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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 5, 8, 12, 14-15 remain pending in the application, with claims 8 and 12 previously withdrawn during prosecution. The amendment filed 02/13/2026 has been entered but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
The amendments to claim 1 overcome the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“wherein the pair of second thermal insulation pads extend an entire distance” should be corrected to read “wherein the pair of second thermal insulation pads extends an entire distance” wherein the underlined portion corresponds to the corrected portion.
“an upper surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet directly contact” should be corrected to read “an upper surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet directly contacts,” wherein the underlined portion corresponds to the corrected portion. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed Feb 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Xu’s teaching of battery cells not battery modules, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the advantage of the bent configuration taught by Xu’s heat conducting plate of minimizing heat from a thermal runaway event spreading from an incident battery cell toward other battery cells would be applicable to minimizing the possibility of thermal energy transfer between a thermal runaway battery module and its neighboring battery module, a problem recognized by Hermann. They would have found it obvious to apply Xu’s teaching to modify Hermann’s battery pack with heat spreader sheets having ends that are bent to cover the upper surface of the battery modules with a reasonable expectation of success. The Courts have also established that the prior art can be modified or combined to reject claims as prima facie obvious as long as there is a reasonable expectation of success. See In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (see MPEP § 2143.02). Additionally, the Courts have established that "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle." Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d 1397. Office personnel may also take into account "the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ." Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396, which in this case would include applying Xu’s teachings to address problems of thermal runaway events involving battery modules.
With respect to the argument that Xu does not teach the claimed third thermal insulation pads, Xu teaches the heat insulation layer 12 can be on an upper surface of the battery module as seen in the middle battery module of Fig. 4 and which would be between the bent (i.e., first) end of the heat spreader sheet 32 and the upper surface of the battery cell 1 and correspond to the claimed third thermal insulation pads.
With respect to the argument that one of ordinary skill would not bend the thermal insulation pads of modified Hermann, both the present and previous Office Actions discuss the motivations for the modification in the prior art rejection, including that in bending an end of the first heat spreader sheet to face an upper surface of the first battery module, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to also bend an adjacent thermal insulation pad (Hermann: 1303) of the pair of the second thermal insulation pads, given that this configuration is one of two possible ways to bend an end of the first heat spreader sheet to face an upper surface of the first battery module. Additionally, based on motivation by Hermann, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to bend the thermal insulation pad adjacent to and sandwiched between a battery module and a heat spreader such that it is interposed between the bent (first) end of the heat spreader sheet and the upper surface of the battery module to form a more complete thermal barrier to minimize the possibility of heat transfer from a thermal battery module to a neighboring battery module.
With respect to the argument that the bent ends of the heat spreader sheets of Xu do not directly contact a top of the battery pack case, the claimed battery pack case can correspond to the disclosed box body including the glue, and thus the bent end 32 of the heat spreader sheets of Xu would directly contact a top of the battery pack case.
Regarding the layers 160 taught by Ma, the Examiner respectfully notes that Ma discloses layer 160 as thermally conductive layers and the structures are not used to teach the claimed second thermal insulation pads, as argued.
With respect to the argument that the second auxiliary functional layer 166 of Ma cannot correspond to the claimed second thermal insulation pad because it is not a thermal insulation layer, Ma teaches layer 166 can be used as an insulating layer or a fireproof layer in [0058], wherein fireproof indicates the ability to withstand great heat without burning or being badly damaged as disclosed by evidentiary reference Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary’s definition of “fireproof,” thereby indicating a degree of thermal insulation property and that the material corresponds to a thermal insulation pad.
With respect to the argument that Ma does not disclose a third thermal insulation pad even when Ma is combined with Xu, the Examiner respectfully points out that Xu teaches the pair of third thermal insulation pads, as discussed above in response to a previous argument.
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 5, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 8,541,126 B2) in view of Murayama et al (WO 2019167689 A1) and Xu et al (CN 110739413 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Hermann teaches (Figures 5 and 7) a battery pack (500) comprising a battery module stack configured to include a first group of cells (battery module) separated from an adjacent second battery module by a barrier (503), and a battery pack case (701, 703) that accommodate the
battery module stack (Col 5: lines 13-17, 42-44). Hermann also discloses (Figure 12) an embodiment of a thermal barrier between battery modules as a multi-component barrier (1200) (Col 7: lines 6-9) that includes two heat spreader sheets (1203, 1205) (Col 7: lines 19-23) sandwiching an insulation pad (1201) and that is interposed between the first battery module (Cell Group A) and the second battery module (Cell Group B). This teaches the limitation of a first thermal insulation pad (1201) interposed between the first battery module and the second battery module (Col 7: lines 13-15, lines 28-29) and teaches the limitations of a first heat spreader sheet (1203) on a first side of the first insulation pad, and a second heat spreader sheet (1205) on a second side of the first insulation pad.
As another embodiment to the thermal barrier shown in Figure 12, Hermann discloses (Figure 13) a multi-component thermal barrier (1300) that comprises of a heat spreader sheet (1301) sandwiched by a pair of thermal insulation pads (1303, 1305). This illustrates a barrier design in which one of the pair of thermal insulation pads (1303) separates a thermal energy-emitting battery module (Cell Group A) from a heat spreader (1301), and the second of the pair of thermal insulation pads (1305) separates a heat spreader (1301) from a neighboring battery module (Cell Group B). Of the alternative embodiment, Hermann teaches the thermal insulation pad (1303) is adjacent to the battery module (Cell Group A) and minimizes the transfer of thermal energy between Cell Group A and a central heat spreader sheet (1301) adjacent to pad 1303, and that any further transfer of heat from the heat spreader sheet (1301) to the neighboring battery module (Cell Group B) is minimized by thermal insulation pad (1305) on the other side of the central heat spreader sheet (1301) (Col 7, lines 46-56). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the utility of incorporating thermal insulation pads (1303, 1305) taught by Figure 13 to surround the first heat spreader sheet (1203) and the second heat spreader sheet (1205) of barrier element 1200 (Figure 12) for the safety advantage of minimizing the possibility of thermal energy transfer between a thermal runaway battery module and its neighboring battery module (Col 2; lines 17 -22). Consequently, in the combined structure, e.g. 1303\1203\1201\1205\1305, the thermal insulation pad 1303 is interposed between the first battery module and the first heat spreader sheet, and thermal insulation pad 1305 is interposed between the second heat spreader sheet and the second battery module, thereby reading on the claimed pair of second thermal insulation pads, wherein a first pad of the pair of second thermal insulation pads is interposed between the first heat spreader sheet and the first battery module, and a second pad of the pair of second thermal insulation pads is interposed between the second heat spreader sheet and the second battery module. Bolded groups represent thermal insulation pads and the underlined section represents thermal barrier 1200 that is sandwiched by thermal insulation pads.
Hermann further teaches (Figure 14) another embodiment of the battery pack that includes a heatsink (1409) for the purposes of aiding in the distribution and removal of thermal energy (Col 7: lines 57-61, Col 8: lines 4-7) but is silent regarding the relative position of the heatsink with respect to the battery modules and the battery pack case. Hermann also teaches neither the bent end of the first heat spreader sheet nor the bent end of the second heat spreader sheet.
Xu is relied upon to teach (Figure 4) an end of the first heat spreader sheet in a longitudinal direction (32) is bent toward a surface of a battery cell (11) (translation: p5 paragraph 7) to facilitate heat transfer from the battery cell to a battery pack case via surface 30 (p5 paragraph 10, p6 paragraph 1) for the advantage of minimizing heat from a thermal runaway event spreading from an incident battery cell toward other battery cells. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the thermal barrier within the battery pack of Hermann to have an end of the first heat spreader sheet in a longitudinal direction bent to face an upper surface of the first battery module, and analogously, to bend an end of the second heat spreader sheet in the longitudinal direction to face an upper surface of the second battery module, as taught by Xu, for the benefits of improving the effectiveness of the thermal barrier and minimizing heat spreading toward other battery cells, thereby reading on the claimed limitations of a bent side end on the first spreader sheet and a bent side end of the second heat spreader sheet.
In bending an end of the first heat spreader sheet to face an upper surface of the first battery module, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to also bend an adjacent thermal insulation pad (Hermann: 1303) of the pair of the second thermal insulation pads, given that this configuration is one of two possible ways to bend an end of the first heat spreader sheet to face an upper surface of the first battery module.
Hermann also discloses that having a thermal insulation pad adjacent to a battery module minimizes the possibility of thermal energy transfer between a thermal runaway battery module and its neighboring battery module (Col 7, lines 46-56). Specifically, Hermann teaches the thermal insulation pad adjacent to the heat-transmitting battery module minimizes the transfer of thermal energy between a thermal energy-transmitting battery module and a central heat spreader adjacent to the thermal insulation pad, and further teaches that having a thermal insulation pad present between the heat spreader and a neighboring battery module minimizes further heat transfer from the heat spreader to the neighboring battery module (Col 7, lines 46-56). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to bend the thermal insulation pad adjacent to and sandwiched between a battery module and a heat spreader such that it is interposed between the bent (first) end of the heat spreader sheet and the upper surface of the battery module to form a more complete thermal barrier to minimize the possibility of heat transfer from a thermal battery module to a neighboring battery module. The bent portion of Hermann’s insulation pad minimizes thermal energy transfer from the battery module to the contacting bent portion of the heat spreader, which is able to conduct heat along its length and outward, and as a result, the insulation pad reduces the transfer of thermal energy outward in the direction of other battery modules. The section of the thermal insulation pad interposed between a bent side end of the first heat spreader sheet and the upper surface of the first battery module corresponds to the recited structure for a pad of the pair of third thermal insulation pads. Under similar reasoning, one of ordinary skill in the art would have also found it obvious to bend the second thermal insulation pad (Hermann: 1305) of the pair of second thermal insulation pads, which is outer adjacent to the second heat spreader sheet, to face an upper surface of the second battery module such that its bent end is between a bent side end of the second heat spreader sheet and the upper surface of the second battery module and which consequently corresponds to the recited structure for a second pad in the pair of third thermal insulation pads.
It is the examiner’s position that the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure and position of the claimed pair of third insulation pads, including the first pad and second pad of the third thermal insulation pads. Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Each of the pair of third thermal insulation pads is able “to block heat energy dispersed upward through the first heat spreader sheet and the second heat spreader sheet from transferred back toward the battery module” as claimed, because the bent portions of modified Hermann’s insulation pads 1303 and 1305, which correspond to the claimed pair of third thermal insulation pads, are interposed between the bent side ends of the heat spreader sheets and the upper surfaces of the corresponding battery module and would present a thermal insulation barrier to block reverse transfer of heat dispersed upward by the heat spreader sheets.
Murayama is relied upon to teach (Figure 2) a design of a battery pack heatsink (40) contacting a bottom of the battery pack case (walls 11a and 11b) (translation: p5 paragraph 4). Murayama teaches that the heatsink facilitates heat load to be withdrawn from a heat spreader sheet (50) and redistributed over the battery pack (1) to prevent creation of local high temperature regions that can affect adjacent cells (p6 paragraph 5; p7 paragraph 1). It would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to have modified the battery pack taught by modified Hermann to include the heatsink design as taught by Murayama in order to derive its advantages of redistributing heat to prevent local hotspots in the thermal barrier between adjacent battery modules, an advantage also recognized by Hermann as preventing adverse effects on battery modules adjacent to an affected barrier (Hermann: Col 7, lines 30-34).
Murayama also teaches thermal insulation pads (51, 52), one on either side of the heat spreader sheet (50), analogous to the claimed pair of second thermal insulation pads, wherein each contacts the heatsink (40) at one end (Fig. 2; p6 para 2 and 4). Murayama teaches that their configuration allows heat transfer from the trigger cell (i.e., the thermal runaway cell) to adjacent cells in the x-direction to be reduced and thereby suppresses thermal damage of the adjacent batteries (p9 para 4). A skilled artisan would have thus found it obvious to have modified the modified battery pack of Hermann such that the pair of second thermal insulation pads contacts the heat sink at one end, because Murayama teaches it is a known configuration that allows heat transfer from the trigger cell (i.e., the thermal runaway cell) to adjacent cells in the x-direction to be reduced and thereby suppresses thermal damage of the adjacent batteries.
Within the combination of prior art, the other end of the claimed second thermal insulation pads contacts the claimed pair of third thermal insulation pads based on the bent configuration of Hermann’s thermal insulation pads, wherein the section of each thermal insulation pad interposed between a bent side end of the first or second heat spreader sheets and the upper surface of the first or second battery modules corresponds to the recited structure for a pad of the pair of third thermal insulation pads, as was described earlier. Consequently, the combination of prior art teaches wherein the pair of second thermal insulation pads extends an entire distance from the heatsink to the pair of third thermal insulation pads as claimed.
As discussed earlier, Xu of the combination teaches a heat spreader with a bent surface 30 connected to a box body by glue (p5 para 10). The box body and the glue corresponds to the claimed battery pack case. In terms of orientation, the bottom of the battery pack case is the side contacting the heatsink, therefore the top of the battery pack case is the side contacting the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet. Consequently, the surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet which contacts the top of the battery pack case corresponds to the upper surface directly contacting a top of the battery pack case.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination above teaches the battery pack of claim 1, and Hermann also teaches that the thermal barrier comprising the heat spreader sheets ideally extends completely between adjoining enclosure walls of the battery pack case, because the effectiveness of the thermal barrier elements is based in part on the completeness of the thermal barrier that they comprise (Col 5: lines 28-31). One of ordinary skill in the art provided with two ends on the heat spreader sheet and Xu’s teaching that the bent end (Xu: surface 30; p5 paragraph 10, p6 paragraph 1) facilitates heat transfer from the battery cell to a battery pack case would have been motivated to have the bent end of the first heat spreader sheet and the bent end of the second heat spreader sheet in contact with the battery pack case to achieve a more effective thermal barrier. Furthermore, Hermann does not disclose use of an intermediary between the heat spreader sheets and the battery pack case, and describes the first heat spreader sheet (1203) and second heat spreader sheet (1205) as having high thermal conductivity (Col 7: lines 19-23). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have also been motivated to arrange the bent ends of the first heat spreader sheet and the second heat spreader sheet given the intrinsic high thermal conductivity of the heat spreader sheets.
Furthermore, in teaching the limitation of claim 1 reciting “wherein an upper surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet directly contact a top of the battery pack case,” the combination of prior art also teaches the limitation of claim 5 “wherein the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet are in direct contact with the battery pack case, respectively.”
Regarding Claim 15, the combination above teaches the battery pack of claim 1 and Hermann further teaches that a vehicle can comprising of the battery pack (Col 4: lines 5-15).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 8,541,126 B2) in view of Murayama et al (WO 2019167689 A1) and Xu et al (CN 110739413 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Tyler et al (US 2016/0301045 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination above teaches the battery pack of claim 1 but does not
teach use its use in an energy storage system. Tyler is relied upon to teach that battery packs may be used to provide power to various high voltage energy storage systems such as electrical grid power storage systems ([0022] lines 1-4). It would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to have incorporated modified Hermann’s battery pack into a high voltage energy storage system to provide power to them for their functioning.
Claims 1, 5, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al (CN 205231210 U) in view of Xu et al (CN 110739413 A) and Murayama et al (WO 2019167689 A1).
Support is provided by evidentiary reference “fireproof,” Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary.
Regarding Claim 1, Ma teaches a battery pack, comprising:
a battery module stack including a first battery module and a second battery module disposed adjacent to each other; (Fig. 1-2 and machine translation of [0051] disclose a plurality of battery modules in a stack, including a first module 14 and a second module 14 adjacent to each other)
a battery pack case accommodating the battery module stack; (module housing 10; Figs. 1-2, [0051])
a heatsink interposed between a lower portion of the battery module stack and the battery pack case or contacting a bottom of the battery pack case;
([0051] teaches the heat dissipation system 12, i.e., a heatsink, is installed on the module housing 10; [0054] teaches 12 can be set at the top or bottom or both the top and bottom; therefore, 12 can contact a bottom of the battery pack case as claimed)
a first thermal insulation pad interposed between the first battery module and the second battery module;
(162; Figs. 2-3 and 5, [0053] describe the thermal runaway prevention structure includes a thermal insulation layer 162 interposed between the first battery module and the second battery module, and that it can effectively isolate two adjacent cells, i.e., modules)
a first heat spreader sheet on a first side of the first insulation pad, an end of the first heat spreader sheet being bent to face an upper surface of the first battery module;
(Fig. 2, reproduced below, shows heat-conducting layer 160, i.e., a first heat spreader sheet, on a first side of first insulation pad 162 and an end bent to face a surface of the first battery module; [0054] also teaches that the top and/or bottom edges of the heat-conducting layer 160 can be bent and fitted to the heat dissipation system 12, i.e. heatsink, indicating an end of the first heat spreader sheet can be bent to face an upper surface of the first battery module.)
a second heat spreader sheet on a second side of the first insulation pad, an end of the second heat spreader sheet being bent to face an upper surface of the second battery module;
(Fig. 2 also shows a second heat spreader 160, i.e., a second heat spreader sheet, on a second side of the first insulation pad 162 and an end bent to face a surface of the first battery module. As previously pointed out for the first heat spreader sheet, [0054] also teaches that the top and/or bottom edges of the heat-conducting layer 160 can be bent and fitted to the heat dissipation system 12, i.e. heatsink, indicating an end of the second heat spreader sheet can also be bent to face an upper surface of the second battery module)
a pair of second thermal insulation pads, a first pad of the pair of second thermal insulation pads being interposed between the first heat spreader sheet and the first battery module and a second pad of the pair of second thermal insulation pads being interposed between the second heat spreader sheet and the second battery module, respectively; and
(166; Fig. 5 shows a layer 166 between the first battery module and the first heat spreader sheet 160, i.e., a first pad of the pair of second thermal insulation pads, and another layer 166 between the second battery module and the second heat spreader sheet, i.e., a second pad of the pair of second thermal insulation pads. Ma teaches layer 166 can be used as an insulating layer or a fireproof layer in [0058], wherein fireproof indicates the ability to withstand great heat without burning or being badly damaged as disclosed by evidentiary reference Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary’s definition of “fireproof,” thereby indicating a degree of thermal insulation property and thereby teaching the material corresponds to a thermal insulation pad.)
Fig. 2 of Ma:
PNG
media_image1.png
345
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ma does not teach a pair of third thermal insulation pads between a bent side of the heat spreaders and the upper surface of the battery module nor does Ma explicitly teach wherein the pair of second thermal insulation pads extend an entire distance from the heatsink to the pair of third thermal insulation pads. Ma also does not explicitly teach wherein an upper surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet directly contact a top of the battery pack case.
In the same field of endeavor, Xu teaches that on at least on one surface of the battery main body 11, there is a heat insulation layer 12 that prevents heat conduction between batteries and that also delays flame-diffusion (machine translation: p5 para 3-4). For example, the heat insulation layer 12 can be on an upper surface of the battery module, as seen in the middle battery module of Fig. 4, reproduced below.
Fig. 4 of Xu:
PNG
media_image2.png
370
469
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Xu teaches the configuration saves cost with small impact to the energy density of the battery while providing the benefit of delaying fire diffusion. (p6 para 1). Given that Ma teaches a shared interest in managing the potential risk of thermal runaway of battery modules through optimized heat dissipation design ([0004]), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the battery pack of Ma to include a heat insulation layer on each surface interposed between the bent side of the heat spreader and the corresponding surface of the battery module, as it is a known configuration taught by Xu, and for its benefit of delaying fire diffusion while saving cost and with small impact to the energy density of the battery. Within the combination of prior art, Xu’s heat insulation layer on a battery module would read on a first pad of the pair of third thermal insulation pads located between a bent side end of the first heat spreader sheet and the upper surface of the first battery module, and Xu’s heat insulation layer taught for an adjacent battery module would read on a second pad of the pair of third thermal insulation pads located between a bent side end of the second heat spreader sheet and the upper surface of the second battery module. Given that Xu’s heat insulation layer acts to prevent conduction of heat generated in the adjacent battery module (p5 para 4), it is the Examiner’s position that it would block heat energy dispersed upward through the first heat spreader sheet and the second heat spreader sheet from being transferred back toward the battery module stack. Additionally, regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
In the same field of endeavor, Murayama teaches a battery pack wherein the vertical length (Z-direction) of the thermal insulating pads (i.e., side members) (51, 52) and the adjacent heat spreader sheet (i.e., central member) (50) extends from the heatsink (40) and spans the vertical length of a battery cell from the heatsink to an upper surface (indicated by central member 50 in Fig. 2; the contact with upper surface is disclosed in p11 para 9). Murayama teaches this arrangement allows heat conduction from the trigger cell to the adjacent battery cell in the X-direction to be reduced, suppressing thermal damage to adjacent cells (p9 para 4). A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to have modified Ma’s battery pack such that thermally conductive layers 160 (i.e., each of the first and second heat spreader sheets) and second auxiliary functional layers 166 (i.e., each of the second thermal insulation pads) continuously extends from the heatsink contacting a bottom of the battery pack case along the vertical length of a battery cell to an upper surface given that Murayama teaches it is a known configuration that reduces heat transfer from the trigger cell to adjacent battery cells in the X-direction and suppresses thermal damage to them.
Accordingly, within the combination of prior art, the pair of second thermal insulation pads would extend an entire distance from the heatsink to the pair of third thermal insulation pads.
Xu teaches direct contact between a bent end 32 of a heat spreader sheet 3 and a battery pack case (“box body”, including the glue) via surface 30 (p5 paragraph 10, p6 paragraph 1) for the advantage of minimizing heat from a thermal runaway event spreading from an incident battery cell toward other battery cells. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to have modified the modified battery pack of Ma to have direct contact between the bent side end (i.e., the first end) of the first heat spreader sheet and the bent side end (i.e., the second end) of the second heat spreader sheet, corresponding to the top edges (i.e., upper surface) of the heat-conducting layers 160, to be in direct contact with the battery pack case, respectively, as taught by Xu, for the benefits of improving the effectiveness of the thermal barrier and minimizing heat spreading toward other battery cells. In terms of orientation, the bottom of the battery pack case is the side contacting the claimed heatsink, therefore the top of the battery pack case is the side opposite to the claimed heatsink. Consequently, the combination of prior art teaches an upper surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet directly contact a top of the battery pack case.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination above teaches the battery pack of claim 1. In teaching the limitation of claim 1 reciting “wherein an upper surface of the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet directly contact a top of the battery pack case,” the combination of prior art also teaches the limitation of claim 5 “wherein the first end of the first heat spreader sheet and the first end of the second heat spreader sheet are in direct contact with the battery pack case, respectively.”
Regarding Claim 14, the combination above teaches the battery pack of claim 1, and Ma further teaches their invention is applicable to the field of energy storage devices ([0002]), which reads on an energy storage system.
Regarding Claim 15, the combination above teaches the battery pack of claim 1 but does not teach a vehicle comprising the battery pack. Xu further discloses multi-vehicle ignition events (i.e. fires) as a safety problem that motivates their invention (p2 para 3-4), therefore implicitly teaching that the taught battery pack can be used to power a vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Roh et al (US 20160087319 A1), published 2016-03-24
Roh teaches a battery pack utilizing a cooling fin 200 to transfer heat from the battery cells to the pack case (Figs 3-4, [0020]), and Roh teaches the cooling fin may directly contact the pack case ([0023]).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIGI LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 - 6.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/G.L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 05/14/2026
Prosecution Insights