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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wesche (US 20190393460 A1) in view of DeKeuster (US 20220271394 A1), and further in view of Ginn (US 10053840 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Wesche discloses a battery pack accommodating a battery module (abstract discloses battery housing, [0031] discloses a plurality of battery modules accommodated in the housing, reading on a battery pack accommodating a battery module) including a cell stack in which a plurality of cells are stacked, the battery pack comprising a pack case include a module area where the battery module is placed (fig. 2 shows the pack case, including housing interior spaces 14. As can be seen in fig. 1, which is a depiction of the pack cases with the battery modules, the battery modules 34 are placed into the interior spaces, satisfying the claimed limitation),
wherein the pack case includes:
a base plate configured to support a lower portion of the battery module (see fig. 2, the surface that the battery module rests on is the claimed base plate),
a main partition wall extending across the base plate and perpendicularly coupled to a central portion of the base plate ([0039] discloses a longitudinal member 20 that corresponds to the claimed main partition. As can be seen in fig. 2, the main partition takes the form of a wall extending across a central portion of the base plate, and perpendicularly coupled to said base plate, reading on the claimed limitations);
a side wall perpendicularly coupled to an edge of the base plate in a perimeter direction (see fig. 2, side wall 16); and
an auxiliary partition wall of which both ends are coupled to the main partition wall and the side wall ([0040] discloses structural components 22 which correspond to the claimed auxiliary partition wall, as can be seen in fig. 2, the ends are coupled to the main partition wall and the side wall).
Wesche does not discuss the structure of the individual battery modules themselves, and as a result does not disclose that battery modules include a cell stack in which a plurality of cells are stacked. However, this feature is very commonly known in the art and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include. For example, DeKeuster discloses a battery module comprising a plurality of stacked cells provided in a housing, [0013] demonstrating the basic structure of a battery module is commonly known to those skilled in the art and would therefore be obvious.
Wesche does not disclose that the auxiliary partition wall includes a pair of reinforcement plates coupled to each other. However, Wesche does disclose that the structural component/auxiliary partition wall is designed so as to increase its flexural rigidity [0010], as [0004]-[0005] discloses that reinforcing elements such as the structural component arrange in the housing so as to prevent deformation of the battery housing due to, for example, an unexpected application of force to the battery.
To this end, forming a wall portion as a double/dual wall coupled together (reading as the claimed reinforcement plates) in order to increase strength/rigidity was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
For example, DeKeuster discloses the concept of forming a wall as a folded or as a dual wall, so as to provide increased strength and rigidity (see [0056], claim 6). As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the auxiliary partition wall/structural components of Wesche as a pair of dual walls, as this is a known technique of provided increased strength and rigidity, which is a goal of Wesche. DeKeuster is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, namely battery module and battery housing configuration, and also because it speaks to the same problem of providing a strengthened/more rigid wall portion capable of minimizing shape deformation (see pg. 2-3 of instant application).
Modified Wesche does not disclose that each of the reinforcement plates includes a plurality of reinforcement ribs protruding and extending in a longitudinal direction of the reinforcement plate, DeKeuster opts to provide the coupling by, for example, a folded portion [0053]. However, the coupling of two parts via a plurality of reinforcement ribs protruding and extending in a longitudinal direction was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in the design of modified Wesche as a known alternative for providing a coupling means that could be routinely selected with predictable results and an expectation of success.
For example, Ginn discloses a coupling configuration for coupling two side walls (claim 1), wherein the exterior comprises connection structures, said connection structures include female channels and male ribs, wherein each channel and rib is configured to interlock with a corresponding rib and channel, wherein each side wall includes connection structures arranged in an alternating pattern that alternates channels and ribs (claim 1, see also fig. 7). As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the dual-walled configuration of modified Wesche wherein the walls are coupled together with the known coupling method described by Wesche. This would be nothing more than the simple substitution of one known connection method between two wall structures for another with predictable results, and doing so would result in a configuration wherein each reinforcement plate includes a plurality of reinforcement ribs protruding and extending in a longitudinal direction of the reinforcement plate, satisfying the instant claim. Ginn is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they both relate to the problem of providing a connection structure between two walls.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 1, wherein the reinforcement ribs are spaced a predetermined distance from each other in the longitudinal direction of the reinforcement plate (as can be seen in fig. 7 of Ginn, the reinforcement ribs are placed a regular, consistent distance apart in the longitudinal direction, reasonably reading as a predetermined distance apart).
Regarding claim 3, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 2, wherein the reinforcement plate includes a reinforcement groove having a recessed shape between a pair of reinforcement ribs spaced apart from each other in the longitudinal direction of the reinforcement plate (see claim 1 rejection above, fig. 6 and claim 1 of Ginn).
Regarding claim 4, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 3, wherein a shape of the reinforcement groove is the same as a shape of the reinforcement rib so that the reinforcement rib is engaged with and inserted into the reinforcement groove (see claim 1 rejection above, fig. 6 and claim 1 of Ginn).
Regarding claim 5, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 4, wherein the reinforcement rib and the reinforcement groove are alternately provided in a longitudinal direction of the auxiliary partition wall (see claim 1 rejection above, fig. 6 and claim 1 of Ginn).
Regarding claim 6, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 4, wherein the reinforcement rib has at least one of a trapezoidal shape (see fig. 7 of Ginn, as can be seen the reinforcement rib has a trapezoidal shape.
Regarding claim 7, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 1. Ginn does not explicitly disclose an embodiment wherein the reinforcement ribs are spaced a predetermined distance from each other in a height direction of the reinforcement plate, however a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the coupling effect provided by the structure of Gimm relies upon the ribs of one wall interlocking with the grooves of the other wall (and vice versa), and is not dependent on the direction that the reinforcement ribs are spaced in. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to routinely select a direction for the reinforcement ribs to be spaced apart in when adapting the coupling structure disclosed by Ginn for the walls of modified Wesche, rendering spacing the ribs a predetermined distance part from each other in a height direction obvious. See also, for example, MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C), which has held that simple rearrangements of parts in such a way that does not modify operation has been held to be obvious, “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice)”.
Regarding claim 8, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 7, wherein the auxiliary partition wall includes:
a first reinforcement plate having the reinforcement rib formed on one side therefore and a second reinforcement plate having the reinforcement rib formed on the other side thereof facing the first reinforcement plate, and
the reinforcement ribs included in the first reinforcement plate and the second reinforcement plate are formed at heights corresponding to each other (see claim 1 and claim 7 rejection above, fig. 6 and claim 1 of Ginn).
Regarding claim 9, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 8, wherein the reinforcement plate includes a reinforcement groove having a recessed shape between a pair of reinforcement ribs spaced apart from each other in the longitudinal direction of the reinforcement plate in the longitudinal direction of the reinforcement plate, and
the reinforcement rib and the reinforcement grove of the first reinforcement plate are engaged with and coupled to the reinforcement groove and reinforcement rib of the second reinforcement plate (see claim 1 and claim 7 rejection above, fig. 6 and claim 1 of Ginn).
Regarding claim 10, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 8, wherein the first reinforcement plate is coupled to the second reinforcement plate so that the reinforcement rib thereof is inserted into reinforcement groove of the second reinforcement plate at a corresponding position, and
the second reinforcement plate is coupled to the first reinforcement plate so that the reinforcement rib thereof is inserted into the reinforcement groove of the first reinforcement plate and a corresponding position (see claim 1 rejection above and fig. 7 of Ginn).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wesche (US 20190393460 A1) in view of DeKeuster (US 20220271394 A1), and Ginn (US 10053840 B2), and further in view of Kim (WO 2020060341 A1, US 20210351455 A1 is used as an English equivalent).
Regarding claim 11 modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 1, but does not disclose a through hole perforated to perpendicularly pass through the reinforcement rib. However, the technique of placing through holes in the auxiliary partition walls of a battery pack was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
For example, Kim discloses a battery case (title) wherein the battery case includes a base plate which supports a lower portion of the battery module, a main partition wall extending across the base plate and perpendicularly coupled to a central portion of the base plate, side walls perpendicularly coupled to edges of the base plate; and auxiliary partition walls of which both ends are coupled to the main partition wall and the side wall (see fig. 2 of Kim, which is provided below).
PNG
media_image1.png
701
314
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As can be seen in fig. 2 of Kim, the auxiliary partition wall includes a through hole 150 perforated to perpendicularly pass through the center of the auxiliary partition wall. [0179] discloses that this enables a fastening member/bolt to be passed through the auxiliary partition wall, enabling the battery pack structure to be fastened. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a through hole through the center of the auxiliary partition wall of modified Wesche, corresponding to the reinforcement rib. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do this to enable fastening of the battery pack structure.
Regarding claim 12, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 11, wherein the pack case includes a coupling groove formed at the bottom of the module area to correspond to a position of the through hole (as can be seen in fig. 2 of Kim, the pack case includes a coupling groove formed at the bottom of the module area to correspond to a position of the through hole), and
the auxiliary partition wall is coupled to the pack case by a bolt passing through the through hole and inserted into the coupling groove (see claim 11 rejection above, and fig. 2 and [0179] of Kim).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wesche (US 20190393460 A1) in view of DeKeuster (US 20220271394 A1), and Ginn (US 10053840 B2), and further in view of Wang (CN 215527838 U, a machine translation from Espacenet is used as an English equivalent).
Regarding claim 13, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 1, but does not disclose that the reinforcement plate includes a reinforcement bar extending perpendicularly through the reinforcement rib, and
the reinforcement bar includes a reinforcement hole perforated to perpendicularly pass through the reinforcement bar. However, the technique of placing reinforcement bars with through-holes in the auxiliary partition walls of a battery pack was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
For example, Wang discloses a battery pack (title) comprising a pack case comprising a base plate, a main partition wall extending across the base plate and perpendicularly coupled to a central portion of the base plate, a side wall perpendicularly coupled to an edge of the case plate in a perimeter direction, and auxiliary partition walls of which both ends are coupled to the main partition wall and the side wall. These features are visible in fig. 1, which is provided below.
PNG
media_image2.png
300
506
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Wang discloses a crossbeam 3 ([0027], visible in fig. 1 above) corresponding to the claimed reinforcement bar that extends through the center of the auxiliary partition wall. [0014] discloses that the crossbeam structure of Wang helps the battery pack be lightweight while ensuring safety. [0008] discloses that the crossbeam may have a perforated post that extends through the top plate and the bottom plate, which is used provide fasteners for mounting housing assembly, the perforation reasonably reading as a reinforcement hole. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the reinforcement bar and reinforcement hole of Wang in the center of the auxiliary partition wall of modified Wesche, corresponding to the reinforcement rib, as a known fastening technique for battery packs and to ensure safety and the light weight of the battery pack, and doing so would result in a battery pack having the features of the instant claim.
Regarding claim 14, modified Wang discloses the battery pack of claim 13, wherein the pack case includes a coupling groove formed at a bottom of the module area to correspond to a position of the reinforcement hole (see [0008] and fig, 2 of Wang), and
The auxiliary partition wall is coupled to the pack case by a bolt passing through the reinforcement hole and inserted into the coupling groove (see claim 13 above, [0008] discloses a perforated post that passes through the crossbeam that can be considered the claimed bolt, [0008] discloses that the post extends vertically through the top and the bottom plate, which is reasonably understood to provide coupling between the auxiliary partition wall and the pack case).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wesche (US 20190393460 A1) in view of DeKeuster (US 20220271394 A1), and Ginn (US 10053840 B2), and further in view of Ijaz (US 20230026549 A1).
Regarding claim 15, modified Wesche discloses the battery pack of claim 1, but does not disclose auxiliary coupling holes perforated to pass through both ends in a horizontal direction, wherein each of the side wall and main partition wall includes an auxiliary coupling groove formed to correspond to a position of the auxiliary coupling hole of the auxiliary partition wall, and wherein a bolt passes though the auxiliary coupling hole and auxiliary coupling groove to couple the auxiliary partition wall to the pack case. However, the coupling of an auxiliary partition wall to a pack case via horizontally oriented bolts that pass through is a known alternative coupling method in the art and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in the battery pack of modified Wesche.
For example, Ijaz discloses a battery pack (title) comprising a plurality of battery modules [0002], and provided with dividers 312 corresponding to the auxiliary partition wall members ([0050], the auxiliary partition wall members 312 are also visible in fig. 4a) provided between the cell assemblies/battery modules (see fig. 4a). Ijaz further discloses coupling the auxiliary partition walls/dividers to the battery pack via known connection methods such as bolts, glue, welding, or adhesion [0052], and further disclosing that the dividers are connected to the base [0052] or to the side plates via welding or bolts [0056]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the use of bolts as a known coupling method between side/end walls and auxiliary partition walls in the configuration of modified Wesche to couple the auxiliary partition walls (reinforcement plates) of Wesche to the side wall and main partition wall. Doing so would have been nothing more than the simple substitution of one known attachment/coupling method for another with predictable and expected outcomes, and would result in a bolt configured to pass through the reinforcement plate and the side wall/main partition plate in a horizontal direction.
Further, after having done this, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that which part has the coupling holes and which part has the coupling grooves would be a matter of routine selection for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and that the same coupling effect could easily be achieved no matter which part the hole and corresponding groove were formed in. Whether the bolt passes through a hole in the reinforcement plate to fit into a corresponding groove formed in the side wall, or a hole in the side wall to fit into a corresponding groove in the reinforcement plate, the coupling effect is the same, and therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan to routinely select, for example, the reinforcement plates to have the auxiliary coupling holes and the main wall/side walls to have the auxiliary coupling grooves, resulting in a configuration matching the instant claim 15. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C), which has held that simple rearrangements of parts in such a way that does not modify operation has been held to be obvious, “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice)”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACKARY R COCHENOUR whose telephone number is (703)756-1480. The examiner can normally be reached 1-9:00PM ET.
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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/ZACKARY RICHARD COCHENOUR/ Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
