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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 11/06/2024 was received and has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the jig and corresponding support leg of the jig as referenced by claims 1 and 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 12 – lower housing. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (U.S. 20190131596).
With respect to claim 1, Yang discloses a battery module housing (120 – U-shaped frame member 150 – top cover plate, 160, 162 – side cover plates) (Fig. 2) comprising:
an upper housing (150), a lower housing (bottom of U-shaped plate 120), a front housing (front side of U-shaped pate 120), and a rear housing (rear side of U-shaped plate 120), respectively disposed on upper, lower, front, and rear surfaces of a plurality of battery cells (50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62, 64, 66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76, 78, 80 - herein referred to as “50 …”) along peripheries thereof (Fig. 2 and Fig. 8), the battery cells (50…) being in surface-contact with each other and arranged in one direction (Fig. 8);
a pair of side housings (160, 162) each disposed to be adjacent to and surrounding a cell lead (cell terminals) protruding from either end of each battery cell in a length direction (Fig. 2 and 6-8; [0063]); and
a sensing busbar assembly (140, 142 – interconnect assembly) disposed between the side housings (160, 162) and the cell leads (Fig. 6-8; [0063]), and connecting the plurality of cell leads to each other (via interconnect members 662, 664, 666, 668, 670, 672, 674( herein referred to as “662…”), 862, 864, 866, 868, 870, 872, 874, 876 (herein referred to as “862…”) of interconnect assemblies 14, 142 - Fig. 11, Figs. 15-16, Figs. 20-21, [0075], [0091]),
wherein the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) includes a jig hole (hole into which coupling members 760, 762, 764, 766, 768, 770, 960, 962, 964, 966, 968, 970 are inserted into, specifically shown in Figs. 9-10, labeled in Fig. 9 below in reference to assembly 140, however Fig. 10 for assembly 142 is the same) into which a jig (760, 762, 764, 766, 768, 770 (herein referred to as “460…”) and 960, 962, 964, 966, 968, 970 (herein referred to as “960…”) for supporting the sensing busbar assembly (140 and 142) is configured to be inserted (Figs. 9-10, 15-16, and 20-21).
PNG
media_image1.png
495
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Yang discloses the jig hole (labeled) has a predetermined depth formed in a direction parallel to a height of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) (Fig. 9 – above, Fig. 10, Fig. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
With respect to claim 3, Yang discloses the depth of the jig hole (labeled) corresponds to a height of a support leg of the jig (760…) (Fig. 9 – above).
With respect to claim 4, Yang discloses a plurality of jig holes (labeled) are provided (Fig. 9 – above), and
wherein among the plurality of jig holes (labeled), at least one jig hole is formed in each of upper and lower ends of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10, Fig. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21), and the jig holes (labeled) are spaced apart from each other by a predetermined distance in a direction vertical to a depth direction of the jig holes (labeled) (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10, Fig. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
With respect to claim 5, Yang discloses wherein among the plurality of jig holes (labeled), predetermined jig holes (labeled) disposed in each of the upper and lower ends of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) are aligned in the vertical direction (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10, Fig. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
With respect to claim 6, Yang discloses the jig hole (labeled) is formed in a surface of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) that is in contact with the battery cells (110) (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10), and the jig hole (labeled) is disposed between the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) and the battery cells (110) (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 7, Yang discloses the jig hole (labeled) is formed in a surface of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) that is in contact with the battery cells (110) (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10), and the jig hole (labeled) is formed in a direction perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the battery cells (110) (Fig. 9 above, Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 8, Yang discloses the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) includes a plurality of cell lead join parts (662…, 862…) arranged to be parallel to each other in a direction vertical to the length direction (Figs. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21), each cell lead join part (662…, 862…) being formed on a surface of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) that is in contact with the battery cells (110), having a predetermined length in a height direction of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142), and in surface-contact with a surface of the cell lead (electrical terminals) by protruding with a predetermined thickness (Figs. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21; [0075], [0091]).
With respect to claim 9, Yang discloses a length of the cell lead join parts (662…, 862…) is lower than a height of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 412) (Figs. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
With respect to claim 10, Yang discloses the jig hole (labeled) protrudes with a predetermined thickness (can be seen in the rear view figures of 140 and 142 – Figs. 16 (labeled below) and 21) in a direction corresponding to a direction in which the cell lead join parts (662…, 862…) protrude from the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) (Figs. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
PNG
media_image2.png
368
643
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, Yang discloses the jig hole (labeled) is disposed in each of upper and lower ends of a selected cell lead join part (662…, 862…) (Fig. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
With respect to claim 13, Yang discloses the jig hole (labeled) is disposed in each of upper and lower ends of the cell lead join parts (662…, 862…) disposed alternately with each other among the plurality of cell lead join parts (662…, 862…) (Figs. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21).
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.
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(s) is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. as applied to claim 10 above.
With respect to claim 12, Yang discloses in the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142), a protrusion thickness of the cell lead join parts (662…, 862…) protruding from the surface of the sensing busbar assembly (140, 142) and a protrusion thickness of the jig hole (labeled) are similar to each other (Figs. 15-16 and Figs. 20-21), but does not explicitly state that they are the same. Particular, looking at the rear/internal view of the assemblies (140, 142) in Figs. 16 and 21, it is clear that both the protrusions forming the jig holes supporting jigs (760…, 960…) are in the same extension direction and about the same length of extension as the protrusions of the cell lead join parts (662…, 862…). However, the exact relation of the extension lengths is not given. However, applicant is reminded that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984)). Therefore, as both the direction and relative length of the extensions of the protrusion are the same, it is understood that the jog holes and cell lead join parts of the prior art and instant application would perform the same, and therefore, the extension lengths being the same is not a patentable feature.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)272-1330. 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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/WYATT P MCCONNELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights