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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1,2,3, 5,6 - is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by - KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1).
Regarding Claim-1, KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1), through Fig-1 and Fig-5A, discloses that the bus bar module comprising: a first module (6A) including a first substrate (44) that is a flexible printed circuit (36), and a device connection unit (34) that connects a circuit of the first substrate to an external device (22); and a second module (6B) including a second substrate (48) configured to be connectable to the first substrate (44), and at least one bus bar (10) connected to a circuit (38) of the second substrate (48).
PNG
media_image1.png
572
819
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
698
1027
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim-2, KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1)– through Fig-1 and Fig-5A, discloses that the bus bar module, wherein the first module (6A) includes at least one bus bar (10) connected to the circuit of the first substrate (44).
Regarding Claim-3, KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1)– through Fig-1 and Fig-5A, discloses that the bus bar module (6), the circuit of the second substrate (48) is connected to the device connection unit (34) via the circuit (36) of the first substrate (44).
Regarding Claim-6, KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1)– through Fig-1, and Fig-5B, discloses that the bus bar module further comprising: a case that accommodates the first substrate and the second substrate, wherein the case is divided into a first case (56) that accommodates the first substrate and a second case (58) that accommodates the second substrate.
PNG
media_image3.png
475
690
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 4- is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as anticipated by KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1) in view of Yanagida et al [US-20190372076-A1].
Regarding Claim-4, KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1) does not disclose that the plurality of the second modules, wherein the plurality of the second modules are configured such that a second substrate of one of the second modules is connectable to a second substrate of another one of the second modules.
However, Yanagida et al [US-20190372076-A1] discloses through annotated Figure-4, that the of comparing a plurality of the second modules (6B-1 & 6B-2), wherein the plurality of the second modules are configured such that a second substrate (64) of one of the second modules (6B-1) is connectable to a second substrate (64) of another one of the second modules (6B-2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use- a plurality of the second modules to address extremely troublesome work of connecting electrode terminals with bus bars needs to be repeated as disclosed by Yanagida et al [US-20190372076-A1] in paragraph [0009 & 0010].
Regarding Claim-5, KITA et al. (US 20230125441 A1)– does not disclose that the bus bar module is comprising: a plurality of the second modules, wherein a second substrate of one of the second modules is connected to the first substrate via a second substrate of another one of the second modules.
However, Yanagida et al [US-20190372076-A1] discloses through annotated Figure-4, that the bus bar module is comprising: a plurality of the second modules (6B-1 & 6B-2), wherein a second substrate (64) of one of the second modules (6b-1) is connected to the first substrate (64) via a second substrate of another one of the second modules.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use- a plurality of the second modules to address extremely troublesome work of connecting electrode terminals with bus bars needs to be repeated as disclosed by Yanagida et al [US-20190372076-A1] in paragraph [0009 & 0010].
PNG
media_image4.png
692
989
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OBAIDUL GANI whose telephone number is (571)272-8665. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30 - 5:00.
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 Thompson can be reached at (571) 272-2342. 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.
/OBAIDUL GANI/Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/TIMOTHY J THOMPSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights