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 Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: L3-4 of the claim should recite “wherein the plurality of the profile elements are .
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.
Claims 19-20 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.
The term “substantially” in Claim 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “the profile element has an L-shaped form”.
The term “substantially” in Claim 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “the outer wall is hollow-cylindrical”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-12, 16, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US PGPub 2009/0092894 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Kim discloses in Figs. 1-3B a battery cell housing for a battery cell (100) of an electrical storage device (battery module) ([0014], [0034]), the battery cell housing comprising:
an interior space designed for arranging cell elements (110) of the battery cell (100) ([0034]);
an outer wall (120) at least partially surrounding the interior space ([0034]);
a cover element (143) terminating the interior space, an electrical terminal (143a) of the battery cell (100) being disposed on the cover element (143) ([0034], [0038]),
a profile element (150) being arranged on the outer wall (120) of the battery cell housing such that the profile element (150) at least partially projects beyond the cover element (143) (Figs. 5-6, [0047]).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Kim discloses wherein the battery cell housing is for a battery cell (100) of an electrical storage device (battery module) ([0014], [0034]), such is capable of being used in an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Kim reads on the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 12, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (150) has a form of a cylinder encircling the cover element (143) (Figs. 1-3B).
Regarding Claim 16, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (150) is formed separately from the outer wall (120) (Figs. 2 and 5-6).
Regarding Claim 20, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the outer wall (120) is hollow-cylindrical (Fig. 1, [0034]).
Regarding Claim 21, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a battery cell (100) of an electrical storage device (battery module), the battery cell (100) comprising at least one battery cell housing as set forth above ([0014], [0034]).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Kim discloses a battery cell (100) of an electrical storage device (battery module) ([0014], [0034]), such is capable of being used in an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Kim reads on the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 22, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell (100) is in a form of a round cell (Figs. 1-3B).
Claims 11-14, 16, and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lejosne et al. (JP 2019-145490 A, see also the provided EPO machine generated English translation).
Regarding Claim 11, Lejosne discloses in Figs. 34-37 a battery cell housing for a battery cell (A) of an electrical storage device (battery pack) ([0083]), the battery cell housing comprising:
an interior space designed for arranging cell elements of the battery cell (A) (e.g. [0081]);
an outer wall (6) at least partially surrounding the interior space ([0174]);
a cover element (9) terminating the interior space, an electrical terminal (5) of the battery cell (A) being disposed on the cover element (9) ([0174], [0181]);
a profile element (54 or 58) being arranged on the outer wall (6) of the battery cell housing such that the profile element (54 or 58) at least partially projects beyond the cover element (9) ([0224], [0228]).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “ for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Lejosne discloses wherein the battery cell housing is for a battery cell (A) of an electrical storage device (battery pack) ([0083]), such is capable of being used in an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Lejosne reads on the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 12, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (54) has a form of a cylinder encircling the cover element (9) (Fig. 34).
Regarding Claim 13, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a plurality of the profile elements (58), wherein the plurality of profile elements (58) are arranged annularly around the cover element (9) (Fig. 34-35).
Regarding Claim 14, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a plurality of the profile elements (58), wherein a respective profile element (58) has a form of a crenellation (Fig. 34-35).
Regarding Claim 16, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (54 or 58) is formed separately from the outer wall (6) (Fig. 34-35).
Regarding Claim 20, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the outer wall (6) is hollow-cylindrical (Fig. 35, [0174]).
Regarding Claim 21, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a battery cell (A) of an electrical storage device (battery pack), the battery cell (A) comprising at least one battery cell housing as set forth above ([0083]).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Lejosne discloses a battery cell (A) of an electrical storage device (battery pack) ([0083]), such is capable of being used in an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Lejosne reads on the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 22, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell is in a form of a round cell (Figs. 34-35).
Regarding Claim 23, Lejosne discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell comprises a lithium-ion battery cell ([0081]).
Claims 11-12, 16, and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Poirier et al. (US Patent No. 6,037,071),
Regarding Claim 11, Poirier discloses in Fig. 1 and 7-8 a battery cell housing (C4, L13-14), the battery cell housing comprising:
an interior space designed for arranging cell elements of the battery cell (C4, L13-21);
an outer wall (90) at least partially surrounding the interior space (C4, L13-21);
a cover element (80) terminating the interior space, an electrical terminal (20) of the battery cell being disposed on the cover element (80) (C4, L22-60);
a profile element (30) being arranged on the outer wall (90) of the battery cell housing such that the profile element (30) at least partially projects beyond the cover element (80) (Figs. 1 and 8, C4, L22-60).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Poirier discloses wherein the battery cell housing is for a battery cell (C4, L13-14), such is capable of being used in an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Poirier reads on the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 12, Poirier discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (30) has a form of a cylinder encircling the cover element (80) (Figs. 1 and 8).
Regarding Claim 16, Poirier discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (30) is formed separately from the outer wall (90) (e.g. Figs. 1 and 8).
Regarding Claim 20, Poirier discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the outer wall (90) is hollow-cylindrical (Fig. 8 and C4, L3-17).
Regarding Claim 21, Poirier discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a battery cell, the battery cell comprising at least one battery cell housing as set forth above (Figs. 1 and 7-8, C4, L13-14).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Poirier discloses a battery cell (Fig. 8 and C4, L3-17), such is capable of being used in an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Poirier reads on the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 22, Poirier discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell is in the form of a round cell (Fig. 8 and C4, L3-17).
Regarding Claim 23, Poirier discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell comprises a lithium-ion battery cell (C4, L61-63).
Claims 11-12, 16-17, and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US PGPub 2004/0121229 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Kim discloses in Figs. 2-4 a battery cell housing for a battery cell (20) ([0027]), the battery cell housing comprising:
an interior space designed for arranging cell elements (21) of the battery cell (20) ([0028], [0034]);
an outer wall (22) at least partially surrounding the interior space ([0033]-[0034]]);
a cover element (260) terminating the interior space, an electrical terminal (210) of the battery cell (20) being disposed on the cover element (260) ([0035], [0037]),
a profile element (220) being arranged on the outer wall (22) of the battery cell housing such that the profile element (220) at least partially projects beyond the cover element (230) ([0041]).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Kim discloses wherein the battery cell housing is for a battery cell (20) ([0027]), such is capable of being used in an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Kim reads on the limitation “for a battery cell of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 12, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (220) has a form of a cylinder encircling the cover element (230) (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 16, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (220) is formed separately from the outer wall (22) (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 17, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein an electrically insulating element (270) is disposed between the profile element (220) and the outer wall (22) (Fig. 3, e.g. see the gasket 270 disposed between the profile element 220 and the outer wall 22 in a vertical direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
535
1063
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the outer wall has a notch (40) around a circumference thereof in a region of the cover element (230) and, the profile element (220) has a L-shaped form and engages in the notch (40) with one arm of the L-shaped form as support (Fig. 3, [0041], [0045]).
Regarding Claim 20, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the outer wall (22) is hollow-cylindrical (Fig. 2, [0033]-[0034]).
Regarding Claim 21, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a battery cell (20), the battery cell (20) comprising at least one battery cell housing as set forth above ([0027]).
The Examiner notes that the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because Kim discloses a battery cell (20) ([0027]), such is capable of being used in an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle and therefore Kim reads on the limitation “of an electrical storage device of an at least partially electric motor vehicle”.
Regarding Claim 22, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell (20) is in a form of a round cell (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 23, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the battery cell (20) comprises a lithium-ion battery cell ([0028]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poirier et al. (US Patent No. 6,037,071), as applied to Claim 11 above.
Regarding Claim 15, Prior discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (30) is formed separately from the outer wall (90) (e.g. Figs. 1 and 8).
Consequently, Poirier does not disclose wherein the profile element is integrally formed with the outer wall.
The Examiner notes that the MPEP states "that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice, see MPEP 2144.04(V)(B).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the profile element integrally with the outer wall, as such is merely a matter of an obvious engineering choice, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the cover member desired by Poirier.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US PGPub 2009/0092894 A1), as applied to Claim 11 above, and further in view of Ranzinger et al. (DE 10-2017-202990 A1, see also the provided English translation).
Regarding Claim 18, Kim discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the profile element (150) comprises a material that is electrically insulating ([0047]) and therefore Kim discloses a desire for electrical insulation between the outer wall (120) and the profile element (150).
However, Kim does not disclose wherein the battery cell housing has an insulation monitoring device designed to monitor electrical insulation between the outer wall and the profile element.
Ranzinger teaches an insulating monitoring device designed to monitor electrical insulation in order to prevent a short circuit or fire from occurring if an insulation fault occurs ([0014]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize an insulation monitoring device in the battery cell housing of Kim, as taught Razinger, wherein the insulation monitoring device is designed to monitor electrical insulation between the outer wall of Kim and the profile element Kim, as desired by Kim, in order to prevent a short circuit or fire from occurring if an insulation fault occurs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US PGPub 2008/0085447 A1) teaches in Fig. 1 a battery cell housing for a battery cell (100) comprising a profile element (129) being arranged on an outer wall (120) of the battery cell housing such that the profile element (129) at least partially projects beyond a cover element (142).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY WYLUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 AM - 3 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights