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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 04/28/2026 and the request for continued examination filed 04/28/2026:
Claims 1, 6-14, 17-20, and 22-25 are pending in the current application. Claim 1 has been amended.
The previous prior art-based rejection have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Page 5, filed 04/28/2026, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered. The rejections have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot due to the amendment to the claims.
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.
Claim 1, and thus claims 6-14, 17-20, and 22-25, is 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 recites the limitation "the heat conducting member" in lines 5-6 and 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which “heat conducting member” of the “at least one heat conducting member” is “the heat conducting member”.
Further, claim 1 recites a plurality of battery cells and at least one heat conducting member, with specifics, in lines 2-8. However, claim 1 then recites in lines 9-15 that the battery includes a plurality of battery modules including two columns of the battery cells and at least two heat conducting members.
It is unclear from the claim, as written, whether or not the at least two heat conducting members from lines 9-15 include the at least one heat conducting member recited from lines 2-8. Are the at least two heat conducting members limited by the structure recited in claims 3-8 or are they at least two additional heat conducting members that do not have to be connected to a first wall of each battery cell or have dimensions as claimed as long as they are provided alternatively in the second direction and not provided between adjacent battery modules? It is not clear.
In order to apply prior art and advance prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting the claims such that the battery includes a plurality of battery modules, the battery modules include a plurality of battery cells arranged in at least two columns, the battery modules includes at least two heat conducting members, the at least two columns of battery cells and the at least two heat conducting members are provided alternately in the second direction, the at least two heat conducting members are not provided between adjacent battery modules, and the at least two heat conducting members require the specific limitations as set forth in lines 2-8 of claim 1.
Given claims 6-14, 17-20, and 22-25 depend from claim 1, they are rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 14, 19-20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, He discloses a power consumption device comprising a battery configured to provide electric energy (electric vehicle; see entire disclosure and especially P171), the battery comprising:
a plurality of battery cells arranged along a first direction (column/line of cells 203 in Figs. 1-2 and 4-6; see entire disclosure and especially P70; first direction is y-direction in Fig. 1); at least one heat conducting member extending along the first direction and connected to a first wall of each battery cell in the plurality of battery cells (structural reinforcing member 202 in Figs. 4-6; see entire disclosure and especially P70), the first wall being a wall with the largest surface area in each battery cell (see Figs. 1-2 and 4-6; see entire disclosure and especially P75), the heat conducting member being configured to conduct heat of each battery cell (structural reinforcing member 202 can be a metal plate; see entire disclosure and especially P22, 75, 113-114); and
wherein a dimension of the heat conducting member in a second direction is 0.1-100mm, and the second direction is perpendicular to the first wall (“a thickness of a structural reinforcing member of at least one battery assembly is 10 mm to 35 mm”, P39; second direction is x-direction in Fig. 1).
He discloses wherein the battery comprises a battery module (see battery pack 300 in Fig. 1) that comprises at least two columns of the plurality of battery cells arranged along the first direction and at least two heat conducting members (in Fig. 1, there are approximately 12 columns of battery cells and there are approximately 11 structural reinforcing members which would be positioned between the 12 columns of battery cells), the at least two columns of the plurality of battery cells and the at least two heat conducting members are provided alternately in the second direction (see Figs. 1-2 and 4-6).
However, He does not disclose a surface of the heat conducting member connected to the first wall being an insulating surface or a plurality of battery modules, wherein the at least two heat conducting members are not provided between adjacent battery modules.
In a similar field of endeavor, Shin teaches a surface of a cooling plate can be coated with an electrically insulating layer (P120). Shin teaches electrical insulation between a secondary battery and the cooling plate may be stably secured due to the electrically insulating layer (P121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Shin and provide an electrically insulating layer on a surface of the heat conducting member of He connected to the first wall in order to provide a surface of the heat conducting member connected to the first wall being an insulating surface, given Shin teaches providing a surface of a cooling plate with an electrically insulating layer can secure electrical insulation between a secondary battery and a cooling plate.
He discloses the use of their battery in an electric vehicle (P171). However, modified He does not meet the limitations wherein the battery comprises a plurality of battery modules, wherein the at least two heat conducting members are not provided between adjacent battery modules.
In a similar field of endeavor, Cho teaches in the case of medium and large devices such as automobiles or power storage systems, in order to increase capacity and power, a battery pack in which a plurality of battery modules are connected may be used (P5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Cho and modified Modified He such that the battery comprises a plurality of the battery modules of modified He connected together, given He desires their battery to be used within an electric vehicle and Cho teaches, in the case of medium and large devices such as automobiles or power storage systems, a battery in which a plurality of battery modules are connected can be used to increase capacity and power.
However, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein the at least two heat conducting members are not provided between adjacent battery modules.
In a similar field of endeavor, Heimer teaches a plurality of identical modules may be stacked one on top of another in any reasonable desired number so as to accommodate a plurality of cells in vertical orientation thereby minimizing the floor space required to house the batteries (P38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Heimer and provided wherein the plurality of battery modules of modified He are stacked vertically, given Heimer teaches this can minimize the floor space required to house the batteries.
Since the heat conducting members alternate between the columns of battery cells of modified He in the second direction (which is a horizontal x-direction, not a vertical (height) z-direction, as seen in Figs. 1-2 and 4-6 of He), when the plurality of battery modules are stacked in a vertical direction, modified He meets the limitation wherein the at least two heat conducting members are not provided between adjacent battery modules.
Regarding claim 6, He discloses the battery cell has a thickness of 10 mm to 90 mm in the second direction (x-direction, P24, 25) and the heat conducting member (structural reinforcing member 202) has a thickness of 10 mm to 35 mm (P39, 158).
Shin is silent to the thickness of the electrically insulating layer.
Therefore, the thickness of the heat conducting member is at minimum greater than 10 mm, given the thickness of the electrically insulating layer is unknown.
Using these numbers we can calculate that T2/T1.
T2 = at minimum greater than 10 mm
T1 = 10 mm as smallest value, 90 mm as largest value
T2 / T1 = 10/90 = 0.1111
Therefore, T2 / T1 is in a range of greater than 0.1111, which overlaps wherein a dimension T1 of each battery cell in the second direction and a dimension T2 of the heat conducting member in the second direction satisfy: 0<T2/T1<7, and in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 7, He discloses the battery cell has a thickness of 10 mm to 90 mm in the second direction (x-direction, P24, 25) and the heat conducting member (structural reinforcing member 202) has a thickness of 10 mm to 35 mm (P39, 158).
Shin is silent to the thickness of the electrically insulating layer.
Therefore, the thickness of the heat conducting member is at minimum greater than 10 mm, given the thickness of the electrically insulating layer is unknown.
Using these numbers we can calculate that T2/T1.
T2 = at minimum greater than 10 mm
T1 = 10 mm as smallest value, 90 mm as largest value
T2 / T1 = 10/90 = 0.1111
Therefore, T2 / T1 is in a range of greater than 0.1111, which overlaps wherein a dimension T1 of each battery cell in the second direction and a dimension T2 of the heat conducting member in the second direction satisfy: 0<T2/T1<1, and in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 14, He discloses wherein each battery cell comprises the two first walls provided opposite to each other in the second direction and two second walls provided opposite to each other in the first direction, and wherein the second walls of the two adjacent battery cells are opposite (see the annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image1.png
368
591
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated He Fig. 5
Regarding claim 19, He discloses wherein the heat conducting member is bonded to the first wall (via a heat conducting structural adhesive 213 in Fig. 6, P112).
Regarding claim 22, He discloses wherein each of the at least two heat conducting members comprises a metal plate and an insulating layer, and the insulating layer is provided on a surface of the metal plate (see He P22 and the rejection of claim 1 above).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Ramamurthi et al (US 20120301768 A1) and Chiu et al (US 20130309531 A1).
Regarding claims 8-9, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein a weight M1 of the battery cell and a weight M2 of the heat conducting member satisfy: 0<M2/M1<20 and wherein 0.1<M2/M1<1.
In a similar field of endeavor, Ramamurthi teaches an invention wherein there are less cathode materials in a core area of the battery cell giving it a lighter weight (P24).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the weight of a battery cell is a result-effective variable based upon the amount of electrode materials, in Ramamurthi’s case cathode materials, within a battery cell. Therefore, it is up to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the weight of the battery cell based upon the amount of electrode materials a manufacture decides to use within the battery cell, and “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
However, modified He does not give a weight for the heat conducting member.
In a similar field of endeavor, Chiu teaches a cooling plate has a reduced weight thereby decreasing its cost by using fewer materials (P2, 10).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the weight of a heat conducting member is a result-effective variable based upon the desired cost and amount of materials a manufacturer wishes to use. Therefore, it is up to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the weight of the heat conducting member based upon the desired cost and amount of materials a manufacturer wishes to use, and “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, the ratio of the weight M1 of the battery cell and the weight M2 of the heat conducting member is dependent upon the optimization of the amount of electrode materials used in a battery cell and the desired cost and amount of materials a manufacturer wishes to use in a heat conduction member.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Khan Academy (What is thermal conductivity?, hereinafter referred to as “Khan”).
Regarding claims 10-11, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein an area S1 of the first wall and an area S2 of a surface of the heat conducting member connected to the first wall of the plurality of battery cells satisfy: 0.2 < S2/S1 < 30 and 2 < S2/S1 < 30.
Khan teaches the transfer of heat between two objects in contact is thermal conduction (page 1). Khan teaches there are four factors that affect the rate at which heat is conductive through a material (Q/t): the thermal conductivity constant for the material (k), a cross-sectional area of the material transferring heat (A), the difference in temperature between one side of the material and another (T1-T2), and the thickness of the material (d, page 3). Khan gives the equation for the rate of thermal conduction:
Q
t
=
k
A
(
T
h
o
t
-
T
c
o
l
d
)
d
(page 3).
One of ordinary skill in the art would not only recognize this equation, but be able to rearrange the equation to:
A
=
d
*
(
Q
/
t
k
)
(
T
h
o
t
-
T
c
o
l
d
)
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the rearranged thermal conductivity equation that the cross-sectional surface areas of the materials transferring heat (the cross-sectional area of the first wall surface and the cross section area of the heat conduction member connected to the first wall) are result-effective variable of the: the thermal conductivity constant for the objects (k), the thickness of the materials (d), the difference in temperature between one side of the object and another object (T1-T2), and the rate at which heat is conductive through an object (Q/t). Therefore, it is up to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the relationship between the surface areas of the first wall and heat conduction member connected to the first wall based upon the factors listed above, and “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Xiao et al (US 20210028425 A1), as evidenced by Accuratus (Aluminum Oxide, Al2O3 Ceramic Properties), and Chiu et al (US 20130309531 A1).
Regarding claims 12-13, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein a specific heat capacity Q of the heat conducting member and a weight M2 of the heat conducting member satisfy: 0.02 KJ/(kg2*°C)<Q/M2<100 KJ/(kg2*°C) and 0.3 KJ/(kg2*°C)<Q/M2<20 KJ/(kg2*°C).
In a similar field of endeavor, Xiao teaches a insulation thermal-dissipation member can be made of an aluminum oxide ceramic as it has electrical insulation and a large thermal conductivity (P19, 61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Xiao and substituted the heat conducting member of modified He with an aluminum oxide ceramic insulation thermal-dissipation member, given Xiao teaches this can provide a heat dissipation structure with electrical insulation and a large thermal conductivity. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Accuratus states that 94%, 96%, and 99.5% Aluminum Oxide has specific heat of 880 J/Kg•°K / 0.21 Btu/lb•°F. Therefore the specific heat of the heat conducting member of modified He is 880 J/Kg•°K / 0.21 Btu/lb•°F.
However, modified He does not give a weight for the heat conducting member.
In a similar field of endeavor, Chiu teaches a cooling plate has a reduced weight thereby decreasing its cost by using fewer materials.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the weight of a heat conducting member is a result-effective variable based upon the desired cost and amount of materials a manufacturer wishes to use. Therefore, it is up to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the weight of the heat conducting member based upon the desired cost and amount of materials a manufacturer wishes to use, and “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, the ratio of the specific heat capacity Q of the heat conducting member and the weight M2 of the heat conducting member is dependent upon the optimization of the weight of the heat conduction member based upon the desired cost and amount of materials a manufacturer wishes to use.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Lee et al (US 20230411760 A1) and Kato et al (US 20040023115 A1).
Regarding claim 17, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein each battery module comprises N columns of battery cells and N-1 heat conducting member(s), the heat conducting member(s) is provided between two adjacent columns of battery cells, and N is an integer greater than 1 (given, it appears there is a structural reinforcing member 202 between each column of battery cells (twelve columns in Fig. 1) and at each end of the plurality of battery cells (therefore, making it approximately thirteen structural reinforcing members); see Figs. 1-2 and 4-6).
In a similar field of endeavor, Lee teaches a compression pad (120 in Fig. 3) can be provided on outer surfaces of a cell stack (100 in Fig. 3, P59). Lee teaches the compression pad is a laminate of an elastic pad and a synthetic resin film (P62). When swelling occurs in battery cells that are in the cell stack due to repeated charging/discharging, Lee teaches the elastic pad of the compression pad can be compressed to absorb the swelling (P63). Lee further teaches that it is also possible for the elastic pad of the compression pad to absorb an impact from the outside (P63).
While Lee discloses their compression pad being used with pouch battery cells (see Fig. 3), Kato teaches prismatic batteries swell (expand) in the thickness direction through charge/discharge cycles (P154). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the benefits the compression pad of Lee could provide to the battery of modified He using prismatic battery cells.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of Lee and Kato and substituted the heat conducting members (structural reinforcing members) of modified He at the outer ends of the battery of modified He in the second direction with the compression pads as taught by Lee, given Kato teaches prismatic batteries swell in their thickness direction during charge/discharge cycles, Lee teaches their compression pad includes an elastic pad that can be compressed to absorb the swelling of battery cells, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
From this modification, modified He would meet the limitation wherein each battery module comprises N columns of battery cells and N-1 heat conducting member(s), the heat conducting member(s) is provided between two adjacent columns of battery cells, and N is an integer greater than 1 (given there would be 12 columns of battery cells and a heat conducting member would be between each column of battery cells: this gives a total of N = 12 columns of battery cells, N-1 = 11 heat conducting members, and then two compression pads at the outer ends of the whole battery of modified He).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Knape et al (US 20180301765 A1), Lee et al (US 20230411760 A1), and Kato et al (US 20040023115 A1).
Regarding claim 18, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein the plurality of battery modules are arranged along the second direction, and there is a gap between adjacent battery modules.
While Heimer teaches battery modules can be stacked vertically (see the rejection of claim 1), Heimer further teaches battery modules can also be horizontally arranged side-by-side (P33).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have rearranged the parts of modified He such that the battery modules are arranged along the second direction, given Heimer teaches a plurality of battery modules can be horizontally arranged side-by-side. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have rearranged the battery modules such that they are arranged along the second direction rather than a vertical direction in order to, for example, fit the plurality of battery modules in an electric vehicle’s battery-housing space that has a shallow depth/height, but large width/horizontal area, because the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
However, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein there is a gap between adjacent battery modules.
In a similar field of endeavor, Knape teaches thermally insulating element can be arranged between battery modules in order to prevent heat from being exchanged between adjacent battery modules in the module assembly (P46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Knape and provided a thermally insulating element between the adjacent battery modules of modified He, given Knape teaches this can prevent heat from being exchanged between adjacent modules.
The space in which the thermally insulating element of modified He sits is the “gap” between the adjacent battery modules.
However, if the battery modules of modified He were arranged along the second direction of modified Lee, two heat conducting members at the outer ends of the battery modules of Lee would be provided between the two adjacent battery modules.
In a similar field of endeavor, Lee teaches a compression pad (120 in Fig. 3) can be provided on outer surfaces of a cell stack (100 in Fig. 3, P59). Lee teaches the compression pad is a laminate of an elastic pad and a synthetic resin film (P62). When swelling occurs in battery cells that are in the cell stack due to repeated charging/discharging, Lee teaches the elastic pad of the compression pad can be compressed to absorb the swelling (P63). Lee further teaches that it is also possible for the elastic pad of the compression pad to absorb an impact from the outside (P63).
While Lee discloses their compression pad being used with pouch battery cells (see Fig. 3), Kato teaches prismatic batteries swell (expand) in the thickness direction through charge/discharge cycles (P154). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the benefits the compression pad of Lee could provide to the battery of modified He using prismatic battery cells.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of Lee and Kato and substituted the heat conducting members (structural reinforcing members) of modified He at the outer ends of the battery of modified He in the second direction with the compression pads as taught by Lee, given Kato teaches prismatic batteries swell in their thickness direction during charge/discharge cycles, Lee teaches their compression pad includes an elastic pad that can be compressed to absorb the swelling of battery cells, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Therefore, through this modification, modified He would not include heat conducting members between the adjacent battery modules, but instead include their respective compression pads between the adjacent modules as the battery modules are arranged along the second direction.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Xiao et al (US 20210028425 A1), as evidenced by Accuratus (Aluminum Oxide, Al2O3 Ceramic Properties).
Regarding claim 23, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein each of the at least two heat conducting members are a non-metallic material plate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Xiao teaches a insulation thermal-dissipation member can be made of an aluminum oxide ceramic as it has electrical insulation and a large thermal conductivity (P19, 61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Xiao and substituted the heat conducting member of modified He with an aluminum oxide ceramic insulation thermal-dissipation member, given Xiao teaches this can provide a heat dissipation structure with electrical insulation and a large thermal conductivity. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Given aluminum oxide is a ceramic, modified He meets the limitation wherein each of the at least two heat conducting members are a non-metallic material plate.
Claim 24-25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 20220416343 A1) in view of Shin et al (US 20180375077 A1) in view of Cho et al (US 20200277433 A1) in view of Heimer (US 20020015880 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Sima (CN107863586 A, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet)
Regarding claims 24-25, modified He does not meet the limitation wherein a cavity is provided in each of the at least two heat conducting members, wherein the cavity is configured to accommodate a fluid to adjust a temperature of each battery cell..
In a similar field of endeavor, Sima teaches a battery module having a liquid cooling plate (2 in Fig. 1; P28). Sima teaches the liquid cooling plate extends outside the main body outline of a battery cell also in the battery module and is provided with an integrally formed surrounding groove comprising a liquid cooling pipe (P28).
Sima teaches their liquid cooling plate has a low cost, a light weight, and the manufacturing process is simple and reliable (P18). Sima teaches their liquid cooling plate with the liquid cooling pipe has good structural strength (P18). Sima teaches heat generated by the battery cells in the battery module can be carried away by the coolant through the liquid cooling plate having the liquid cooling pipe (P18). Sima teaches their structure has high mechanical properties (P18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the at least two heat conducting members of modified He with liquid cooling plates having liquid cooling pipes as taught by Sima, given Sima teaches their liquid cooling plates having liquid cooling pipes have good structural strength, are low cost, are light weight, and the manufacturing process for them is simple and reliable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mary Harris whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/MARY GRACE HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights