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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/02/2025 does not place the application in condition for allowance.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 of claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-13, and 15-19 has been withdrawn.
The cancellation of claim 17 is acknowledged.
In view of the amendment the rejection of claims 6, 7, 10, 14 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 is withdrawn and the addition of claim 21 have been acknowledged.
New analysis follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the profile structure "provides a relatively high resistance of the battery device against elastic and plastic deformations as a result of an application of force or force effect in addition to the temperature control function" of the fluid ducts and this results in the structures being “functionally different”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, in this case an upper section for cooling and a lower section not used for cooling and thus functionally different, then it meets the claim.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-13, 15-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greber (US20210031836A1) in view of Yang (CN211789374U, as cited in the IDS, reference made to attached English translation).
Regarding claims 1 and 21, Greber discloses a battery device of a motor vehicle (¶[0002]-[0003]), comprising:
a battery housing (cover 30, housing 11 and bottom panel 10, Fig. 1) with a cell stack of rechargeable individual battery cells (i.e. electricity storage cells 3) that are stacked one on top of the other with contact along a stack center axis in a stack direction arranged therein (Fig. 5, ¶[0039], cells 3 within module 2)
the battery housing including a housing base (bottom panel 10 and housing 11, Fig. 1) and the cell stack is arranged and held in a flat manner with contact on the housing base,
wherein for controlling a temperature of the cell stack, the housing base has a heat exchanger section (upper portion of housing base/bottom panel 10 defined by upper plate 20, embossed plate 26 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4), with fluid ducts through which fluid is flowable (¶[0097]and [0099]), and the heat exchange section is reinforced via a profile structure (¶[0054] see profile of embossed plates 26 on the lower portion of the housing base, Fig. 4)
wherein the housing base has a profile structure section (lower portion of bottom panel 10 defined by lower plate 18, embossed plate 24 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4) that is functionally separate with respect to the heat exchanger section (Fig. 4, see separate sections separated by intermediate plate 22 with the upper section providing cooling fluid and the lower section does not), but does not explicitly disclose the profile structure section including hollow profile ducts having a cross-sectional shape different from that of the fluid ducts.
Yang, related to a cooling bottom plate, teaches a housing base with a liquid cooling portion (1) and an energy absorption portion (2) each with different shapes (¶[0055], see fig. 1, where the cooling portion is square/rectangular and the energy absorption portion is rectangular) and further teaches the shape of the cooling portion may be multiple shapes (¶[0054]) and the shape of the energy absorbing portion may be multiple shapes, including triangular (¶[0061]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the fluid ducts and profile ducts of Gerber could also have rectangular and triangular shapes and the two shapes may be different from each other as a matter of design choice.
Therefore it would have been obvious to vary the shape of the ducts because, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 2, Greber discloses a battery device according to claim 1, wherein the profile structure includes struts (¶[0057] see inclined faces of embossed plate 26, Fig. 4) that define a truss pattern in the cross section (the truss pattern may be triangular, quadrangular, polygonal, or circular as specified in the instant specification ¶[0010], see shapes in rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 3, Greber discloses a battery device according to claim 1, wherein:
the profile structure is defined by the heat exchange section (embossed plate 26 defines the profile structure within the heat exchange section).
Regarding claim 4, Greber discloses a battery device according to claim 3, wherein hollow profile ducts (slots within embossed plate 24, ¶[0054], Fig. 4) that are parallel to one another (¶[0056], each groove is at same angle and therefore parallel to one another) and have a constant cross-sectional surface (Fig. 4, see cross section of ducts which are parallel to each other providing a constant extrusion profile shape and therefore cross-sectional surface ¶[0054]).
Regarding claim 5, Greber discloses a battery device according to claim 4, wherein the cross-sectional shape of the hollow profile ducts is respectively quadrangular surface shape (Fig. 4, see 4-sided shape) and are constant in terms of surface area over an entire length of a respective hollow profile duct (¶[0056], each groove is at same angle and shape providing a constant surface area).
Regarding claim 8, Greber discloses a battery device according to claim 1, wherein:
the fluid ducts of the heat exchanger section (i.e. slots) that are parallel to one another (¶0054], all at the same angle therefore parallel) and the parallel ducts have a constant cross-sectional surface (Fig. 4, see cross section of ducts which are parallel to each other providing a constant extrusion profile shape and therefore cross-sectional surface ¶[0054]) and through which fluid is flowable (¶[0101] the cooling circuit is defined by embossed plate 26), the plurality of fluid ducts being connected to one another so as to communicate fluidically (¶[0097] the cooling circuit 12 is a closed circuit and guides the heat transfer fluid),
wherein a fluid path for fluid, along which the heat exchanger section can be flushed by fluid (¶[0097]), extends through the plurality of fluid ducts (¶[101], see embossed plate 26 forms the cooling circuit).
Regarding claim 9, Greber discloses a battery device according to claim 8, wherein flow cross sectional surfaces of the plurality of fluid ducts, through which fluid is flowable, define the cross-sectional shape that is triangular, quadrangular, polygonal, or circular shape (see rejection of claim 1) and are constant in terms of surface area over an entire length of a respective fluid duct (¶[0055], each groove is at same angle and shape providing a constant surface area).
Regarding claim 11, Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of:
the housing base is provided by a single base (bottom panel 10, Fig. 1), and
the single base body has the heat exchanger section (upper portion of bottom panel 10 defined by upper plate 20, embossed plate 26 and intermediate plate 22), and the profile structure section (lower portion of bottom panel 10 defined by lower plate 18, embossed plate 24 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 1, wherein:
the housing base is structured as an extruded profile (¶[0054] see plates 24 and 26 which define the housing bottom are part of the extrusion profile).
Regarding claim 13, Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 1, the cell stack has a stack center transverse axis that stands vertically on the stack center axis and, together with the stack center axis, spans a cell plane (X/Y plane which contains the cells within the modules 2, Fig. 1)
the profile structure section has hollow profile ducts (slots within embossed plate 24, ¶[0054], Fig. 4) that are parallel to one another (¶[0056], each groove is at the same angle and therefore parallel to one another) and in each case define a profile duct center axis, wherein the hollow profile ducts span a common plane (X/Y plane of the lower portion of bottom panel 10 defined by lower plate 18, embossed plate 24 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4).
the heat exchanger section has fluid ducts (i.e. slots) that are parallel to one another (¶0054], all at the same angle therefore parallel) and in each case define a fluid duct center axis, wherein the fluid ducts span a common further plane (X/Y plane of the upper portion of bottom panel 10 defined by upper plate 20, embossed plate 26 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4)., and
wherein the common further plane of the fluid ducts is arranged in a sandwich-like manner between the common plane of the hollow profile ducts and the cell plane (see sandwich structure, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 15 and 18, Greber discloses an electrically driven motor vehicle, comprising: a battery device integrated in said motor vehicle and connectable to at least one of a drive train and an on-board system of the motor vehicle (¶[0003], intended to be installed in a vehicle containing an electric motor which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize as being connectable to the drive train or other on-board system), the battery device including:
a battery housing (cover 30, housing 11 and bottom panel 10, Fig. 1) with a cell stack of rechargeable individual battery cells (i.e. electricity storage cells 3) that are stacked one on top of the other with contact along a stack center axis in a stack direction arranged therein (Fig. 5, ¶[0039], cells 3 within module 2)
the battery housing including a housing base (bottom panel 10 and housing 11) and the cell stack is arranged and held in a flat manner with contact on the housing base (Fig. 1),
wherein for controlling a temperature of the cell stack, the housing base has a heat exchanger section (upper portion of bottom panel 10 defined by upper plate 20, embossed plate 26 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4), with fluid ducts through which fluid is flowable (¶[0097]and [0099]), and the heat exchange section is reinforced via a profile structure (¶[0054] see profile of embossed plates 26, Fig. 4)
wherein the housing base has a profile structure section (lower portion of bottom panel 10 defined by lower plate 18, embossed plate 24 and intermediate plate 22, Fig. 4) that is functionally separate with respect to the heat exchanger section (Fig. 4, see separate sections separated by intermediate plate 22), but does not explicitly disclose the profile structure section including hollow profile ducts having a cross-sectional shape different from that of the fluid ducts.
Yang, related to a cooling bottom plate, teaches a housing base with a liquid cooling portion (1) and an energy absorption portion (2) each with different shapes (¶[0055], see fig. 1, where the cooling portion is square/rectangular and the energy absorption portion is rectangular) and further teaches the shape of the cooling portion may be multiple shapes (¶[0054]) and the shape of the energy absorbing portion may be multiple shapes, including triangular (¶[0061]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the fluid ducts and profile ducts of Gerber could also have rectangular and triangular shapes and the two shapes may be different from each other.
Furthermore, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 16, Greber discloses the electrically driven motor vehicle according to claim 15, wherein the profile structure includes struts (¶[0057] see inclined faces of embossed plate 26, Fig. 4) that define a truss pattern in the cross section (which may be triangular, quadrangular, polygonal, or circular as specified in the instant specification ¶[0010]).
Regarding claim 19, Greber discloses the electrically driven motor vehicle according to claim 15, wherein the fluid ducts (i.e. slots) that are parallel to one another (¶0054], all at the same angle therefore parallel) and the parallel ducts have a constant cross-sectional surface (Fig. 4, see cross section of ducts which are parallel to each other providing a constant extrusion profile shape and therefore cross-sectional surface ¶[0054]) and the hollow profile ducts (slots within embossed plate 24, ¶[0054], Fig. 4) that are parallel to one another (¶[0056], each groove is at same angle and therefore parallel to one another) and have a constant cross-sectional surface (Fig. 4, see cross section of ducts which are parallel to each other providing a constant extrusion profile shape and therefore cross-sectional surface ¶[0054]).
Claims 6, 7, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greber (US20210031836A1) in view of Yang (CN211789374U, as cited in the IDS, reference made to attached English translation) as applied to claim 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Haussmann (DE102009058808, reference made to attached English translation).
Regarding claim 6, modified Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 1, but does not disclose reinforcing elements inserted in the hollow profile ducts of the profile duct section.
Haussmann, related to a cooling device for a vehicle battery, teaches reinforcing elements (i.e. thermal insulation component 29) within cavities of a support component 24 (¶[0084], Fig. 2).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize adding the thermal insulation component of Haussmann to the hollow profile ducts of the profile duct section of Greber would provide thermal insulation to the battery and improve cooling efficiency(¶0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added the thermal insulation component of Haussmann to the ducts of Greber to improve insulation and cooling efficiency.
Regarding claim 7, modified Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 6, but does not disclose at least one of the reinforcing elements extends over a length of the respective hollow profile duct in a direction of a profile duct center axis of the respective hollow profile duct, in which the at least one reinforcing element is inserted, and the reinforcing elements fill a clear hollow profile cross sectional surface of the respective hollow profile duct in an inserted state, and support themselves with contact on a hollow profile duct wall of the respective hollow profile duct, which frames the respective clear hollow profile cross sectional surface all around.
Haussmann teaches the reinforcing elements extends over a length of the respective hollow profile duct in a direction of a profile duct center axis of the respective hollow profile duct (Fig. 6 see extension of 29 through cavities), in which the at least one reinforcing element is inserted, and
the reinforcing elements fill a clear hollow profile cross sectional surface of the respective hollow profile duct in an inserted state((¶[0029], filled cavities), and support themselves with contact on a hollow profile duct wall of the respective hollow profile duct, which frames the respective clear hollow profile cross sectional surface all around (¶0029], see they fill the cavities thus support themselves on the hollow duct wall, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 20, modified Greber discloses the electrically driven motor vehicle according to claim 15, but does not disclose reinforcing elements inserted in the plurality of hollow profile ducts of the profile duct section.
Haussmann, related to a cooling device for a vehicle battery, teaches reinforcing elements (i.e. thermal insulation component 29) within cavities of a support component 24 (¶[0084], Fig. 2).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize adding the thermal insulation component of Haussmann to the hollow profile ducts of the profile duct section of Greber would provide thermal insulation to the battery and improve cooling efficiency(¶0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added the thermal insulation component of Haussmann to the ducts of Greber to improve insulation and cooling efficiency.
Claims 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greber (US20210031836A1) in view of Yang (CN211789374U, as cited in the IDS, reference made to attached English translation) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Harada (US20150140388A1).
Regarding claim 10, modified Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the fluid path is structured and arranged in a meander-shaped manner and extends transversely or parallel with respect to the stack center axis, so that the heat exchanger section can be flown through in the stack direction or transversely thereto in a direction of a stack center transverse axis.
Harada, related to cooling plates for batteries, teaches a fluid path which is meander-shaped
(see arrows defining meander path in figure 4, ¶[0039]) and extends parallel with respect to the stack center axis, so that the heat exchanger section can be flown through in the stack direction or transversely thereto in a direction of a stack center transverse axis (Fig. 1).
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize adding the meander-shaped fluid path of Harada to the bottom panel of Greber such that they extends parallel with respect to the stack center axis would provide a cooling plate with a simple structure and uniform cooling thereby reducing cell life variation(¶[0007]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to have added the cooling plate structures of Harada to the battery device structure of Greber in order to reduce cell life variation.
Regarding claim 14, modified Greber discloses the battery device according to claim 1, wherein:
the housing base are provided via at least one one-piece (housing base 10 including pieces lower 18, upper 20, intermediate 22, embossed lower 24 and embossed upper 26 plates, Fig. 3), aluminum (¶[0052] and ¶[0058], see may be made of aluminum) extrusion profile(¶[0054]) that has the heat exchanger section (upper portion of bottom panel 10 defined by upper plate 20, embossed plate 26 and intermediate plate 22), and a profile structure section (lower portion of bottom panel 10 defined by lower plate 18, embossed plate 24 and intermediate plate 22) that together form said profile structure (see profile structure in Fig. 4).
the profile structure section includes has the hollow profile ducts (slots within embossed plate 24, ¶[0054], Fig. 4) that are parallel to one another (¶[0056], each groove is at same angle and therefore parallel to one another) oriented in parallel with respect to the stack center axis as shown in annotated Figure 1, and have a constant cross-sectional surface (Fig. 4, see cross section of ducts which are parallel to each other providing a constant extrusion profile shape and therefore cross-sectional surface ¶[0054]) and open out on two front surfaces of the housing base, the two front surfaces oriented oppositely to one another in each case by providing profile duct mouth openings, in this case the embossed plates which create the ducts extend between the top and bottom plates of the bottom panel 10 creating two front faces on each side of the bottom panel 10 (see annotated Fig. 1 and Fig. 4),
PNG
media_image1.png
523
755
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Greber
the heat exchanger section includes the fluid ducts (i.e. slots within embossed plate 26, ¶[0054], Fig. 4)) that are parallel to one another (¶0054], all at the same angle therefore parallel) and the parallel ducts have a constant cross-sectional surface (Fig. 4, see cross section of ducts which are parallel to each other providing a constant extrusion profile shape and therefore cross-sectional surface ¶[0054]) and through which fluid is flowable (¶[0101] the cooling circuit is defined by embossed plate 26), the fluid ducts open out on the two front surfaces of the housing base that are oriented oppositely to one another in each case by providing fluid duct mouth openings (see annotated Fig. 1 and Fig, 4),
Greber also discloses wherein the battery housing includes a cover that spans the cell stack (cover 30, Fig. 1) and, with a cover edge oriented towards the housing base, is fixed thereto (¶[0087]).
Greber does not disclose,
wherein a fluid deflecting plate that covers the profile duct mouth openings and the fluid duct mouth openings in a fluid-tight manner, is arranged on a first front surface of the housing base, and a fluid supply plate that covers the profile duct mouth openings and fluid duct mouth openings in a fluid-tight manner, is arranged on a second front surface of the housing base,
wherein fluid duct walls between the adjacent fluid ducts return with respect to the fluid deflecting plate in a region of the fluid duct mouth openings that are covered by the fluid deflecting plate, so that an overflow region, through which fluid can flow from the one fluid duct into the other fluid duct, is defined between two adjacent fluid ducts,
wherein fluid duct walls between the adjacent fluid ducts return with respect to the fluid supply plate in a region of the fluid duct mouth openings that are covered by the fluid supply plate, so that an overflow region, through which fluid can flow from the one fluid duct into the other fluid duct, is defined between two adjacent fluid ducts,
wherein the fluid supply plate has two supply connections, through which fluid can flow into and flow out of the fluid ducts,
wherein the fluid ducts define a meander-shaped fluid path for fluids, which extends parallel with respect to the stack center axis and along which the heat exchanger section can be flushed by fluid in the stack direction.
Harada, related to cooling plates for batteries, teaches a cooling plate 1 for a battery module 100 (Fig. 1) which contains a fluid deflecting plate( end surface part 7D, Fig. 4) a fluid supply plate (end surface part 7B, Fig. 4) and wherein,
fluid duct walls (3(A-D), Fig. 4) between the adjacent fluid ducts return with respect to the fluid deflecting plate in a region of the fluid duct mouth openings that are covered by the fluid deflecting plate, so that an overflow region (2D, Fig. 4), through which fluid can flow from the one fluid duct into the other fluid duct, is defined between two adjacent fluid ducts (see the channel including the width W3 flowing through the over flow region including the width W4 and into the channel including the width W5),
wherein the fluid supply plate has two supply connections (coolant entrance 4 and coolant exit 5), through which fluid can flow into and flow out of the fluid ducts,
wherein the fluid ducts define a meander-shaped fluid path for fluids (see arrows defining meander path in figure 4, ¶[0039]),
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize adding the fluid supply and fluid deflecting plates as well as fluid ducts walls of Harada to the profile duct openings of Greber such that they cover the duct mouths in a fluid tight manner in order to flow coolant and arrange the ducts to extend parallel to the stack center axis so the heat exchanger section can be flushed by fluid in the stack direction would provide a cooling plate with a simple structure and uniform cooling thereby reducing cell life variation(¶[0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have added the cooling plate structures of Harada to the battery device structure of Greber in order to reduce cell life variation.
Conclusion
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 KAREN J. ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (703)756-1243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am-6 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, Jeffrey 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.
/K.J.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1726 /RYAN S CANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726