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
Currently, the pending Claims are 1-13, 15, 17-20. The examined Claims are 1-13, 15, 17-20, with Claims 1-2, 7, 15, 17, 19 being amended.
Response to Arguments
Per the aforementioned amendments to the Claims, the previous objection(s) of record are hereby withdrawn.
Applicant has mainly (1) amended independent Claim 1 to further require that the thermal interface material directly contacts the at least one terminal, (2) amended Claim 7 to further require that the thermal interface material delivery aperture is configured to deliver the thermal interface material into a position where the thermal interface material directly contacts the at least one terminal, and (3) amended independent Claim 15 to require that the method comprises thermally connecting a thermal exchange plate to both a busbar and at least one terminal using a thermal interface material that directly contact the at least one terminal, wherein a battery cell of a traction battery pack includes that at least one terminal.
Furthermore, Applicant presents arguments in favor of the instantly amended Claims versus the prior art rejections of record (Pages 5-7 of Remarks). In particular:
Applicant argues that the heat transfer member (250) (i.e. the “thermal interface material” of Claims 1 and 15) of Park does not directly contact the electrode lead (150) (i.e. the “at least one terminal” of Claims 1 and 15) due to the position of the bus bar (230) (i.e. the “busbar” of Claims 1 and 15) (Pages 5-6 of Remarks), and
Applicant argues that the coolant supply unit (400) of Park includes no apertures configured to deliver thermal interface material in the manner now recited in Claim 7 (Page 7 of Remarks), and
Applicant argues that Park, as modified by Besombes and Phlegm, neither teaches nor suggests the limitations of Claims 4, 7, 18, 20 because there is no obvious reason to modify Park to include a thermal interface material delivery aperture in the instantly claimed manner especially given Park’s pack case (50) has an existing upward opening and given that introduction of an injection aperture into Park’s pack case would introduce further interruptions to the cooling flow path (315) thereby detracting from an ability to cool the batteries (Pages 6-7 of Remarks).
Applicant’s said (A) argument is acknowledged, but is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented below as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the Claims. However, Applicant’s said (B) and (C) arguments are persuasive.
It is noted that all previous prior art rejections of record are hereby withdrawn.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 12, 15, 17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2021/0013563), and further in view of Bower et al. (US 2018/0261992).
Regarding Claim 1, Park teaches an assembly, wherein said assembly comprises the following: (A) a bus bar (230) (“busbar”) of a battery pack (1) used to provide power to an electric vehicle (“traction battery pack”), (B) an electrode lead (150) (“at least one terminal”) of a battery cell (100) (“battery cell”) of the battery pack, wherein the electrode lead is electrically coupled to the bus bar, (C) a heatsink assembly (300) (“thermal exchange plate”), and (D) a heat transfer member (250) (“thermal interface material”) that communicates heat (“thermal energy”) to the heatsink assembly from the electrode lead, the bus bar, or both (See Figures 1-4, 6, and [0033]-[0040], [0051], [0060]-[0061]).
Park does not explicitly teach that the heat transfer member directly contacts the electrode lead.
However, Bower teaches comprising in integrated busbar and cold plate system for a battery module (Abstract). As illustrated in Figure 4, Bower teaches that the system comprises a battery module (405) comprising batteries (410), wherein a terminal (411) of each battery is, at least in part, in direct physical contact with a busbar (420) that is in direct physical contact with a coldplate (430) ([0046]). As illustrated in Figure 4, Bower teaches that the outer surface of the busbar is coated with a layer (440) helps enhance its thermal conductivity characteristics such that heat can transfer via paths (460) to the coldplate ([0046]-[0047], [0053]). As illustrated in Figure 4, the terminal of each battery is, at least in part, in direct physical contact with the layer coated on the busbar.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the material of the heat transfer member of Park additionally coats the outer surface of the bus bar such it, at least in part, directly contacts the electrode lead (”the thermal interface material directly contact the at least one terminal”), as taught by Bower, given that the provision of such a coating layer would help further enhance the thermal conductivity characteristics of the busbar.
Regarding Claim 2, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1-3, Park teaches that the battery cell is provided as a plurality of battery cells (“the battery cell is one of a plurality of battery cells”) within a battery module (10) (“battery array”), wherein the plurality of battery cells are disposed atop at least a portion of the heatsink assembly within the battery module ([0030]-[0032]).
Regarding Claim 3, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 2, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 5, Park teaches that the battery module is positioned within a pack case (50) (“array side cover”) which extends along a lateral side of the battery module ([0059]). Furthermore, given that the heat transfer member is positioned inside of the battery module so as to be between the plurality of battery cells and the outer walls of the battery module while the pack case is positioned outside of the battery module, the heat transfer member is therefore sandwiched between the plurality of battery cells and the pack case.
Regarding Claim 5, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 2, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 3-4, the heatsink assembly has a “wrap-around configuration” insofar as it is configured with a bottom portion beneath the plurality of battery cells and opposing side portions which extend along respective lateral sides of the plurality of battery cells.
Regarding Claim 6, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 5, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1-2, 4, the heat transfer member is sandwiched between the plurality of battery cells and the opposing side portions of the heatsink assembly.
Regarding Claim 8, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1-2, the electrode lead is in the form of a tab (“at least one tab terminal”).
Regarding Claim 9, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1-2, Park teaches that the electrode lead is at least one electrode lead of a pouch-type secondary battery (“pouch-style battery cell”) ([0031]).
Regarding Claim 12, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 6, the battery pack is used to provide power to an electric vehicle (“electrified vehicle”) ([0060]-[0061]).
Regarding Claim 15, Park teaches an assembly, wherein said assembly comprises the following: (A) a bus bar (230) (“busbar”) of a battery pack (1) used to provide power to an electric vehicle (“traction battery pack”), (B) an electrode lead (150) (“at least one terminal”) of a battery cell (100) (“battery cell”) of the battery pack, wherein the electrode lead is electrically coupled to the bus bar, (C) a heatsink assembly (300) (“thermal exchange plate”), and (D) a heat transfer member (250) that communicates heat to the heatsink assembly from the electrode lead, the bus bar, or both (Figures 1-4, 6, and [0033]-[0040], [0051], [0060]-[0061]).
By virtue of constructing the aforementioned assembly, and in accordance with how said heatsink assembly, said electrode lead, and said bus bar are thermally interconnected (See Figure 4 and [0050]-[0058]), Park is considered to necessarily teach a “thermal energy management method” comprising thermally connecting the heatsink assembly to both the bus bar and the electrode lead of the battery cell (and therefore the electrode lead as well), of the battery pack using the heat transfer member.
Park does not explicitly teach that the heat transfer member directly contacts the electrode lead.
However, Bower teaches comprising in integrated busbar and cold plate system for a battery module (Abstract). As illustrated in Figure 4, Bower teaches that the system comprises a battery module (405) comprising batteries (410), wherein a terminal (411) of each battery is, at least in part, in direct physical contact with a busbar (420) that is in direct physical contact with a coldplate (430) ([0046]). As illustrated in Figure 4, Bower teaches that the outer surface of the busbar is coated with a layer (440) helps enhance its thermal conductivity characteristics such that heat can transfer via paths (460) to the coldplate ([0046]-[0047], [0053]). As illustrated in Figure 4, the terminal of each battery is, at least in part, in direct physical contact with the layer coated on the busbar.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the material of the heat transfer member of Park additionally coats the outer surface of the bus bar such it, at least in part, directly contacts the electrode lead (”the thermal interface material directly contact the at least one terminal”), as taught by Bower, given that the provision of such a coating layer would help further enhance the thermal conductivity characteristics of the busbar.
Regarding Claim 17, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 15, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1-3, Park teaches that the battery cell is provided as a plurality of battery cells within a battery module (10), wherein the plurality of battery cells are disposed atop at least a portion of the heatsink assembly within the battery module (“the battery cell is within a plurality of battery cells disposed atop the thermal exchange plate”) ([0030]-[0032]). As illustrated in Figures 1-3, the electrode lead and the bus bar are disposed on a lateral side of the plurality of battery cells. As illustrated in Figure 5, Park teaches that the battery module is positioned within a pack case (50) (“array side cover”) which extends along a lateral side of the battery module ([0059]). Furthermore, given that the heat transfer member is positioned inside of the battery module so as to be between the plurality of battery cells and the outer walls of the battery module while the pack case is positioned outside of the battery module, the heat transfer member is therefore sandwiched between the plurality of battery cells and the pack case (“sandwiching the thermal interface material between the plurality of battery cells and an array side cover”).
Regarding Claim 19, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 15, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1-4, Park teaches that the battery cell is provided as a plurality of battery cells within a battery module (10), wherein the plurality of battery cells are disposed atop at least a portion of the heatsink assembly within the battery module, wherein the heatsink assembly has a “wrap-around configuration” insofar as it is configured with a bottom portion beneath the plurality of battery cells and opposing side portions which extend along respective lateral sides of the plurality of battery cells (“the battery cell is within a plurality of battery cells, wherein the thermal exchange plate has a wrap-around configuration with a bottom portion beneath plurality of battery cells and opposing side portions extending along respective lateral sides of the plurality of battery cells ([0030]-[0032]). As illustrated in Figures 1-2, the heat transfer member is positioned inside of the battery module so as to be sandwiched between the plurality of battery cells and the opposing side portions (“sandwiching the thermal interface material between the plurality of battery cells and the opposing side portions”).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2021/0013563), and further in view of Bower et al. (US 2018/0261992) and Yanagida (US 2020/0106075).
Regarding Claim 10, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 2, Park teaches that the bus bar is positioned within a bus bar housing (210) (“cover”), wherein the bus bar housing is, at least in part, disposed between the battery cell and the bus bar.
Park, as modified by Bower, does not explicitly teach that the bus bar housing is insulating.
However, Yanagida teaches a bus bar assembly (Abstract). As illustrated in Figures 1, 8-10, Yanagida teaches that the assembly comprises a busbar (20) which is positioned within a holding area of an insulating protector (30) ([0039], [0053]-[0054]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to Park, as modified by Bower, form the bus bar housing such that it is insulating, as taught by Yanagida, given that a modification would help enhance the insulation characteristics of the assembly, and in particular, the area surrounding the bus bar in the assembly.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2021/0013563), and further in view of Bower et al. (US 2018/0261992) and Weicker et al. (US 2019/0393571).
Regarding Claim 11, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1, 4, the heatsink assembly includes a coolant supply unit (400) that supplies coolant from the outside to manage thermal energy levels of the battery cell.
Park, as modified by Bower, does not explicitly teach that the coolant is a liquid coolant or refrigerant.
However, Weiker teaches fluid cooled electric vehicle battery systems (Abstract). Weiker teaches that battery systems, such at those used in electric vehicle drive systems, often use liquid cooling system to remove heat from the battery cells during operation ([0015]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to Park, as modified by Bower, use a liquid coolant, as taught by Weiker, as the coolant, given that battery systems often use liquid coolants to remove heat from battery cells during operation, as taught by Weiker.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2021/0013563), and further in view of Bower et al. (US 2018/0261992) and Phlegm et al. (US 2020/0161727).
Regarding Claim 13, Park, as modified by Bower, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Park, as modified by Bower, does not explicitly teach that the heat transfer member is an expandable foam.
However, Phlegm teaches a thermal interface member positioned between a heat sink and a plurality of battery cells (Abstract, [0042]). As illustrated in Figure 2, Phlegm teaches that the thermal interface member is an injected, thermally conductive expandable foam ([0042]). Phlegm teaches that the thermal interface member cures in place so as to form a solid, strong, flexible, and long-lasting foam which has substantially 0% shrinkage ([0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to Park, as modified by Bower, form the heat transfer member out of an injectable, thermally conductive expandable foam (“expandable foam”), as taught by Phlegm, given that such a material can cure in place so as to form a strong, flexible, and long-lasting foam which has substantially 0% shrinkage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 further limits the assembly of Claim 3 by requiring that the array side cover includes at least one thermal interface material delivery aperture.
Park neither teaches nor suggests that the pack case includes a material delivery aperture as instantly claimed. There is no obvious reason to modify Park to include a thermal interface material delivery aperture in the instantly claimed manner especially given Park’s pack case (50) has an existing upward opening and given that introduction of an injection aperture into Park’s pack case as claimed would introduce further interruptions to the cooling flow path (315) thereby detracting from an ability to cool the batteries. Furthermore, neither Bowers, nor Besombes, nor Phlegm (See the 11/21/25 Non-Final Rejection which outlines, in detail, the relevant teachings of Besombes and Phlegm) cure the deficiencies of Park.
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 7 further limits the assembly of Claim 6 by requiring that the claimed aperture is configured to deliver the thermal interface material into a position where the thermal interface material directly contacts the at least one terminal.
Park neither teaches nor suggests that the pack case includes a material delivery aperture as instantly claimed, let alone one which permits the delivery of thermal interface material into the instantly claimed position. There is no obvious reason to modify Park to include a thermal interface material delivery aperture in the instantly claimed manner especially given Park’s pack case (50) has an existing upward opening and given that introduction of an injection aperture into Park’s pack case as claimed would introduce further interruptions to the cooling flow path (315) thereby detracting from an ability to cool the batteries. Furthermore, neither Bowers, nor Besombes, nor Phlegm (See the 11/21/25 Non-Final Rejection which outlines, in detail, the relevant teachings of Besombes and Phlegm) cure the deficiencies of Park.
Claim 18 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 18 further limits the method of Claim 17 by requiring injecting the thermal interface material through at least one aperture in the array side cover.
Park neither teaches nor suggests that the pack case includes a material delivery aperture as instantly claimed. There is no obvious reason to modify Park to include a thermal interface material delivery aperture in the instantly claimed manner especially given Park’s pack case (50) has an existing upward opening and given that introduction of an injection aperture into Park’s pack case as claimed would introduce further interruptions to the cooling flow path (315) thereby detracting from an ability to cool the batteries. Furthermore, neither Bowers, nor Besombes, nor Phlegm (See the 11/21/25 Non-Final Rejection which outlines, in detail, the relevant teachings of Besombes and Phlegm) cure the deficiencies of Park.
Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 20 further limits the method of Claim 19 by requiring injecting the thermal interface material through at least one aperture in the thermal exchange plate.
Park neither teaches nor suggests that the pack case includes a material delivery aperture as instantly claimed, let alone one which is in the thermal exchange plate. There is no obvious reason to modify Park to include a thermal interface material delivery aperture in the instantly claimed manner especially given Park’s pack case (50) has an existing upward opening and given that introduction of an injection aperture into Park’s pack case as claimed would introduce further interruptions to the cooling flow path (315) thereby detracting from an ability to cool the batteries. Furthermore, neither Bowers, nor Besombes, nor Phlegm (See the 11/21/25 Non-Final Rejection which outlines, in detail, the relevant teachings of Besombes and Phlegm) cure the deficiencies of Park.
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 MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7595. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-3PM EST M-F.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 5712707871. 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.
/MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728