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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/18/2024, 06/17/2025, 09/02/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: A typographical error stating “one or more batter modules” in Line 14. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 03/18/2024 has been entered. Claims 1-3 and 14 are amended, Claims 15-16 are newly added and Claims 1-16 are pending.
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, 7, 11-12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. (WO 2020060108 A1 - US 20210305651 A1 referenced for citation), hereinafter "You". You et al. is analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely battery packs.
In regard to Claim 1, You et al. discloses a battery pack, comprising a plurality of pouch-type battery cells (You, [0009, 0034]), a pack case having an inner space in which a module that houses the plurality of pouch-type battery cells is accommodated (You, [0019]), and at least one cell covers (cover frames) provided in the module which is housed in the inner space of the pack case which at least partially surrounds at least some of the plurality of pouch-type battery cells (You, Figure 2 (300)), wherein the at least one cell cover being configured to have a dimension that is changeable in a width direction (You, [0010-0011]).
While You et al. discloses a battery pack and pack case with an inner space which accommodates at least one battery module (You, [0061-0062]), and the cell cover (cover frame) is included in each battery module (You, [0033]), it fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of cell covers. However, it is obvious that when more than one module is present in a pack, the skilled artisan would reasonably provide a plurality of cell covers in the inner space of the pack case and mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) See MPEP 2144.04 VI B.
In regard to Claim 7, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. You et al. also disclose wherein the cell cover is configured to support the plurality of pouch-type battery cells in a stacked state (You, [0035-0036]).
In regard to Claims 11-12, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. You et al. also discloses wherein the cell cover is configured to partially surround the pouch-type battery cell so that at least one side of the surrounded pouch-type battery cell is exposed to outside (You, Figure 4) and wherein the cell cover is configured so that at least one side of the surrounded pouch-type battery cell is exposed toward a bottom surface of the battery pack (You, Figure 5).
In regard to Claim 14, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. You et al. also discloses a vehicle comprising the battery pack according to claim 1 (You, [0001]).
In regard to Claim 15, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. You et al. also discloses wherein the plurality of pouch-type battery cells is disposed within one or more battery modules, the one or more battery modules being arranged within the battery pack (You, [0001]).
Claims 2-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. (WO 2020060108 A1 - US 20210305651 A1 referenced for citation), hereinafter "You" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Jeon et al. (US 20230231266 A1), hereinafter "Jeon". You and Jeon et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely battery packs.
In regard to Claims 2-4, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. While You et al. discloses wherein the at least one cell cover being configured to have a dimension that is changeable in a width direction (You, [0010-0011]) and that the cell cover is configured to surround both side surfaces of the at least some pouch-type battery cells (You, Figure 4), it is silent as to discharge holes formed in the battery pack case or the cell cover surrounding an upper side of the cells.
However, the skilled artisan of You would be well aware of the use of discharge holes in a battery pack or battery module and given the deformation of the cell covers due to swelling in You, the skilled artisan would reasonably provide discharge holes capable of communication with the venting cells even when swelling causes deformation as taught in Jeon et al. which discloses a battery module including a cell assembly including a plurality of battery cells, and a module housing having an arrangement space for accommodating the cell assembly and a cell cover (Jeon, Abstract) surrounding the top portion of the cell (Jeon, Figure 2), wherein a plurality of discharge holes are formed along a direction in which the plurality of cell are arranged (Jeon, [0021]) and when swelling occurs the plurality of discharge holes are capable of communicating with the cells and stably discharging gas generated in the battery module externally (Jeon, [0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a plurality of discharge holes in the battery pack case of You et al. in a configuration wherein the top of the cell is surrounded by the cover plate and a communication area with the discharge hole is variable through a change in the dimension during selling as taught in Jeon et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of achieving the benefits taught in Jeon et al. and as doing so would amount to nothing more than applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
In regard to Claim 9, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. While You et al. also discloses a cell cover it is silent as to the material of the cover.
However, the skilled artisan of You must select some material with known properties including a metal cover as taught in Jeon et al. which discloses a cell cover made of metal wherein the metal has high heat conductivity (Jeon, [0046]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the cover of You et al. with a metal material as taught in Jeon et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would amount to nothing more than a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Claims 5-6, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. (WO 2020060108 A1 - US 20210305651 A1 referenced for citation), hereinafter "You" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Yoon et al. (WO 2020256271 A1 - US 20220173481 A1 cited for reference), hereinafter "Yoon". You and Yoon et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely battery packs.
In regard to Claims 5-6, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. While You et al. discloses a cell cover wherein a portion is formed in a wrinkled shape wherein wrinkled shape includes a triangle portion folded into a triangular shape (You, [0039-0042], Figure 2 (350)), it is silent as to that portion being formed on an upper cover portion formed on an upper side.
However, the skilled artisan of You would be well aware of different variations in cell covers and selecting one with an upper part would obvious to try as taught in Yoon et al. which discloses a battery cell stack of pouch type cells which have a cell cover which surrounds both side surfaces and an upper side of the at least some pouch-type battery cells (Yoon, [0045-0046]) with an advantage to that variation taught as improving a space utilization rate and reducing a tolerance between the battery cell stacked body and the frame in comparison with conventional art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a cell cover with a cover portion formed in a wrinkled shape as disclosed in You et al. wherein the cover portion has an upper cover portion formed on an upper side as taught in Yoon et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of achieving the benefits taught in Yoon et al. an as doing so would amount to nothing more than a variation of it for use in the same field based on design incentives or other market forces, as the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
In regard to Claim 8, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. You et al. also discloses wherein the cover has a triangular or wrinkled groove shape (You, [0059]), and Yoon et al. discloses the cover having a U shape (Yoon, [0045]) and the skilled artisan would find it obvious to try different shapes of cell covers without the need for undue experimentation to include 'n' shaped covers as doing so would amount to nothing more than substituting an obvious variation of a known component with the reasonable expectation of success.
In regard to Claim 10, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. While You discloses connecting cells in series or parallel (You, [0005]), it is silent as to providing a bus bar to do so. However, this is a known technique to the skilled artisan as taught in Yoon et al. which discloses a bus bar configured to connect a plurality of electrode leads (Yoon, [0008]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a bus bar to connect the cells of You et al. as taught in Yoon et al. as doing so would amount to nothing more than applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable results.
Claims 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. (WO 2020060108 A1 - US 20210305651 A1 referenced for citation), hereinafter "You" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Kim et al. (US 20230223661 A1), hereinafter "Kim". You and Kim et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely battery packs.
In regard to Claims 13 and 16, You et al. discloses the battery pack according to claim 1. While You et al. discloses a battery pack comprising a module comprising the pouch type cell assembly the skilled artisan of You would be aware of variations of battery packs without modules as taught in Kim et al. which discloses a beneficial configuration of vehicle battery pack wherein a plurality of pouch-type battery cells are arranged within the battery pack without a module casing and wherein a cell cover is directly seated on the pack case (Kim, [0017-0019, 0062]) wherein that configuration is taught to have the benefit of reducing the kind and number of parts, and maximizing a volume ratio of the battery cell to increase travel distance of an electric vehicle (Kim, [0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a configuration of battery pack without the module as taught in Kim et al. as a variation of the battery pack disclosed in You et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of achieving the benefits taught in Kim et al. and as doing so would amount to nothing more than a variation of it for use in the same field based on design incentives or other market forces, as the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MAX OTERO whose telephone number is (571)272-2559. The examiner can normally be reached M-F Generally 7:30-430.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/K.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights