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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 19-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/25/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, line 13, the limitation, “the recesses” is confusing. Replace “recesses” with –one or more recesses--.
Claim 1, line 16, the limitation, “the recesses” is confusing. Replace “recesses” with –one or more recesses--.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arima et al. (JP H11-111250 A).
PNG
media_image1.png
368
322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
190
348
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Arima et al. disclose a module comprising:
one or more energy storage device (1) that each comprise a main-body covered with a laminate film, and a first terminal electrode (1a) and a second terminal electrode (1a) exposed from the main-body;
a case (2) including one recess (see Fig. 1) configured to house the one energy storage device, respectively;
a first bus bar (2d) integrally incorporated in the case (2) and electrically connected to the first terminal electrode (1a) of the one energy storage device; and
a second bus bar (2d) integrally incorporated in the case (2) and electrically connected to the second terminal electrode (1a) of the one energy storage device;
wherein the first bus bar (2d) includes one first connection portion
connected to the respective first terminal electrode (1a) of the one energy storage device disposed in the recess, respectively, and
wherein the second bus bar (2d) includes one second connection portion
connected to the respective second terminal electrode (1a) of the one energy storage device disposed in the recess, respectively.
Arima et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the energy storage device (1) is a capacitor.
It is well known in the energy storage device art to substitute a battery with a capacitor.
Lacking unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a capacitor in the module of Arima et al., since such a modification would create a module with high power density and rapid charge times. In addition, the capacitor remains firmly in place even when the module is subjected to vibration or shock.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Arima et al. disclose the recess includes a first recess that accommodates the main-body, a second recess (@ 2d) that accommodates the first terminal electrode (1a), and a third recess (@ 2d) that accommodates the
second terminal electrode (1a).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Arima et al. disclose the one first connection portion is positioned in the second recess (@ 2d) of the one recess, respectively, and the one second connection portion is positioned in the third recess (@ 2d) of the one recess, respectively.
Regarding claim 4, the modified Arima et al. disclose for the one recess, the second recess (@ 2d) and the third (@ 2d) recess are arranged continuously with the first recess, and the second recess (@ 2d) and the third recess (@ 2d)are spaced apart from each other.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Arima et al. disclose in the case, the
first recess of the one recess is aligned in a first direction, and the second recess (@ 2 d) and the third recess (@ 2d) of the one recess is alternately aligned in the first direction (left-right).
Regarding claim 11, Arima et al. disclose a module comprising:
an energy storage device (1) that comprises a main-body covered with a laminate film, and a first terminal electrode (1a) and a second terminal electrode (1a) exposed from the main-body;
a case (2) including a recess that houses the energy storage device (1);
a first bus bar (2d) integrally incorporated in the case (2) and electrically connected to the first terminal electrode (1a) of the energy storage device (1); and
a second bus bar (2d) integrally incorporated in the case (2) and electrically connected to the second terminal electrode (1a) of the energy storage device (1),
wherein the first bus bar (2d) includes a first connection portion connected to the
first terminal electrode (1a) of the energy storage device disposed in the recess, and
wherein the second bus bar (2d) includes a second connection portion connected to the second terminal electrode (1a) of the energy storage device (1).
Arima et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the energy storage device (1) is a capacitor.
It is well known in the energy storage device art to substitute a battery with a capacitor.
Lacking unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a capacitor in the module of Arima et al., since such a modification would create a module with high power density and rapid charge times. In addition, the capacitor remains firmly in place
even when the module is subjected to vibration or shock.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Arima et al. disclose the recess includes a first recess that accommodates the main-body, a second recess (@ 2d) that accommodates the first terminal electrode (1a), and a third recess (@ 2d) that accommodates the
second terminal electrode (1a).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Arima et al. disclose the first connection portion is positioned in the second recess (@ 2d) and the second connection portion is positioned in the third recess (@ 2d).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Arima et al. disclose the second recess (@ 2d) and the third (@ 2d) recess are arranged continuously with the first recess, and the second recess (@ 2d) and the third recess (@ 2d)are spaced apart from each other, and the first recess is aligned in a first direction, and the second recess (@ 2 d) and the third recess (@ 2d) are alternately aligned in the first direction (left-right).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 15-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In combination with the other claim limitations, the prior art does not teach or suggest a capacitor module wherein the case includes a first case incorporating the first bus bar, and a second case incorporating the second bus bar (claims 6 and 15).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0162927 A1 – DC link capacitor having multiple capacitor elements
JP 4021592 – Pouch type capacitor
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1985. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00 AM-2:30 PM.
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, Timothy Dole can be reached at (571)272-2229. 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.
/ERIC W THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
ERIC THOMAS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights