux’s battery. See MPEP § 2114.}
Regarding Claim 13, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. In modified Lebreux, the current collector sheet is single folded sheet with electrical insulating layers included therebetween (Lebreux: Fig. 7; [0077]); therefore, modified Lebreux further includes the claimed structure of wherein the flexible current collector further comprises more than one layer (Lebreux [0077]), which is within the claimed scope of one or more layers, the layers comprising a conductive layer (Lebreux: Refer to layers 88a/84b in Fig. 7; [0077]) comprising a pattern defining a plurality of conductive regions (Lebreux: Refer to contact portions 90a/86b; [0070 – 0071];[0076 – 0077]) and an isolation layer (Lebreux: Refer to electrical insulators 94a/92b; [0076 – 0077]).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. Lebreux further discloses wherein the battery further comprises a case configured to contain one or more subassemblies (housing body 50, Fig. 4; [0056]); and a lid configured to create a seal between the lid and the case (lid 62, Fig. 4; [0056]).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebreux (US PG Pub. 2021/0028516 A1) and Strutt (WO2021074571A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lane (US PG Pub. 2014/0212695 A1) and Kang (US PG Pub. 2020/0203788 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. As established above, the current collector in modified Lebreux {i.e. corresponds to claimed flexible current collector} is a current collector sheet that is single folded sheet with electrical insulating layers included therebetween (Lebreux: Fig. 7; [0077]). Furthermore, the current collector is included between the first face of the first subassembly (Refer to top surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7) and the second face of the second subassembly (Refer to bottom surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7).
Therefore, Lebreux does not explicitly disclose electrically connecting the flexible current collector to the first faces of the first and second subassemblies.
Lane, also directed to cylindrical cell battery packs and thus analogous to Lebreux (Fig. 1; [0029 – 0031]), teaches a battery pack including an interconnected array of energy storage elements 105 that are electrically connected via a flexible printed circuit including three layers a flexible conductive layer 125 sandwiched between a flexible bottom insulating layer 130 and a flexible top insulating layer 135 and further teaches electrically connecting the terminals of the energy storage elements to flexible printed circuit at one end in order to enable a cooling system to be coupled to the other end ([0029 – 0030];[0032]). Lane further teaches that, by enabling such a configuration, cooling of the energy storage elements 105 is more efficient and that efficient cooling paradigm enables the construction and arrangement of modules and coolant loops within the enclosure to be redesigned, further improving certain of the supporting systems ([0032]).
Since Lebreux is also concerned with heat management of the battery cells ([0083]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the subassemblies of Lebreux to electrically connect to the flexible current collector via the same face {i.e. first face} and include a cooling system on the opposite face {i.e. second face}, as taught by Lane, with a reasonable expectation of success obtaining a battery pack structure with more efficient cooling structure.
Claims 3 – 4 and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebreux (US PG Pub. 2021/0028516 A1), Strutt (WO2021074571A1) and Lane (US PG Pub. 2014/0212695 A1), as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of and Kang (US PG Pub. 2020/0203788 A1).
Regarding Claim 3 – 4 and 17, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. In modified Lebreux as established above, the stacked subassemblies share a current collector and further each subassembly is electrically connected to the flexible current collector via the same face {i.e. first face}. Furthermore, in modified Lebreux, the second end face includes a cooling system (Lane: Fig. 1; [0029 – 0032]). Additionally, in Lebreux, the cells are shown to be stacked vertically (Figs. 4, 7, and 8 – 9; [0052]).
Cooling systems taught by Lane include coolant loops with heat exchangers, heat pumps, and the like ([0032]).
Modified Lebreux does not explicitly disclose the current collector and subassemblies being folded such that second faces of the first and second subassemblies are disposed in proximity to one another (Claim 3); a heatsink disposed between second faces of the first and second subassemblies (Claim 4); and wherein the flexible current collector comprises one or more bends such that the flexible current collector has a substantially “U” profile (Claim 17).
Kang, also directed to cylindrical cell battery packs and thus analogous to Lebreux (Figs. 7 – 9; [[0039 – 0042]), teaches a multilayer battery module structure in which first and second cylindrical battery cells 110, 120 are housed in separate first and second cell housings 160, 170 and stacked on top of one another vertically with a heatsink 130 interposed between the housings (Figs 1 – 3 and 5; [0040]). The inclusion of one heat sink between the stacked and separately housed cylindrical cell battery groups effectively dissipates the heat, taught by Kang to have a high accumulation rate in the boundary portion of the first and second cylindrical battery cells 110, 120, and prevent chain ignition ([0011];[0049 – 0050]). Additionally, the use of one heatsink to cool two groups of vertically stacked cells is taught by Kang to provide a battery pack with increased space efficiency ([0011]).
Since Lebreux is also concerned with heat management of the battery cells (Lebreux: [0083]) and, as established above, modified Lebreux includes cooling system structure on a second face of the stacked subassemblies (Lane: Fig. 1; [0029 – 0032]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cooling system of modified Lebreux’s electrically connected subassemblies include a shared heatsink, as taught by Kang, with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the desired effect of protecting the cells from getting too hot/thermal runaway during charging/discharging (Lebreux; [0083]) while also achieving increased space efficiency within the battery pack.
In modified Lebreux, the first faces of the subassemblies are electrically connected via the same current collector (Refer to rejection of claim 2 above); therefore, when further modifying Lebreux to include a shared heatsink between the second end faces of the electrically connected subassemblies, one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate/recognize that the flexible current collector would need to be extend and fold in a U-shape configuration to allow for the first faces of the subassemblies to be electrically connected to the same current collector and the second faces of the electrically connected subassemblies to include a heatsink interposed therebetween. As such, in modified Lebreux as established above, the current collector and subassemblies would necessarily need to be folded such that second faces of the first and second subassemblies are disposed in proximity to one another (Claim 3); a heatsink is disposed between second faces of the first and second subassemblies (Claim 4); and the flexible current collector comprises one bend such that the flexible current collector has a substantially “U” profile (Claim 17), and thus read on the structure of claims 3 – 4 and 17.
Claim(s) 5 – 6 and 15 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Lebreux (US PG Pub. 2021/0028516 A1) and Strutt (WO2021074571A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Capati (US PG Pub. 2020/0251710 A1).
Regarding Claim 5 – 6, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. Lebreux further teaches generally including 10 – 60 cells per brick {i.e. corresponds to subassembly} ([0061]).
Modified Lebreux does not explicitly disclose wherein a capacity of the battery is added to by increasing a number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies (Claim 5) or wherein a capacity of the battery is reduced by decreasing a number of cells in the first and/or second subassemblies (Claim 6).
Capati, also directed to battery block structures including a plurality of electrically connected cylindrical battery cells and thus analogous to Lebreux (Capati: Fig. 2; [0038];[0051 – 0053]), teaches that is well known in the art to determine the number of battery cells for a battery block based on the desired capacity of the battery block, and further that increasing the number of cylindrical battery cells allows for a greater capacity ([0022]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely increase or decrease the capacity of modified Lebreux by increasing/decreasing the number of cells included in the subassemblies of the battery, because, as indicated by Capati, it is known in art to do so to achieve, with a reasonable expectation of success, a predetermined capacity.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. As established above, the current collector in modified Lebreux {i.e. corresponds to claimed flexible current collector} is a current collector sheet that is single folded sheet with electrical insulating layers included therebetween (Lebreux: Fig. 7; [0077]). Furthermore, the current collector is included between the first face of the first subassembly (Refer to top surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7) and the second face of the second subassembly (Refer to bottom surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7).
Therefore, Lebreux does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrically the flexible current collector is electrically connected to first faces of the first and second subassemblies.
Capati, also directed to battery block structures including a plurality of electrically connected cylindrical battery cells and thus analogous to Lebreux (Capati: Fig. 2; [0038];[0051 – 0053]), further teaches a multi-layer current collector having at least one positive current collector layer (e.g., first current collector 205 of FIG. 2), at least one negative current collector layer (e.g., second current collector 215 of FIG. 2), and at least one isolation layer (e.g., isolation layer 210 of FIG. 2) disposed between the positive current collector layer and the negative current collector layer ([0033]). Capati further teaches mounting or coupling the current collector to the same end or surface of each of the battery cells in order to simplify the assembly process and reduce defects introduced during assembly ([0017]). Capati also teaches that such a current collector configuration is desirable because it decreases the part count of the battery block which, in turn, assists in reduce the defect rate of the battery pack including the block ([0017]).
Since Lebreux teaches a similar current collector structure and a battery pack including cylindrical battery cells that are electrically connected via the current collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the subassemblies of Lebreux to electrically connect to the flexible current collector via the same face {i.e. first face}, as taught by Capati, with a reasonable expectation of success in reducing the number of parts {i.e. current collector structures} required in modified Lebreux, simplifying the assembly process of the subassemblies and reducing defects introduced during assembly ([0017]).
Lebreux further teaches connecting the current collectors and battery terminals via ultrasonic or friction welding ([0068]). Generally, Lebreux teaches that other means of ensuring conductive connection can be used and exemplifies as an additional method, laser welding ([0068 – 0069]).
Modified Lebreux does not explicitly disclose wherein the flexible current collector is electrically connected to the first faces of the first and second subassemblies by wire bonding.
Capati, however, generally teaches that current collectors can be electrically connected to battery cells by welding or wire bonding ([0017]). Furthermore, Capati presents wire bonding as an alternative method to laser welding ([0020];[0058 – 0059];[0067];[0070])
Therefore, as Lebreux does not explicitly limit the method of electrical connection, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely use wire bonds for electrically connecting the battery cells and current collector in modified Lebreux, and thus obtain the claimed structure, with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the desired conductive connection.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. As established above, the current collector in modified Lebreux {i.e. corresponds to claimed flexible current collector} is a current collector sheet that is single folded sheet with electrical insulating layers included therebetween (Lebreux: Fig. 7; [0077]). Furthermore, the current collector is included between the first face of the first subassembly (Refer to top surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7) and the second face of the second subassembly (Refer to bottom surface of each brick 40 in Figs. 5 and 7).
Therefore, Lebreux does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrically the flexible current collector is electrically connected to first faces of the first and second subassemblies.
Capati, also directed to battery block structures including a plurality of electrically connected cylindrical battery cells and thus analogous to Lebreux (Capati: Fig. 2; [0038];[0051 – 0053]), further teaches a multi-layer current collector having at least one positive current collector layer (e.g., first current collector 205 of FIG. 2), at least one negative current collector layer (e.g., second current collector 215 of FIG. 2), and at least one isolation layer (e.g., isolation layer 210 of FIG. 2) disposed between the positive current collector layer and the negative current collector layer ([0033]). Capati further teaches mounting or coupling the current collector to the same end or surface of each of the battery cells in order to simplify the assembly process and reduce defects introduced during assembly ([0017]). Capati also teaches that such a current collector configuration is desirable because it decreases the part count of the battery block which, in turn, assists in reduce the defect rate of the battery pack including the block ([0017]).
Since Lebreux teaches a similar current collector structure and a battery pack including cylindrical battery cells that are electrically connected via the current collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the subassemblies of Lebreux to electrically connect to the flexible current collector via the same face {i.e. first face}, as taught by Capati, with a reasonable expectation of success in reducing the number of parts {i.e. current collector structures} required in modified Lebreux, simplifying the assembly process of the subassemblies and reducing defects introduced during assembly ([0017]).
Lebreux further teaches connecting the current collectors and battery terminals via ultrasonic or friction welding ([0068]). Generally, Lebreux teaches that other means of ensuring conductive connection can be used and exemplifies as an additional method, laser welding ([0068 – 0069]).
Modified Lebreux does not explicitly disclose an embodiment wherein the flexible current collector is electrically connected to the first faces of the first and second subassemblies by laser welding.
However, since Lebreux presents laser welding as a viable alternative to friction/ultrasonic welding, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely select laser welding as a method for electrically connecting the battery cells and current collector in modified Lebreux, and thus obtain the claimed structure, with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the desired conductive connection.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebreux (US PG Pub. 2021/0028516 A1) and Strutt (WO2021074571A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mujeeb (US PG Pub. 2009/0297892 A1).
Regarding Claims 7, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. In Lebreux, the voltage of each battery module {i.e. corresponds to battery} included in the battery pack is a sum of the voltages of each brick {i.e. corresponds to subassembly} included within the battery module ([0075]). By teaching a battery pack including multiple battery modules and by teaching that each brick in the battery module includes a current collectors for the purpose of obtaining a particular voltage ([0052];[0075]), modified Lebreux provides the claimed structure of wherein the battery is a first battery comprising a first current collector and further the claimed structure of a second battery comprising a second current collector.
Modified Lebreux does not explicitly disclose wherein a voltage of the first battery is different from a voltage of a second battery comprising all the same components of the first battery except for, in the second battery, the current collector is a second current collector comprising electrically connected conductive regions that are different from the electrically connected conductive regions of the first current collector.
Mujeeb, also directed to cylindrical cell battery modules and thus analogous to Lebreux (Fig. 3a; [0060 – 0061]), teaches that the voltage of the battery module is dependent on the configurations of the electrical connections of the cells by the buss bars ([0006]). Mujeeb further teaches that different configuration may provide different voltages ([0006]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely obtain a second battery with a different voltage in modified Lebreux by using a current collector having different electrically connected conductive regions, and thus obtain the claimed first and second battery, because, as suggested by Mujeeb, it is known in art to use different electrical connection configurations to achieve, with a reasonable expectation of success, predetermined, different voltages.
Claim(s) 11 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebreux (US PG Pub. 2021/0028516 A1) and Strutt (WO2021074571A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mujeeb (US PG Pub. 2009/0297892 A1) and Capati (US PG Pub. 2020/0251710 A1).
Regarding Claims 11 – 12, modified Lebreux discloses all limitation as set forth above. In Lebreux, the voltage of each battery module {i.e. corresponds to battery} included in the battery pack is a sum of the voltages of each brick {i.e. corresponds to subassembly} included within the battery module ([0075]). By teaching a battery pack including multiple battery modules and by teaching that each brick in the battery module includes a current collectors for the purpose of obtaining a particular voltage ([0052];[0075]), modified Lebreux provides the claimed structure of wherein the battery is a first battery comprising a first current collector and further the claimed structure of a second battery comprising a second current collector.
Modified Lebreux does not explicitly disclose wherein a voltage of the first battery is different from a voltage of a second battery comprising all the same components of the first battery except for, in the second battery, the current collector is a second current collector comprising electrically connected conductive regions that are different from the electrically connected conductive regions of the first current collector and a capacity of the second battery is added to by increasing a number of cells in the first and/or second assemblies in the second battery (Claim 11) or wherein a voltage of the first battery is different from a voltage of a second battery comprising all the same components of the first battery except for, in the second battery, the current collector is a second current collector comprising electrically connected conductive regions that are different from the electrically connected conductive regions of the first current collector and a capacity of the second battery is reduced by decreasing a number of cells in the first and/or second assemblies in the second battery (Claim 12).
Mujeeb, also directed to cylindrical cell battery modules and thus analogous to Lebreux (Fig. 3a; [0060 – 0061]), teaches that the voltage of the battery module is dependent on the configurations of the electrical connections of the cells by the buss bars ([0006]). Mujeeb further teaches that different configuration may provide different voltages ([0006]).
Capati, also directed to battery block structures including a plurality of electrically connected cylindrical battery cells and thus analogous to Lebreux (Capati: Fig. 2; [0038];[0051 – 0053]), further teaches a multi-layer current collector having at least one positive current collector layer (e.g., first current collector 205 of FIG. 2), at least one negative current collector layer (e.g., second current collector 215 of FIG. 2), and at least one isolation layer (e.g., isolation layer 210 of FIG. 2) disposed between the positive current collector layer and the negative current collector layer ([0033]). Capati further teaches mounting or coupling the current collector to the same end or surface of each of the battery cells in order to simplify the assembly process and reduce defects introduced during assembly ([0017]). Capati also teaches that such a current collector configuration is desirable because it decreases the part count of the battery block which, in turn, assists in reduce the defect rate of the battery pack including the block ([0017]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely obtain a second battery with a different voltage and further a second battery with increased/decreased capacity in modified Lebreux, by using current collector with different electrically connected conductive regions and increasing/decreasing the number of cells in the subassemblies, because, as suggested by Mujeeb, it is known in art to use different electrical connection configurations to achieve, with a reasonable expectation of success, a predetermined voltage, and, as suggested by Capati it is known in art to, with a reasonable expectation of success, obtain a predetermined capacity by increasing/decreasing the number of the cells.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 at (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.
/A.Y.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights