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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/1/24 and 6/6/25 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 5/1/24. These drawings are acceptable.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-9, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200259139 A1 (US’139) in view of US 20210305651 A1 (US’651).
As to claim 1:
US’139 discloses a battery assembly defining a first axis, a second axis orthogonal to the first axis, and a third axis orthogonal to the first and second axes. In particular, US’139 discloses a stacking direction SH, a height direction HH orthogonal to the stacking direction SH, and a lateral direction YH orthogonal to both the stacking direction SH and the height direction HH (US’139 [0068]). US’139 further discloses the battery assembly comprising a casing, namely pack case 10, comprising a plurality of plates, including bottom metal plate portion 21 and side-wall metal plate portions 22–25 (US’139 [0068]–[0070]); and a plurality of battery cells 2 stacked along the third axis, namely stacking direction SH, and disposed within pack case 10 (US’139 [0064]–[0068], [0087]–[0088]). At least one plate of the casing extends along the third axis because third and fourth side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25 extend along stacking direction SH (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0068]–[0070]). The longitudinal side-wall metal plate portions carry, as a tensile force in stacking direction SH, the reaction force corresponding to compression force KF applied to battery stack 5, thereby maintaining the battery cells compressed together within pack case 10 (US’139 [0017], [0064], [0080], [0088]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the plate extending along the third axis comprises an elastic portion. Rather, US’139 emphasizes the high flexural and torsional rigidity of its casing walls and metal plate portions for resisting deformation under the reaction force corresponding to compression force KF (US’139 [0077]–[0080]).
US’651 discloses the missing elastic portion. US’651 discloses a battery module having a plurality of battery cells 110 stacked together, a pair of end plates 200 positioned at opposite sides of the cell assembly, and a cover frame 300 coupled to the end plates and covering the battery-cell assembly (US’651 [0033]–[0037]). Cover frame 300 comprises elastic-deforming portions 350 that elastically deform toward the opposite sides of the cell assembly and extend the cover frame in the cell-inflation or stacking direction (US’651 [0038]–[0042]). The elastic-deforming portions permit the frame to extend by a predetermined length and prevent the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude, thereby reducing the risk of damage to the battery cells or cover frame (US’651 [0042]–[0044]). US’651 further discloses elastic-deforming portions 450 formed as a plurality of straps having bent groove shapes capable of elastically extending cover frame 400 (US’651 [0049]–[0059]).
US’139 and US’651 are analogous art because both concern mechanical casing or frame structures for accommodating a stack of battery cells and controlling forces applied to the battery-cell stack. US’139 addresses maintaining compression of a battery stack through casing walls that carry tensile reaction forces, while US’651 addresses controlling the internal pressing force of a stacked-cell assembly by providing elastically deformable portions in the surrounding frame (US’139 [0002]–[0006], [0016]–[0017]; US’651 [0001], [0006]–[0011]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide one or more of the elastic-deforming portions taught by US’651 in at least one of US’139’s side-wall metal plate portions 24 or 25 that extends along stacking direction SH and carries tensile force. The modification would have allowed the longitudinal casing plate to extend elastically in response to expansion of the battery cells, thereby preventing the cell-stacking pressure from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and reducing damage to the cells or casing, as expressly taught by US’651 (US’651 [0042]–[0044]). As modified, the same longitudinal casing plate would comprise an elastic portion while continuing to transmit the tensile reaction force that maintains compression of the battery cells, thereby rendering the subject matter of claim 1 obvious.
As to claim 3:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing that accommodates and compresses a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis, wherein side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25 extend along the stacking direction and carry, as tensile force, the reaction force corresponding to compression force KF applied to battery stack 5 (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the elastic portion of the plate extending along the third axis comprises a spring structure. Rather, US’139 emphasizes providing casing walls having sufficient flexural and torsional rigidity to resist deformation caused by the reaction force corresponding to compression force KF (US’139 [0007]–[0008], [0077]–[0080]).
US’651 discloses the missing spring structure. Specifically, US’651 discloses a cover frame 300 comprising elastic-deforming portions 350 that extend in the inflation direction when the stacked battery cells expand (US’651 [0037]–[0040]). The elastic-deforming portions 350 have a spring-like structural configuration in that they protrude convexly from the outer side of the cover frame, are concave at the inner side, and elastically deform toward a flattened configuration as the battery cells expand (US’651 [0041]–[0042]). US’651 further discloses an alternative elastic-deforming portion 450 formed from a plurality of straps having bent-groove shapes that elastically extend the cover frame (US’651 [0049]–[0059]). Thus, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the convex/concave elastic-deforming portions and bent-groove straps constitute the claimed spring structure because their expressly disclosed structure permits elastic deformation and controlled extension of the surrounding frame.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide US’139’s longitudinal casing plate with the convex/concave or bent-groove spring structure taught by US’651. The modification would have permitted the longitudinal casing plate to extend elastically when the battery cells expand, thereby preventing the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and reducing the risk of damage to the battery cells or casing, as expressly taught by US’651 (US’651 [0042]–[0044], [0057]–[0059]). As modified, the elastic portion of US’139’s longitudinal casing plate would comprise the claimed spring structure while the plate continued to carry tensile reaction force maintaining compression of the battery cells.
As to claim 6:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying tensile force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses that the plurality of casing plates comprises at least one side plate. Specifically, pack case 10 includes third and fourth side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25 positioned on opposite lateral sides of battery stack 5 (US’139 [0068]–[0070]). Each side wall includes a lateral metal plate extending in the stacking direction and connecting the first and second walls. The side walls carry, as tensile force in the stacking direction, part of the reaction force corresponding to the compression force applied to the battery stack (US’139 [0016]–[0017]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that an elastic portion is formed on at least one of side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25. Rather, US’139 emphasizes suppressing deformation of the casing walls by providing sufficient flexural and torsional rigidity to withstand the reaction force produced by compression of the battery stack (US’139 [0007]–[0008], [0077]–[0080]).
US’651 discloses the elastic structure missing from US’139. US’651 discloses a cover frame 300 coupled to end plates 200 and surrounding a stacked battery-cell assembly 100 (US’651 [0033]–[0037]). Elastic-deforming portions 350 are formed in cover frame 300 and elastically deform in the cell-inflation direction to extend the frame when the battery cells expand (US’651 [0038]–[0042]). The elastic-deforming portions prevent the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and thereby reduce the risk of damage to the battery cells or frame (US’651 [0043]–[0044]). US’651 additionally discloses elastic-deforming portions 450 formed as a plurality of straps having bent-groove shapes capable of elastically extending cover frame 400 (US’651 [0049]–[0059]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form the elastic-deforming portion taught by US’651 on at least one of US’139’s side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25. The modification would have permitted the side plate to extend elastically in response to expansion of the battery cells, thereby preventing the cell-stacking pressure from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and reducing the risk of damage to the cells or casing, as expressly taught by US’651 (US’651 [0042]–[0044], [0057]–[0059]). As modified, US’139’s plurality of casing plates would comprise at least one side plate having the elastic portion formed thereon, while the side plate continued to carry tensile reaction force maintaining compression of the battery cells.
As to claim 7:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and transmitting tensile reaction force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses that the plurality of casing plates comprises a bottom plate. Specifically, pack case 10 includes rectangular plate-shaped bottom wall 11 and four walls 12–15 extending from the four side edges of bottom wall 11 (US’139 [0068]). Metal case member 20 comprises rectangular bottom metal plate portion 21 and side-wall metal plate portions 22–25 extending from its four side edges, with the side-wall metal plate portions being connected through bottom metal plate portion 21 (US’139 [0069]–[0070]). Bottom wall 11 receives the reaction force transmitted from first and second side walls 12 and 13 when those walls apply compression force KF to battery stack 5 (US’139 [0096]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the elastic portion is formed on bottom metal plate portion 21. Rather, US’139 discloses a substantially rigid bottom wall that connects the surrounding casing walls and receives reaction force from the opposing walls that compress the battery stack (US’139 [0068]–[0070], [0096]).
US’651 discloses the missing elastic portion formed on a top or bottom portion of a battery-module casing. Specifically, US’651 discloses cover frame 300 coupled to a pair of end plates 200 and covering at least the upper and lower sides of the battery-cell assembly, thereby providing respective top and bottom portions of the surrounding frame (US’651 [0033]–[0036]). Cover frame 300 includes elastic-deforming portions 350 that elastically deform in the cell-inflation direction and extend the frame toward the opposite sides of the battery-cell assembly (US’651 [0037]–[0040]). The elastic-deforming portions are formed in the cover frame with convex outer surfaces and concave inner surfaces and elastically flatten when the cells expand (US’651 [0041]–[0042]). Thus, US’651 teaches forming the elastic portion in the top or bottom portion of a casing frame that surrounds the stacked battery cells.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form the elastic-deforming portion taught by US’651 on US’139’s bottom metal plate portion 21. The modification would have permitted the bottom plate, which connects the opposing compression walls and receives the reaction force transmitted from those walls, to extend elastically when the battery cells expand, thereby preventing the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and reducing the risk of damage to the battery cells or casing, as expressly taught by US’651 (US’139 [0070], [0096]; US’651 [0042]–[0044]). As modified, US’139’s plurality of casing plates would comprise a bottom plate having the elastic portion formed thereon, while the casing continued to maintain compression of the battery cells.
As to claim 8:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and a longitudinal casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying tensile force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses a pair of rectangular metal end plates 4 arranged at opposite ends of battery stack 5 in stacking direction SH. The end plates 4 are positioned outward of the outermost battery cells 2 such that compression force KF restrains the battery cells between the end plates (US’139 [0064]–[0067], [0087]–[0088]). US’139 also discloses longitudinal third and fourth side walls 14 and 15, including lateral metal plate portions 24 and 25, which carry as tensile force part of the reaction force corresponding to the compression force applied to battery stack 5 (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0068]–[0070]). Thus, US’139 discloses paired end plates engaging the battery-cell stack and longitudinal casing plates carrying the tensile reaction force used to maintain compression of the battery cells.
However, US’139 does not expressly disclose that longitudinal side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25 are coupled directly to internal end plates 4 such that the longitudinal plates transmit their tensile force to the pair of end plates, which in turn transmit the force to the plurality of battery cells. Rather, US’139 discloses that longitudinal side walls 14 and 15 are connected to first and second casing side walls 12 and 13 through corner-connecting resin portions, while end plates 4 are components of battery stack 5 positioned inside pack case 10 (US’139 [0016]–[0018], [0064]–[0070]).
US’651 discloses the missing structural coupling between a longitudinal surrounding plate and a pair of end plates. Specifically, US’651 discloses a battery-cell assembly 100 comprising a plurality of stacked battery cells 110 and a pair of end plates 200 positioned at opposite sides of the battery-cell assembly to support the battery cells (US’651 [0033]–[0035]). Cover frame 300 is coupled to the pair of end plates 200 and covers the battery-cell assembly (US’651 [0036]). The cover frame extends between and acts through the pair of end plates in the cell-stacking or inflation direction because inflation occurs toward the end plates and elastic-deforming portions 350 allow controlled extension of the cover frame in that direction (US’651 [0037]–[0042]). The coupled cover frame and end plates thereby control the internal pressing force applied to the battery-cell assembly and prevent that force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude (US’651 [0043]–[0044]). Accordingly, US’651 teaches coupling a longitudinal surrounding plate to paired end plates that directly support the opposite sides of the stacked battery cells.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to couple US’139’s longitudinal side-wall metal plate portions 24 and 25 to the pair of end plates 4 in the manner taught by US’651. US’651 expressly teaches that coupling a surrounding frame to paired end plates supports the opposite sides of the battery-cell assembly while allowing the frame and end plates to control the internal pressing force applied to the stacked cells (US’651 [0035]–[0044]). In the resulting combination, the tensile force carried by US’139’s longitudinal plates would be transmitted through their coupling to the pair of end plates, and the end plates would transmit the corresponding compressive restraint to the battery cells positioned therebetween, thereby maintaining compression of the battery-cell stack while controlling increases in pressing force.
As to claim 9:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying tensile force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses that the battery cells are prismatic cells. Specifically, battery stack 5 comprises a plurality of batteries 2 and rectangular plate-shaped spacers 3 stacked alternately between rectangular metal end plates 4 (US’139 [0064]–[0065]). Each battery 2 is a sealed rectangular lithium-ion secondary battery comprising electrodes and a non-aqueous electrolyte housed in a metal battery case 2a having a cuboid box shape (US’139 [0066]). The expressly disclosed rectangular, cuboid-box configuration of each battery 2 satisfies the claimed prismatic-cell structure.
As to claim 13:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying tensile force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses that the plate extending along the third axis comprises a first clamp on a first end thereof along the third axis and a second clamp on a second end thereof along the third axis. Specifically, third side-wall metal plate portion 324 extends in stacking direction SH and comprises a first extending portion 324A at one longitudinal end. Extending portion 324A includes panel-engagement portion 324Ak, which is formed by bending an end of extending portion 324A and protrudes between inner metal plate portion 322a and outer metal plate portion 322c, thereby engaging inner metal plate portion 322a through corner-connecting resin portion 336 (US’139 [0106]–[0107]). At the opposite longitudinal end, third side-wall metal plate portion 324 comprises second extending portion 324B having a corresponding bent panel-engagement portion 324Bk (US’139 [0108]). The engagement portions at the respective ends firmly connect longitudinal third side wall 314 to first and second side walls 312 and 313 (US’139 [0109]). Thus, bent panel-engagement portions 324Ak and 324Bk constitute respective first and second clamps at opposite ends of the plate under the broadest reasonable interpretation of “clamp.”
As to claim 14:
See the rejection of claim 13 regarding the battery assembly comprising a longitudinal casing plate having a first clamp at a first end thereof along the third axis and a second clamp at a second end thereof along the third axis.
US’139 further discloses that the first clamp clamps onto a first end plate of the plurality of casing plates and that the second clamp clamps onto a second end plate of the plurality of casing plates. Specifically, first side wall 312 and second side wall 313 are positioned at respective opposite ends of the casing along stacking direction SH, while third side wall metal plate portion 324 extends longitudinally between those opposite end walls (US’139 [0068]–[0072], [0103]–[0106]). At its first longitudinal end, third side wall metal plate portion 324 comprises extending portion 324A having bent panel-engagement portion 324Ak. Panel-engagement portion 324Ak projects between inner metal plate portion 322a and outer metal plate portion 322c of first side wall 312 and engages inner metal plate portion 322a through corner-connecting resin portion 336 (US’139 [0106]–[0107]). At its opposite longitudinal end, third side wall metal plate portion 324 comprises extending portion 324B having a corresponding bent panel-engagement portion 324Bk (US’139 [0108]). The respective panel-engagement portions engage inner metal plate portions 322a and 323a of first and second side walls 312 and 313 and thereby firmly connect the longitudinal third side wall 314 to those opposite end walls (US’139 [0109]). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, these bent engagement portions constitute first and second clamps that clamp onto respective first and second end plates of the casing.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200259139 A1 (US’139) in view of US 20210305651 A1 (US’651), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20170263911 A1 (US’911).
As to claim 2:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and providing a tensile force that maintains compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the longitudinal casing plate comprises an elastic portion having at least one cutout portion. Rather, US’139 emphasizes providing casing walls having sufficient flexural and torsional rigidity to suppress deformation caused by the reaction force corresponding to the compression force applied to the battery stack (US’139 [0007]–[0008], [0077]–[0080]).
US’651 discloses providing an elastic portion in a structural frame surrounding stacked battery cells. Specifically, cover frame 300 is coupled to a pair of end plates 200 and covers battery-cell assembly 100 (US’651 [0033]–[0036]). Cover frame 300 comprises elastic-deforming portions 350 that elastically deform toward opposite sides of the battery-cell assembly and permit the cover frame to extend when the battery cells expand (US’651 [0037]–[0042]). The elastic-deforming portions prevent the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and reduce the risk of damage to the battery cells or cover frame (US’651 [0043]–[0044]). Nevertheless, US’651 does not expressly disclose forming a cutout portion in elastic-deforming portion 350.
US’911 discloses the claimed cutout portion formed in an elastic portion. Specifically, US’911 discloses a battery bus-bar clip 40 comprising first and second legs 44 and 46 extending from a spring portion 42. Spring portion 42 is provided with a notch 70, which constitutes a cutout portion in the spring portion. US’911 further discloses that the size of notch 70 may be adjusted to increase or reduce the spring force produced by spring portion 42 and that notch 70 permits differential flexure of the spring structure (US’911 [0037]). Thus, US’911 expressly teaches forming a cutout in an elastic structure to control its spring force and flexure.
US’139, US’651, and US’911 are analogous art because each concerns battery assemblies containing structural members that apply or control mechanical forces associated with battery cells. US’139 employs longitudinal casing plates to carry tensile reaction force and maintain compression of a battery-cell stack; US’651 employs elastic-deforming portions in a surrounding frame to control pressing force resulting from cell expansion; and US’911 employs a notched spring portion to apply and selectively control spring force in a battery-cell connection structure (US’139 [0002]–[0008], [0016]–[0017]; US’651 [0004]–[0011], [0042]–[0044]; US’911 [0002]–[0009], [0037]). US’911 is also reasonably pertinent to controlling the force and flexure of US’651’s elastic portion because US’911 expressly teaches that varying the size of a notch formed in a spring portion increases or reduces the resulting spring force (US’911 [0037]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide at least one cutout portion, in the form of notch 70 taught by US’911, in the elastic-deforming portion taught by US’651 and incorporated into US’139’s longitudinal casing plate. US’911 expressly teaches forming the notch in a spring portion and adjusting the notch size to control the spring force and differential flexure produced by that portion (US’911 [0037]). The modification therefore would have permitted the force and flexure of the elastic casing portion to be controlled while the longitudinal plate continued to provide the tensile force maintaining compression of the battery cells. The resulting elastic portion would comprise at least one cutout portion, as required by claim 2.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200259139 A1 (US’139) in view of US 20210305651 A1 (US’651), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20220380107 A1 (US’107).
As to claim 4:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying tensile force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the longitudinal casing plate comprises an elastic portion having a mesh structure. Rather, US’139 emphasizes providing casing walls having sufficient flexural and torsional rigidity to suppress deformation caused by the reaction force corresponding to the compression force applied to the battery stack (US’139 [0007]–[0008], [0077]–[0080]).
US’651 discloses providing an elastic portion in a structural frame surrounding stacked battery cells. Specifically, cover frame 300 is coupled to a pair of end plates 200 and covers battery-cell assembly 100 (US’651 [0033]–[0037]). Cover frame 300 comprises elastic-deforming portions 350 that elastically deform in the cell-inflation direction and permit the cover frame to extend when the battery cells expand (US’651 [0038]–[0042]). The elastic-deforming portions prevent the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude and thereby reduce the risk of damage to the battery cells or cover frame (US’651 [0043]–[0044]). Nevertheless, US’651 does not expressly disclose forming elastic-deforming portion 350 as a mesh structure.
US’107 discloses the claimed mesh structure. Specifically, US’107 discloses a sheet having repeating rows of slits that define interconnected axial beams, transverse beams, and folding-wall regions throughout the sheet (US’107 [0058]–[0063]). The axial beams transmit tension through the patterned sheet and around the slits, causing the slits and the patterned sheet to expand along the tension axis (US’107 [0063]–[0064]). US’107 further discloses a compound slit pattern defining columns and rows of interconnected beams. When the patterned sheet is placed under tension, the beams and folding-wall regions rotate and bend to produce open regions 822 throughout the sheet, thereby forming an expandable beam-and-opening network constituting a mesh structure (US’107 [0118]–[0123]). US’107 expressly teaches that the slit pattern may be formed in elastic materials, including natural or synthetic rubber, silicone rubber, urethane rubber, chloroprene rubber, and ethylene-vinyl-acetate rubber, as well as plastics and other sheet materials (US’107 [0138]–[0140]).
US’139, US’651, and US’107 are analogous art because each concerns structures that transmit or control mechanical forces through a sheet, plate, or surrounding structural member. US’139 and US’651 concern casing or frame members that control compression and expansion forces in stacked battery cells, while US’107 is reasonably pertinent to the same mechanical problem because it teaches an expandable planar structure comprising interconnected beams and openings that transmits tensile load while deforming along the tension axis (US’139 [0016]–[0017]; US’651 [0038]–[0044]; US’107 [0011], [0063]–[0064], [0119]–[0121]). US’107 also expressly states that its expanding patterns are not limited to packaging applications and may be used in other applications (US’107 [0013]–[0014]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form the elastic-deforming portion taught by US’651 and incorporated into US’139’s longitudinal casing plate with the interconnected slit-and-beam mesh structure taught by US’107. US’107 expressly teaches that its mesh-like pattern transmits tension through interconnected beams while allowing axial expansion of the patterned structure (US’107 [0063]–[0064]) and that the pattern may be formed in elastic materials (US’107 [0138]). The modification would therefore have allowed the longitudinal casing plate to elastically expand in response to battery-cell expansion while continuing to transmit tensile force, thereby limiting increases in pressing force as taught by US’651 (US’651 [0042]–[0044]). The resulting elastic portion would comprise the claimed mesh structure.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200259139 A1 (US’139) in view of US 20210305651 A1 (US’651), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20150280280 A1 (US’280).
As to claim 5:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along the third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying tensile force to maintain compression of the battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]). See also the rejection of claim 1 regarding providing the longitudinal casing plate with an elastic portion that permits elastic extension in response to expansion of the battery cells and limits an increase in the internal pressing force (US’651 [0033]–[0044], [0049]–[0059]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the longitudinal casing plate comprises an elastic portion having a spiral structure. Rather, US’139 emphasizes providing casing walls having sufficient flexural and torsional rigidity to suppress deformation caused by the reaction force corresponding to the compression force applied to the battery stack (US’139 [0007]–[0008], [0077]–[0080]). US’651 supplies the elastic-deforming portion missing from US’139, but forms that portion as convex and concave regions or as straps having bent-groove shapes, rather than as a spiral structure (US’651 [0038]–[0042], [0049]–[0059]).
US’280 discloses the claimed spiral structure. Specifically, US’280 discloses a stretchable battery having a spring formation that allows the battery structure to stretch while retaining its electrochemical functionality (US’280 [0003]–[0006], [0030]–[0031]). US’280 further discloses configuring the stretchable battery as a “spiral spring,” including two long, thin battery structures spiraled together and capable of stretching along a defined direction (US’280 [0032]). The spiral lithium-ion battery is formed by cutting a precise spiral shape into the battery layers and laminating the resulting layers into sheets (US’280 [0033]). Thus, US’280 expressly teaches using a spiral-spring geometry to provide reversible elastic deformation in a battery structure.
US’139, US’651, and US’280 are analogous art because each concerns battery structures configured to accommodate or control mechanical forces while maintaining battery operation. US’139 employs longitudinal casing plates that carry tensile reaction force and maintain compression of stacked battery cells; US’651 employs elastic-deforming portions in a surrounding battery frame to accommodate cell expansion and limit internal pressing force; and US’280 employs spring and spiral-spring structures to provide mechanical compliance and reversible stretching in battery structures (US’139 [0016]–[0017]; US’651 [0038]–[0044]; US’280 [0003]–[0006], [0017], [0030]–[0033]). US’280 is therefore reasonably pertinent to the problem of selecting a deformable geometry for the elastic portion of a battery-assembly casing.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form the elastic-deforming portion taught by US’651 and incorporated into US’139’s longitudinal casing plate with the spiral-spring structure taught by US’280. US’280 expressly teaches that a spiral-spring geometry permits a battery structure to stretch along a defined direction (US’280 [0030]–[0033]). Employing that geometry in the elastic portion of the longitudinal casing plate would have permitted the plate to elastically extend in response to expansion of the battery cells, thereby limiting increases in internal pressing force and reducing the risk of damage as taught by US’651, while the longitudinal plate continued to carry the tensile reaction force maintaining compression of the battery-cell stack (US’139 [0016]–[0017]; US’651 [0042]–[0044]). The resulting elastic portion would comprise the spiral structure required by claim 5.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200259139 A1 (US’139) in view of US 20210305651 A1 (US’651), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of DE 102019112327 A1 (DE’327).
As to claim 10:
See the rejection of claim 1 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying a tensile force that maintains compression of the plurality of battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]). See also the rejection of claim 1 regarding providing the longitudinal casing plate with an elastic portion that elastically extends in response to expansion of the battery cells and limits an increase in the internal pressing force (US’651 [0033]–[0044], [0049]–[0059]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the elastic portion is structured such that the casing plate has a spring constant that generates the tension force producing a stacking pressure of the plurality of battery cells between 20 psi and 1500 psi. US’139 discloses applying compression force KF to battery stack 5 and carrying the corresponding reaction force as tensile force through the longitudinal casing walls, but does not quantify the resulting stacking pressure in psi or attribute that pressure to a spring constant of an elastic portion (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0087]–[0088]). US’651 discloses elastic-deforming portions that regulate internal pressing force, but does not expressly disclose that the elastic portion has a spring constant selected to generate a stacking pressure within the claimed numerical range (US’651 [0041]–[0044], [0057]–[0059]).
DE’327 discloses a solid-state battery housing containing a battery submodule comprising a plurality of battery cells and a tensioning device having flexible tensioning elements. The flexible tensioning elements compensate for changes in the longitudinal volume of the battery-cell stack while maintaining a predetermined pressure value on the battery cells (DE’327, Pgs. 2–4). DE’327 expressly discloses that the predetermined stacking pressure may be 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, or 200 psi, each of which falls within the claimed range of 20 psi to 1500 psi (DE’327, Pgs. 3, 6).
DE’327 further discloses forming the flexible tensioning elements from disc springs, spiral springs, leaf springs, or conical springs. These spring elements preload the battery-cell stack and generate the predetermined pressure through a pressure plate while permitting longitudinal expansion of the cells (DE’327, Pgs. 3–4, 6–7). In particular, spiral spring 30 presses pressure plate 34 against the battery cells to produce an essentially constant and uniformly distributed pressure, and conical springs 44 apply a defined force through pressure plate 34 to generate the predetermined pressure on the cells (DE’327, Pgs. 6–7). Thus, DE’327 teaches structuring a flexible spring portion to generate a stacking pressure of 50–200 psi, which is within the claimed range.
US’139, US’651, and DE’327 are analogous art because each concerns mechanical casing or tensioning structures surrounding stacked battery cells and controlling the compressive force applied to the battery-cell stack. US’139 uses longitudinal casing plates carrying tensile reaction force to maintain compression of stacked cells; US’651 uses elastic-deforming portions in a surrounding frame to regulate internal pressing force during cell expansion; and DE’327 uses flexible spring tensioning elements to maintain a predetermined stacking pressure while accommodating longitudinal cell expansion (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070]; US’651 [0033]–[0044]; DE’327, Pgs. 2–4, 6–7).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to structure the elastic portion taught by US’651 and incorporated into US’139’s longitudinal casing plate using the spring-based tensioning configuration taught by DE’327, with the spring response selected to generate a stacking pressure of, for example, 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, or 200 psi. DE’327 expressly teaches that flexible spring elements generating these pressures maintain a predetermined pressure on stacked battery cells while accommodating longitudinal changes in cell volume (DE’327, Pgs. 3, 6–7). The modification would have provided a defined and substantially uniform stacking pressure within the claimed range while permitting elastic expansion of the longitudinal casing plate and maintaining compression of the battery-cell stack.
As to claim 11:
See the rejection of claim 10 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying a tensile force that maintains compression of the plurality of battery cells (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]). See also the rejection of claim 10 regarding providing the longitudinal casing plate with an elastic portion structured to have a spring response that generates the tensile force and produces a stacking pressure between 20 psi and 1500 psi (US’651 [0033]–[0044], [0049]–[0059]; DE’327, Pgs. 2–4, 6–7).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the spring constant of the elastic portion does not exceed 1000 psi. Although US’139 discloses applying compression force KF to battery stack 5 and carrying the corresponding reaction force as tensile force through the longitudinal casing walls, US’139 neither quantifies the resulting stacking pressure in psi nor discloses an elastic portion having a spring response limited to no more than 1000 psi (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0087]–[0088]). US’651 discloses elastic-deforming portions that regulate the internal pressing force, but does not expressly identify a numerical spring constant or pressure not exceeding 1000 psi (US’651 [0041]–[0044], [0057]–[0059]).
DE’327 discloses a solid-state battery having a plurality of battery cells and a tensioning device comprising flexible tensioning elements that compensate for changes in the longitudinal volume of the battery-cell stack while maintaining a predetermined pressure (DE’327, Pgs. 1–3). DE’327 expressly discloses that the predetermined stacking pressure may be 10 psi, 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, or 200 psi, each of which is within the 20–1500 psi range of parent claim 10, except the expressly disclosed 10 psi alternative, and each of 50–200 psi does not exceed the 1000 psi upper limit of claim 11 (DE’327, Pg. 3).
DE’327 further discloses forming the flexible tensioning elements from disc springs, spiral springs, leaf springs, or conical springs. These spring elements preload the battery-cell stack, accommodate changes in cell volume, and maintain the selected pressure (DE’327, Pgs. 3–4). In the illustrated embodiment, spiral springs press a pressure plate against the battery cells to produce a substantially constant and uniformly distributed pressure; DE’327 expressly identifies 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, and 200 psi as suitable pressures generated by the tensioning device (DE’327, Pg. 6). Conical springs similarly apply a defined force through the pressure plate to generate the predetermined pressure while permitting expansion of the battery cells (DE’327, Pg. 7). Thus, under the claim’s expression of the spring response in psi, DE’327 teaches selecting the flexible spring arrangement to generate a pressure that does not exceed 1000 psi.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to structure the elastic portion taught by US’651 and incorporated into US’139’s longitudinal casing plate with the spring response taught by DE’327, selected to generate a stacking pressure of, for example, 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, or 200 psi. DE’327 expressly teaches that flexible spring tensioning elements generating these pressures maintain a predetermined pressure on stacked battery cells while accommodating changes in the longitudinal volume of the cells (DE’327, Pgs. 3, 6–7). Selecting any of these expressly disclosed pressure values would have produced the stacking pressure required by claim 10 while also providing a spring response that does not exceed 1000 psi, as required by claim 11.
As to claim 12:
See the rejection of claim 10 regarding the battery assembly comprising a casing having a plurality of plates, a plurality of battery cells stacked along a third axis within the casing, and at least one casing plate extending along the third axis and carrying a tension force that compresses the plurality of battery cells together (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0080], [0087]–[0088]). See also the rejection of claim 10 regarding providing the longitudinal casing plate with an elastic portion structured to generate the tension force producing a stacking pressure between 20 psi and 1500 psi (US’651 [0033]–[0044], [0049]–[0059]; DE’327, Pgs. 2–4, 6–7).
However, US’139 does not disclose that the spring constant of the elastic portion does not exceed 800 psi. Although US’139 discloses applying compression force KF to battery stack 5 and carrying the corresponding reaction force as tensile force through the longitudinal casing walls, US’139 neither quantifies the resulting stacking pressure in psi nor discloses an elastic portion having a spring response limited to no more than 800 psi (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0064]–[0070], [0087]–[0088]). US’651 discloses elastic-deforming portions that regulate internal pressing force, but does not expressly identify a numerical spring response or pressure not exceeding 800 psi (US’651 [0041]–[0044], [0057]–[0059]).
DE’327 discloses a solid-state battery having a plurality of battery cells and a tensioning device comprising flexible tensioning elements that compensate for changes in the longitudinal volume of the battery-cell stack while maintaining a predetermined pressure on the battery cells (DE’327, Pgs. 2–4). DE’327 expressly discloses predetermined stacking pressures of 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, and 200 psi. Each disclosed pressure is within the 20–1500 psi range required by parent claim 10 and does not exceed the 800 psi upper limit required by claim 12 (DE’327, Pgs. 3, 6).
DE’327 further discloses that the flexible tensioning elements may comprise disc springs, spiral springs, leaf springs, or conical springs. These spring elements preload the battery-cell stack, accommodate changes in cell volume, and maintain the selected pressure (DE’327, Pgs. 3–4). Spiral springs press a pressure plate against the battery cells to produce a substantially constant and uniformly distributed pressure, and DE’327 identifies 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, and 200 psi as exemplary pressures generated by the tensioning device (DE’327, Pg. 6). Conical springs similarly apply a defined force through the pressure plate to generate the predetermined pressure while permitting expansion of the battery cells (DE’327, Pg. 7). Thus, under the claim’s expression of the spring response in psi, DE’327 teaches selecting a spring arrangement that generates a stacking pressure not exceeding 800 psi.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to structure the elastic portion taught by US’651 and incorporated into US’139’s longitudinal casing plate with the spring response taught by DE’327, selected to generate a stacking pressure of, for example, 50 psi, 100 psi, 150 psi, or 200 psi. DE’327 expressly teaches that flexible spring tensioning elements generating these pressures maintain a predetermined pressure on stacked battery cells while accommodating changes in the longitudinal volume of the cells (DE’327, Pgs. 3, 6–7). Selecting any of these expressly disclosed pressure values would have produced the stacking pressure required by claim 10 while also providing a spring response that does not exceed 800 psi, as required by claim 12.
Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230139645 A1 (US’645) in view of US 20150214570 A1 (US’570).
As to claim 15:
US’645 discloses a battery cell for a battery assembly defining a first axis, a second axis orthogonal to the first axis, and a third axis orthogonal to the first and second axes. Specifically, US’645 defines a width direction x, height direction y, and thickness direction z for a rectangular prismatic battery cell. The electrode layers extend in the x-y plane and are stacked in the z direction perpendicular to that plane. Thus, the x, y, and z directions correspond respectively to the claimed first, second, and third axes (US’645 [0008], [0047]–[0048]).
US’645 further discloses an electrode package having a plurality of electrode stacks stacked along the third axis. Casing 13 accommodates one or more stacks 16 of layer assemblies, each layer assembly including an anode layer, cathode layer, and separator layer. Each stack comprises layers stacked in the z direction, and two electrode stacks 16, 16′ are arranged side-by-side in the thickness direction z of casing 13 (US’645 [0018]–[0020], [0048], [0052]).
US’645 further discloses a can in which the electrode stacks are disposed. In particular, conductive casing body 14 constitutes a prismatic can accommodating electrode stacks 16, 16′ (US’645 [0008], [0047]–[0048], [0052]). US’645 also discloses a top cover disposed on the can. Conductive cover 15 is attached to casing body 14 and defines the top plane of the battery cell; the cover is welded to sidewalls 26 of the casing to seal the battery cell (US’645 [0008], [0047], [0050], [0053], [0056], [0059]).
However, US’645 does not disclose that the top cover or at least one wall of the can extending along the third axis comprises an elastic portion. US’645 discloses a conductive casing and cover, for example made of aluminum, with the cover welded to the casing sidewalls, but does not describe the cover or any wall extending in the z direction as having an elastic, deformable, or compressible portion (US’645 [0047], [0053], [0056], [0059]).
US’570 discloses the missing elastic portion. US’570 discloses a battery cell comprising cell housing 3, which may also be referred to as a “can,” containing one or more chemicals carriers or electrode jelly rolls (US’570 [0006], [0010], [0043]). The cell housing includes housing base 5, housing wall 7, and housing cover 27 (US’570 [0043]). At least one housing wall—and, in some embodiments, all housing walls—is outwardly cambered so that the cell housing is deformable, compressible, and elastic. US’570 expressly states that the cambered cell housing provides an elastic element in the force-distribution chain of the battery module (US’570 [0007], [0011]). For an angular cell housing, each individual housing wall may be outwardly curved, and housing wall 7 is specifically shown and described as outwardly curved in a convex manner (US’570 [0016], [0043]–[0044]). Accordingly, the cambered region of housing wall 7 constitutes an elastic portion of a can wall.
US’645 and US’570 are analogous art because both concern prismatic or cuboid battery cells having an electrode structure disposed within a can having walls and a cover. US’645 addresses a prismatic battery cell configured for efficient integration into a battery pack, while US’570 addresses a battery cell having a deformable cell housing configured for use in a prestressed battery module (US’645 [0007]–[0009], [0047]–[0048]; US’570 [0004]–[0011], [0042]–[0044]). US’570 is also reasonably pertinent to the mechanical configuration of US’645’s can because US’570 expressly teaches transferring elasticity to the cell housing to compensate for tolerances, reduce weight and cost, and improve the longitudinal tolerance of the assembled battery module (US’570 [0003], [0007], [0042]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure at least one wall of US’645’s conductive casing body 14 that extends along the z direction with the outwardly cambered elastic structure taught by US’570. US’570 expressly teaches that cambering the cell housing wall makes the wall deformable, compressible, and elastic, thereby transferring the resilient function to the battery cell itself, compensating for assembly tolerances, reducing weight and cost, and improving module dimensional tolerance (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0042]). The resulting battery cell would retain US’645’s orthogonal x, y, and z axes, plurality of electrode stacks arranged along the z direction, casing, and top cover, while at least one casing wall extending along the z direction would comprise the elastic portion required by claim 15.
As to claim 17:
See the rejection of claim 15 regarding the battery cell comprising an electrode package having a plurality of electrode stacks stacked along the third axis, a can in which the electrode stacks are disposed, and a top cover disposed on the can (US’645 [0008], [0018]–[0020], [0047]–[0048], [0052]–[0053], [0055]–[0059]). See also the rejection of claim 15 regarding providing at least one wall of the can extending along the third axis with an elastic portion formed by an outwardly cambered, deformable, and compressible housing wall (US’570 [0006]–[0011], [0016], [0042]–[0044]).
However, US’645 does not disclose that the elastic portion comprises a spring structure. US’645 discloses conductive casing body 14 and conductive cover 15, for example formed from aluminum, but does not describe the cover or any casing wall as having an elastic portion structured to perform a spring function (US’645 [0047]–[0048], [0053], [0056], [0059]).
US’570 discloses the claimed spring structure. US’570 explains that an elastic element, such as a pre-bent metal plate acting as a leaf spring, is used in a battery module to compensate for dimensional tolerances and maintain a predetermined restraining force (US’570 [0003]). US’570 transfers that spring function to the battery-cell housing itself by providing an outwardly curved, convex housing wall that is deformable, compressible, and elastic (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0016]). The cambered battery cell therefore acts as a resilient element having targeted elasticity and performs the same force-application and tolerance-compensation functions as the spring plates (US’570 [0040]–[0042]). When compressed, the cambered housing generates a restraining force, with the resulting tension force emanating from the battery cells themselves (US’570 [0020], [0044]–[0046]). Accordingly, the outwardly cambered elastic wall constitutes a spring structure because the wall elastically compresses and supplies the restoring force previously supplied by a spring plate.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure at least one wall of US’645’s conductive casing body 14 that extends along the z direction with the outwardly cambered spring structure taught by US’570. US’570 expressly teaches transferring the function of separate spring plates to the cambered battery-cell housing so that the housing itself acts as a resilient element having targeted elasticity, applies restraining force, and compensates for dimensional tolerances (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0042], [0046]). The modification would have reduced the number and weight of separate spring components, reduced cost, and improved dimensional tolerance while maintaining the required restraining force (US’570 [0007], [0042]). The resulting elastic portion of the can wall would comprise the spring structure required by claim 17.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230139645 A1 (US’645) in view of US 20150214570 A1 (US’570), as applied to Claim 15 above, and further in view of US 20170263911 A1 (US’911).
As to claim 16:
See the rejection of claim 15 regarding the battery cell comprising an electrode package having a plurality of electrode stacks stacked along the third axis, a can in which the electrode stacks are disposed, and a top cover disposed on the can (US’645 [0008], [0018]–[0020], [0047]–[0048], [0052]–[0053], [0056], [0059]). See also the rejection of claim 15 regarding providing at least one wall of the can extending along the third axis with an elastic portion formed by an outwardly cambered, deformable, and compressible housing wall (US’570 [0006]–[0011], [0016], [0042]–[0044]).
However, US’645 does not disclose that the elastic portion comprises at least one cutout portion. US’645 discloses a conductive casing body and conductive cover, but does not describe the cover or any casing wall as having an elastic portion containing a cutout (US’645 [0047], [0053], [0056], [0059]). US’570 supplies the elastic can-wall portion missing from US’645, but does not expressly disclose forming a cutout in its outwardly cambered elastic housing wall (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0016], [0042]–[0044]).
US’911 discloses the claimed cutout portion formed in an elastic portion. Specifically, US’911 discloses battery bus-bar clip 40 comprising first and second legs 44, 46 extending from spring portion 42. Spring portion 42 biases the legs toward battery terminals and produces sufficient spring force to hold the clip against the terminals (US’911 [0006], [0008]–[0009], [0034]). Spring portion 42 includes notch 70, which constitutes a cutout portion in the spring portion. US’911 expressly teaches that the size of notch 70 may be adjusted to increase or reduce the spring force produced by spring portion 42 and that the notch permits differential flexure of the spring structure (US’911 [0016], [0037]). Thus, US’911 teaches forming a cutout in an elastic structural portion to control the portion’s spring force and flexure.
US’645, US’570, and US’911 are analogous art because each concerns structural components used in battery cells or battery assemblies. US’645 and US’570 concern battery cells having electrode structures enclosed within metallic cans, while US’911 concerns an elastically deformable battery-cell connection structure that applies a controlled spring force (US’645 [0007]–[0009], [0047]–[0048]; US’570 [0004]–[0011]; US’911 [0002]–[0009]). US’911 is reasonably pertinent to configuring US’570’s elastic housing portion because US’911 expressly teaches that forming and dimensioning a notch in an elastic portion controls the spring force and differential flexure produced by that portion (US’911 [0037]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide at least one cutout portion, corresponding to notch 70 taught by US’911, in the outwardly cambered elastic can-wall portion taught by US’570 and incorporated into US’645’s conductive casing body. US’911 expressly teaches forming the notch in a spring portion and adjusting the notch size to increase or reduce the resulting spring force and permit differential flexure (US’911 [0037]). The modification would therefore have permitted the spring force and flexure of the elastic can-wall portion to be selectively controlled while retaining the deformability, compressibility, tolerance compensation, and resilient-force function taught by US’570 (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0042]). The resulting elastic portion would comprise at least one cutout portion, as required by claim 16.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230139645 A1 (US’645) in view of US 20150214570 A1 (US’570), as applied to Claim 15 above, and further in view of US 20220380107 A1 (US’107).
As to claim 18:
See the rejection of claim 15 regarding the battery cell comprising an electrode package having a plurality of electrode stacks stacked along the third axis, a can in which the electrode stacks are disposed, and a top cover disposed on the can (US’645 [0008], [0018]–[0020], [0047]–[0048], [0052]–[0053], [0056], [0059]). See also the rejection of claim 15 regarding providing at least one wall of the can extending along the third axis with an elastic portion formed by an outwardly cambered, deformable, and compressible housing wall (US’570 [0006]–[0011], [0016], [0042]–[0044]).
However, US’645 does not disclose that the elastic portion comprises a mesh structure. US’645 discloses conductive casing body 14 and conductive cover 15, but does not describe the cover or any casing wall as having an elastic portion formed with interconnected beams defining a plurality of openings (US’645 [0047]–[0048], [0053], [0056], [0059]). US’570 supplies the elastic can-wall portion missing from US’645, but does not expressly disclose forming its outwardly cambered elastic housing wall as a mesh structure (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0016], [0042]–[0044]).
US’107 discloses the claimed mesh structure. Specifically, US’107 discloses forming a repeating array of slits in a sheet, with material remaining between the slits forming interconnected beams. When tension is applied, the two-dimensional sheet expands into a three-dimensional structure having openings between the beams (US’107 [0007]–[0011]). US’107 further discloses multi-slit patterns comprising repeating rows of slits that produce out-of-plane undulations and absorb energy in a spring-like manner without significant plastic deformation (US’107 [0086]–[0089]).
US’107 additionally discloses a compound-slit embodiment comprising rows of slits, non-rotating beams connecting folding-wall regions, and open regions formed by movement of the interconnected beams and folding-wall regions (US’107 [0114]–[0121]). The open regions appear generally hexagonal or octagonal when viewed from the face of the expanded structure, thereby providing a mesh structure having repeated openings bounded by interconnected structural members (US’107 [0121]–[0123]). US’107 expressly teaches forming these slit-and-opening patterns in elastic materials, including natural or synthetic rubber, silicone rubber, urethane rubber, and EVA rubber, and provides that the resulting article may be a sheet, film, or similar construction (US’107 [0138]). Thus, US’107 teaches an elastic portion comprising a mesh structure that deforms under applied force and absorbs energy in a spring-like manner.
US’645, US’570, and US’107 are analogous art because each concerns structural members configured to deform or withstand mechanical loading while protecting an enclosed or adjacent article. US’645 and US’570 concern battery cells having electrode structures enclosed within cans, with US’570 particularly addressing an elastic housing wall that supplies resilient force and compensates for dimensional tolerances (US’645 [0007]–[0009]; US’570 [0003]–[0011], [0042]). Although US’107 is not specifically directed to battery-cell housings, it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of selecting a deformable geometry for an elastic wall portion because it teaches repeating slit-and-beam structures that deform under tension, withstand compressive loading, and absorb energy in a spring-like manner without significant plastic deformation (US’107 [0013]–[0014], [0089], [0120]–[0123]). US’107 also expressly states that its patterns are not limited to packaging applications and may be formed in elastic sheet materials (US’107 [0014], [0138]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form the outwardly cambered elastic can-wall portion taught by US’570 and incorporated into US’645’s conductive casing body with the repeating slit-and-beam structure taught by US’107, such that interconnected beams define repeated open regions. US’107 expressly teaches that this structure provides spring-like energy absorption without significant plastic deformation, permits controlled expansion under tension, and forms folded walls capable of resisting compressive force (US’107 [0088]–[0089], [0120]–[0123]). Applying that structure to the elastic portion would have provided controlled deformation and increased energy absorption while retaining the resilient-force and dimensional-tolerance functions taught by US’570 (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0042], [0046]). The resulting elastic portion would comprise the mesh structure required by claim 18.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230139645 A1 (US’645) in view of US 20150214570 A1 (US’570), as applied to Claim 15 above, and further in view of US 20150280280 A1 (US’280).
As to claim 19:
See the rejection of claim 15 regarding the battery cell comprising an electrode package having a plurality of electrode stacks stacked along the third axis, a can in which the electrode stacks are disposed, and a top cover disposed on the can (US’645 [0008], [0018]–[0020], [0047]–[0048], [0052]–[0053], [0056], [0059]). See also the rejection of claim 15 regarding providing at least one wall of the can extending along the third axis with an elastic portion formed by an outwardly cambered, deformable, and compressible housing wall (US’570 [0006]–[0011], [0016], [0042]–[0044]).
However, US’645 does not disclose that the elastic portion comprises a spiral structure. US’645 discloses conductive casing body 14 and conductive cover 15 but does not describe the cover or a casing-wall portion as having a spiral structure (US’645 [0047]–[0048], [0053], [0056], [0059]). US’570 discloses an outwardly cambered elastic housing wall that performs a resilient spring function, but does not expressly disclose forming that elastic portion as a spiral structure (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0016], [0040]–[0046]).
US’280 discloses a spiral structure configured to provide elastic, spring-like deformation. US’280 concerns batteries that provide mechanical functionality and are capable of in-plane or out-of-plane stretching while retaining their electrochemical functionality (US’280 [0003]–[0006]). US’280 further teaches that its stretchable structures may be incorporated into structural components and vehicle parts to provide mechanical compliance through stretching (US’280 [0017]).
More particularly, US’280 discloses a spring embodiment in which a battery is configured as a spiral spring comprising anode and cathode layers separated by a gel or solid-polymer electrolyte. The spiral spring is configured to stretch in the plane of the structure and may comprise two elongated, thin battery structures spiraled together (US’280 [0030]–[0032]). US’280 further teaches forming the precise spiral profile of each battery layer by cutting and laminating the resulting layers into a flexible structure (US’280 [0033]). Thus, US’280 expressly teaches using a spiral-spring geometry to provide an elastic structure capable of controlled stretching and mechanical compliance.
US’645, US’570, and US’280 are analogous art because each concerns battery-cell structures and their mechanical configuration. US’645 concerns a prismatic battery cell having electrode stacks enclosed within a conductive can; US’570 concerns providing mechanical elasticity through a deformable battery-cell housing; and US’280 concerns providing battery structures with reversible stretching and mechanical compliance through spring and spiral configurations (US’645 [0007]–[0009], [0047]–[0048]; US’570 [0003]–[0011]; US’280 [0003]–[0006], [0017], [0030]–[0033]). US’280 is reasonably pertinent to configuring the elastic housing portion of US’570 because it expressly addresses the geometry of battery structures intended to provide spring-like, reversible mechanical deformation.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure the outwardly cambered elastic can-wall portion taught by US’570 and incorporated into US’645’s conductive casing body with the spiral-spring geometry taught by US’280. US’280 expressly teaches that a spiral-spring configuration provides stretching and mechanical compliance while permitting the structure to return toward its folded configuration (US’280 [0017], [0030]–[0033]). Applying that spiral configuration to the elastic portion would have provided controlled elastic deformation and mechanical compliance while retaining the resilient-force and dimensional-tolerance functions taught by US’570 (US’570 [0007], [0011], [0042], [0046]). The resulting elastic portion would comprise the spiral structure required by claim 19.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200259139 A1 (US’139) in view of US 20210305651 A1 (US’651) and CN 113196549 A (CN’549).
As to claim 20:
US’139 discloses a vehicle comprising a battery assembly. Battery pack 1 is an in-vehicle battery pack mounted in a hybrid vehicle, plug-in hybrid vehicle, or electric vehicle (US’139 [0064]).
US’139 discloses that the battery assembly defines a first axis, a second axis orthogonal to the first axis, and a third axis orthogonal to the first and second axes. Specifically, US’139 defines a stacking direction SH, a lateral direction YH orthogonal to the stacking direction SH, and a height direction HH orthogonal to the stacking and lateral directions. The lateral direction YH, height direction HH, and stacking direction SH correspond respectively to the claimed first, second, and third axes (US’139 [0016], [0068]).
US’139 further discloses that battery pack 1 comprises pack case 10 and battery stack 5. Battery stack 5 includes a plurality of rectangular batteries 2 stacked along stacking direction SH and disposed within pack case 10 (US’139 [0064]–[0068], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses that pack case 10 comprises opposing third and fourth side walls 14, 15 extending along stacking direction SH, corresponding to the claimed first and second side plates extending along the third axis. The third and fourth side walls connect the opposing end walls of pack case 10 and surround battery stack 5 (US’139 [0016]–[0017], [0068]–[0070]). The third and fourth side walls carry, as tensile force in the stacking direction, the reaction force resulting from the compression force applied to battery stack 5. Pack case 10 thereby maintains batteries 2 compressed and restrained together along stacking direction SH (US’139 [0017], [0080], [0087]–[0088]).
US’139 further discloses that each battery 2 is a sealed rectangular lithium-ion battery cell comprising electrodes and a cuboid metal battery case 2a containing the electrodes and electrolyte (US’139 [0065]–[0067]).
However, US’139 does not disclose that each of the first and second side plates extending along the third axis comprises a respective elastic portion. Rather, US’139 configures the longitudinal third and fourth side walls to carry tensile reaction force and emphasizes structural rigidity for maintaining the compression force on battery stack 5 (US’139 [0017], [0068]–[0080]). US’139 also does not disclose that each individual battery cell has an electrode package comprising a plurality of electrode stacks stacked along the third axis and a can having first and second side walls extending along the third axis, wherein both side walls comprise respective third and fourth elastic portions (US’139 [0066]).
US’651 discloses a battery module comprising battery-cell assembly 100 having a plurality of battery cells 110 stacked together, a pair of end plates 200 disposed at opposite sides of the battery-cell assembly, and cover frame 300 coupled to the end plates and covering at least the upper and lower sides of the assembly (US’651 [0010]–[0012], [0033]–[0037]). Cover frame 300 thus provides opposed longitudinal plate portions extending between the end plates along the stacking direction.
US’651 further discloses that cover frame 300 comprises a plurality of elastic-deforming portions 350 that extend along the longitudinal direction of battery-cell assembly 100. The elastic-deforming portions elastically extend the cover frame toward the opposite ends of the battery-cell assembly when the cells inflate (US’651 [0038]–[0042]). Accordingly, US’651 teaches providing the opposing longitudinal portions of a casing or cover frame with elastic portions capable of accommodating changes in the length of a stacked battery-cell assembly.
US’651 expressly teaches that the elastic-deforming portions prevent the internal pressing force of the battery module from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude, thereby reducing the risk of damage to battery cells 110 or cover frame 300 (US’651 [0043]–[0044]). US’651 also discloses an alternative cover frame 400 having plural groove-shaped elastic-deforming portions 450 that elastically extend the cover frame in the inflating direction (US’651 [0047]–[0059]). Battery pack 1 containing such a battery module is expressly installed in vehicle V, including an electric or hybrid vehicle (US’651 [0060]–[0066]).
CN’549 discloses the remaining cell-level limitations. CN’549 discloses an electric core, corresponding to a battery cell, comprising electrode assembly 1 disposed within shell 2. Electrode assembly 1 has opposed first and second surfaces, and shell 2 comprises opposed first and second flat plates 21, 22 contacting the respective surfaces of electrode assembly 1 (CN’549, Pgs. 4–5).
CN’549 further discloses an embodiment in which a plurality of electrode assemblies are orderly stacked and accommodated together within shell 2. The plurality of stacked electrode assemblies collectively correspond to the claimed electrode package having a plurality of electrode stacks (CN’549, Pgs. 6–7, 10).
CN’549 further discloses that shell 2 may comprise first and second flat plates 21, 22 and two opposed elastic connecting pieces 233, 234 positioned on opposite sides of electrode assembly 1. Each connecting piece is fixed to both flat plates and is formed from an elastic material capable of elastic bending (CN’549, Pgs. 6–7, 9). Because connecting pieces 233, 234 occupy the two opposed sides of shell 2 and span between plates 21, 22 along the thickness or stacking direction, the connecting pieces respectively form first and second side-wall portions extending along that direction. The first elastic connecting piece 233 therefore constitutes the claimed third elastic portion of the first side wall, and the opposed elastic connecting piece 234 constitutes the claimed fourth elastic portion of the second side wall (CN’549, Pg. 6).
CN’549 additionally discloses that, when the electrode assembly expands, elastic connecting pieces 233, 234 permit plates 21, 22 to move outwardly while providing a uniform reaction force that limits expansion. When the electrode assembly contracts, the elastic structure maintains the assembly in a pressed state, thereby controlling cell expansion and improving cell-cycle performance (CN’549, Pgs. 4–6). Thus, CN’549 teaches providing both opposed side walls of an individual battery-cell shell with respective elastic portions.
US’139, US’651, and CN’549 are analogous art because each concerns mechanical enclosures for battery cells or stacked battery assemblies and controlling the pressure produced by expansion of the enclosed electrochemical structures. US’139 uses longitudinal casing walls carrying tensile force to maintain compression of stacked battery cells; US’651 provides elastic-deforming portions in the longitudinal cover frame of a battery module to control internal pressing force during cell expansion; and CN’549 provides opposed elastic connecting walls in an individual battery-cell shell to accommodate electrode-stack expansion while maintaining pressure on the electrode assembly (US’139 [0002]–[0008], [0016]–[0017]; US’651 [0001], [0006]–[0014]; CN’549, Pgs. 2–6).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide each of US’139’s opposing longitudinal side walls 14, 15 with the elastic-deforming structure taught by US’651 and to employ, within each of US’139’s battery cells, the plural-electrode-stack and opposed elastic side-wall configuration taught by CN’549. US’651 expressly teaches that longitudinal elastic-deforming portions accommodate expansion and prevent the internal pressing force from increasing beyond a predetermined magnitude, thereby reducing damage to the battery cells and casing (US’651 [0038]–[0044], [0057]–[0059]). CN’549 expressly teaches that opposed elastic side-wall members accommodate changes in electrode-stack thickness, maintain pressure on the electrode assembly, limit expansion, and improve cycle performance (CN’549, Pgs. 4–7). The resulting vehicle battery assembly would retain US’139’s casing walls carrying tensile force to compress the battery-cell stack, while both longitudinal casing side plates and both opposed side walls of each individual cell would comprise respective elastic portions, as required by claim 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DE 10201504620 A1 discloses a traction battery assembly may include an array of battery cells having opposite end surfaces, opposite side surfaces, and a bottom surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights