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 4 objected to because of the following informalities: “the width direction” should read as “in the width direction”. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shin et al. (PGPub 2025/0174803).
Considering Claim 1, Shin discloses a battery pack for a vehicle (battery pack [Abstract, Figure 1], battery pack improves space utilization [0023] for a higher energy density [0006], the claiming of a vehicle in conjunction with battery pack is considered to be an intended use of the claimed battery pack. This intended use provides no mechanical, structural, or composition limitation beyond the claimed battery pack in Claim 1. Therefore, due to the lack of a mechanical or structural claim limitation, the claiming of a vehicle offers no patentable weight in view of the prior art of record. (In re Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999), MPEP 2111.02)), the battery pack comprising:
a lower casing (base plate 110 of pack case 100 [0050, Figure 2]) including a plurality of battery modules positioned in a longitudinal direction (plurality of battery cell units 210 each having a plurality of cell laminates 212 each positioned in a longitudinal direction [0052, Figure 2]), wherein a terminal part of a first battery module of the plurality of battery modules and a terminal part of a second battery module of the plurality of batter modules face each other in a width direction (leads protrude from the cell laminates 212 [0052], busbar frame assembly 214 corresponds to and connects leads [0053], plates of busbar frame assembly 214 face each other in a width direction [Figures 1 and 2], so corresponding and connected leads face each other in a width direction);
a first cross member crossing the lower casing in the width direction, and inserted between two adjacent battery modules in the longitudinal direction (first cross beam 220 and fitted dummy cross beam 250 inserted between adjacent battery modules 210 in longitudinal direction [0066, Figures 1 and 2]); and
a second cross member crossing the lower casing in the longitudinal direction (longitudinally oriented busbar assembly 214 [Figures 1 and 2]), fastened to an upper end of the first cross member (busbar assembly 214 is coupled and fixed to cross beams 220 by bolts or the like [0060, Figures 1 and 2]) so as to be positioned between adjacent battery modules in the width direction (busbar assembly 214 positioned between battery modules 210 in width direction [Figures 1 and 2]), and electrically connected to a terminal part of each of the adjacent battery modules (leads protrude from the cell laminates 212 [0052], busbar frame assembly 214 corresponds to and mechanically and electrically connects leads [0053, Figures 1 and 2]).
Considering Claim 2, Shin discloses that the adjacent battery modules in the width direction are spaced apart from each other by a predetermined distance to form a gap space, and the second cross member is positioned in an upper portion of the gap space (battery modules 210 have preset gap in width direction [Figures 1 and 2], bus bar assembly 214 positioned along whole gap space [Figures 1 and 2]).
Considering Claim 3, Shin discloses that the upper end of the first cross member has an indentation part having a depressed form, and the indentation part is formed at the second cross member, and the second cross member is placed in the indentation part and is fastened to the first cross member (dummy cross member 250 and first cross beam 220 have depressed indentations that correspond to inserted bus bar assembly 214 [Figures 1 and 2], busbar assembly 214 is coupled and fixed to cross beams 220 by bolts or the like [0060, Figures 1 and 2]).
Considering Claim 4, Shin discloses that the second cross member covers the gap space formed between the adjacent battery modules in the width direction (busbar assembly 214 covers gap space in width direction [Figures 1 and 2]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-14 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 5, Shin discloses that the busbar assembly 214 makes up the totality of the claimed second cross member [Figures 1 and 2], so even if one of ordinary skill in the art were to connect a sensing device to the busbar assembly 214 to provide a sensing function, the combination would not provide a second cross member comprising a sensing device and a high-voltage bus bar as required by the claims. Shin discloses that the cross beams provide a solid fixed state for the battery cell assemblies, and they reduce the number of assembly processes, components, and weight of the battery pack [0022, 0023].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P DOMONE whose telephone number is (571)270-7582. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 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, 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P DOMONE/Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights