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 .
Summary
This is the initial Office Action based on Application 18/696,603 filed 03/28/2024 by Sun Woo Yun.
Claims 1-12 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by YE (CN 21669865 U).
YE teaches a soft copper busbar which includes a copper busbar body 1 a heat shrink tube 2 sleeved on the middle of the copper busbar body (paragraph 0022). There is a groove 5 in the middle of the busbar body (paragraph 0022). The width at the ends of the copper busbar is greater than a width in the middle (paragraph 0026). Therefore as seen in Figure 2 the ends of the busbar outside of the tube 2 are taken to be the claimed first busbar symmetrically protruding from the tube, and the middle part is taken to be the claimed second busbar.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE (US 2018/0047970 A1) in view of YE (CN 21669865 U).
With respect to claim 1. LEE teaches a bus bar with a protection part installed in the bus bar (paragraph 0037) and is taken to be the claimed busbar assembly. The bus bar 20 is made of a thin plate (paragraph 0053). There is a coupling hole 23 in each of both sides of the bus bar 20, and a notch part 21 disposed at a center of the bus bar 20 (paragraph 0054). The sides of the bus bar with the hole 23 is taken to be the claimed first bus bar, and the part of the busbar with the notch 21 is taken to be the claimed second busbar (see Figure 3). A protection part 30 is installed in the bus bar 20 and is installed to surround the notch part 21 (paragraph 0062). The protection part 30 is taken to be the claimed cover member. The notch 21 then makes the width of the second busbar be less than the width of the first bus bar (Figure 3).
LEE does not explicitly teach that the busbar is made of a copper material.
YE teaches a copper busbar structure (paragraph 0022). The structure includes two ends and a thinner middle part (paragraph 0026).
At the time the invention was filed one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to substitute the material of the busbar of LEE with the copper busbar of YE, as this is a simple substitution of one known prior art element for another in order to achieve predictable results.
With respect to claims 10-11. LEE teaches the protection connection part 30 is installed to surround the notch part 21 of the busbar 20 (paragraph 0062). The protection part 30 includes an absorption member 31 and an endothermic agent 33 (paragraph 0066). The endothermic agent then is made of a ceramic fiber (paragraph 0067) which is taken to be the claimed refractory material.
With respect to claim 12. LEE further teaches a battery pack 1 which incldues the unit cell and bus bar (paragraph 0039).
Claim(s) 2-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE (US 2018/0047970 A1) in view of YE (CN 21669865 U) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of GROBE (US 8,574,008 B2).
Claim 2 is dependent upon claim 1 which is rejected above under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of LEE and YE. LEE teaches a width of the second busbar, being the are with the notch 21 is smaller than the ends. LEE teaches the notch is beneficial so that it may be easily broken when overcurrent flows (paragraph 0057). However, LEE does not explicitly teach a height of the second busbar is less than a height of the first busbar.
GROBE teaches a battery cell connector 1 which includes a terminal part and a connecting part 6 arranged between the terminal parts (column 10 lines 19-23). The central region of the connecting part 6 then is tapered (column 10 lines 60-63). The central connection part may further included grooves/holes formed in the connection part (column 12 lines 30-33). Then the tapering of the connecting part means the cross section is smaller than the cross section of the connecting part on the outwardly facing regions (column 12 lines 49-52).
At the time the invention was filed one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the area of the second busbar of LEE to be tapered as taught by GROBE, which is a lower height, as this is a combination of known prior art elements in order to achieve predictable results. Specifically such elements are taught by GOBE to be beneficial as they allow for an increased in flexibility between the terminal parts and the connection parts (column 4 lines 27-55).
With respect to claim 3. LEE further teaches as seen in Figure 3, the second busbar part including the notch includes at least one protrusion on each side of the notch 21. Each of the notches is spaced apart from the opposite one of the first busbar (Figure 3).
With respect to claims 4-7. LEE teaches the protrusions are provided in plurality and have a quadrangular sectional shape (Figure 3) specifically having a right triangular shape. Further an inclined surface faces the middle of the second busbar (Figure 3).
With respect to claim 8. LEE does not explicitly teach a metal layer disposed on the surfaces of the first busbar. GROBE teaches the connecting structure 1 includes the terminal parts 4 and 2 with the central connecting part 6 (column 10 lines 19-23). The terminal parts 2 and 4 may be roller plated (column 11 lines 60-65). Thus the connecting region is coated with the metal or an alloy (column 6 lines 27-34).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE (US 2018/0047970 A1) in view of YE (CN 21669865 U) and GROBE (US 8,574,008 B2) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of BIRKHOLZ (US 2021/0167472 A1).
Claim 9 is dependent upon claim 8 which is rejected above under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of LEE, YE, and GROBE. GROBE teaches the connection structure may be coated with a metal material (column 6 lines 27-34). GROBE does not explicitly teach the metal layer is formed by copper aluminum welding.
BIRKHOLZ teaches an electrochemical cell (abstract). The cells are connected with busbars, which may be welded together (paragraph 0097). For this purpose a bimetallic plate is used with a first side of aluminum and a second side of copper, so that the welding may be made to the bimetallic plate (paragraph 0097).
At the time the invention was filed one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the bimetallic plate for welding of the busbar to other elements, as BIRKHOLZ teaches that aluminum and copper can only be welded with great effort, and therefor ethe use of the bimetallic plate to weld the similar metals together would have been beneficial to the connection structure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN G JELSMA whose telephone number is (571)270-5127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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.
/JONATHAN G JELSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
