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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species AI and Species BI in the reply filed on September 23rd, 2025, is acknowledged. Therefore, claims 3, 14 and 16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected elected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on September 23rd, 2025.
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.
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.
Claims 1,2, 5, and 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Campbell, US 20160003553 A1 (as cited in IDS) and He et al, US 20210175572 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Campbell discloses a battery stack and a motor land vehicle comprising a battery module with a battery cell and a heat transfer device [Campbell, 0001], wherein the battery pack, shown in figure 7 of Campbell, includes securing plate (Campbell, 25; figure 7), corresponding to the transverse front piece of the claim, and an alignment plate (Campbell, 33; figure 7), corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, both plates extend in a width direction, as shown in figure 7 of Campbell, and are interconnected by bolts (Campbell, 24; figure 7), corresponding to the two spaced-apart sill members of the claim, which extend in a length direction, as shown in figure 7 of Campbell. Heat transfer devices (Campbell, 1a/1b/1c; figure 1), corresponding to the cooling members of the claim, shown in figure 1 of Campbell to be plate-shaped as required by the claim, wherein each battery pack, cell or pouch, is provided between adjacent heat transfer devices [Campbell, 0083] in the longitudinal direction and extending in the width direction from a first longitudinal side to a second longitudinal rise of array, as shown in figure 7 of Campbell. Each heat transfer device is connected to the spigots (Campbell, 10a/10b/10c; figure 5), corresponding to the inlets and outlets of the claim, connected to the through channel that extends along past surfaces 15/32 as shown in figure 5 of Campbell [Campbell, 0070] corresponding to the distribution ducts of the claim. Each heat transfer device is formed similarly such that the spigots (Campbell, 10a/10b/10c; figure 5) along each side are in alignment [Campbell, 0067], wherein the through channels extending along past the surfaces of 15/32 as shown in figure 5 [Campbell, 0070], corresponding to the distribution ducts, extends in a direction that is parallel to the bolts, corresponding to the sill members, wherein a heat transfer fluid, corresponding to the coolant of the claim, may be fed along one of the rows of interconnected spigots, such that the heat transfer fluid flows through the internal volume of the heat transfer device to the row of interconnected spigots formed on the opposite site of the stack, therefore, the flow of the heat transfer medium is parallel across the heat transfer device [Campbell, 0086]. The heat transfer device comprises a plurality of fluid flow channels extending from the inlet to the outlet [Campbell, 0016], and the heat transfer device include channels (Campbell, 8; figure 6) [Campbell, 0046], configured to optimize the flow off cooling or other heat transfer medium from the inlet to outlet [Campbell, 0016], which would extend through the securing plate and/or the alignment plate. However, Campbell is silent to teach on at least two longitudinal transverse rows of prismatic batteries extending side by side in the length direction.
He teaches an embodiment of a two cell array (He, 400; figure 18), distributed along a second direction [He, 0196], corresponding to the longitudinal direction of the claim.
He and Campbell are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Campbell to include the two cell array as taught by He because such modification would reduce the accumulation of errors along the second direction and facilitate assembly of the battery pack [He, 0170].
Regarding Claim 2, modified Campbell discloses the battery pack of claim 1, wherein each battery pack, cell or pouch, is provided between adjacent heat transfer devices [Campbell, 0083].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Campbell discloses the battery pack of claim 1, wherein the spigot (Campbell, 10a; figure 5), corresponding to the inlet duct of the claim, is connected at or the near the midpoint of the through channels extending along past the surfaces of 15/32 as shown in figure 5 [Campbell, 0070], corresponding to the distribution ducts of the claim.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 1, wherein the coolant inlet and outlet return ducts, depicted as the spigots (Campbell, 10a, 10b, & 10c; figure 5), on one side of the battery pack shown in figure 7 of Campbell, extend between the longitudinal sides of the array and the sill member, depicted as the bolts (Campbell, 24; figure 7), as shown in figure 7 of Campbell. However, Campbell is silent to teach on a distance (d), between the longitudinal sides of the array and the sill members in the width direction (W) is 5 cm to 25 cm.
While Campbell does not explicitly teach a distance (d), between the longitudinal sides of the array and the sill members in the width direction (W) is 5 cm to 25 cm, He teaches a battery pack with a pack housing including a first and second direction, wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the first, including a plurality of rectangular cells (He, 100; figure 2) in a rectangular accommodating unit, with a length (He, L; figure 2), that extends from one side of the cell accommodating unit along the first direction, wherein the length, L, is 600 mm (60 cm) ≤ L ≤2500 mm (250 cm), and the interval of length over thickness, D (He, D; figure 2), is 23 ≤ L/D ≤ 208 [He, 0013], by optimizing the length to thickness ratio the heat dissipation within the battery cell is improved, because a greater length and smaller thickness means the heat inside the cell is more easily transferred to an exterior of the battery cell, and by using the relationship between the length and distance, the external surface of the battery cell is enlarged and therefore, improves the overall heat dissipation effect of the battery pack, which improves the safety and stability of the battery pack [He, 0014]. There is a finite number of identified predictable solutions for the distance (d), between the longitudinal sides of the array and the sill members in the width direction (W), such that the distance is 5 cm to 25 cm, or such that it is not, and it would be obvious to optimize the distance (d), between the longitudinal sides of the array and the sill members in the width direction (W) is 5 cm to 25 cm, to achieve an improved safety and stability of the battery pack as taught by He. Therefore, absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, such that the distance (d), between the longitudinal sides of the array and the sill members in the width direction (W) is 5 cm to 25 cm, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, see MPEP 2143 (E).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 1, wherein a securing plate (Campbell, 25; figure 8) is provided at each outermost end of the stacked spaced [He, 0084], and is shown in figure 8 of Campbell to be at the rear, and interconnects the rear sill members (Campbell, 24; figure 8), wherein the battery stack shown in figure 7 of Campbell, comprising a plurality of battery cells (Campbell, 26; figure 7) and heat transfer devices (Campbell, 1a/1b/1c; figure 1), corresponding to the cooling members of the claim, and each heat transfer device is connected to the spigots (Campbell, 10a/10b/10c; figure 5), corresponding to the inlets and outlets of the claim, connected to the through channel that extends along past surfaces 15/32 as shown in figure 5 of Campbell [Campbell, 0070] corresponding to the distribution ducts of the claim. Each heat transfer device is formed similarly such that the spigots (Campbell, 10a/10b/10c; figure 5) along each side are in alignment [Campbell, 0067], wherein a heat transfer fluid, corresponding to the coolant of the claim, may be fed along one of the rows of interconnected spigots, such that the heat transfer fluid flows through the internal volume of the heat transfer device to the row of interconnected spigots formed on the opposite site of the stack[Campbell, 0086]. The heat transfer device comprises a plurality of fluid flow channels extending from the inlet to the outlet [Campbell, 0016]. However, Campbell is silent to teach on the transverse member comprises a beam or a foot garage, wherein a first array of cells is situated between the front transverse member and the beam or foot garage, a second array of cells is situated between the beam or foot garage and the rear transverse piece, or the inlet return ducts of the first array and the second array of cells extending through the front transverse piece and the beam or foot garage.
He teaches an embodiment with a two cell array (He, 400; figure 18) distributed along a second direction [He, 0169], with a transverse beam (He, 700; figure 18), corresponding to the beam or foot garage of the claim, divides the interior of the battery pack housing (He, 200; figure 18) into two cell accommodating units [He, 0186], disposed between the first cell array and the fourth frame (He; 204; figure 18), corresponding to the front transverse member of the claim, and a second cell array disposed between the transverse beam and the third frame (He, 203; figure 18), corresponding to the rear transverse piece of the claim.
He and Campbell are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Campbell to include the two cell array separated by the transverse beam because such modification would facilitate assembly and reduce the accumulation of errors along the second direction during assembly [He, 017].
Regarding Claim 9, modified Campbell teaches on the battery pack of claim 1, wherein each cooling member comprises a heat transfer device (Campbell, 1a/1b/1c; figure 3) formed of a first half shell (Campbell, 12; figure 1) and a second half shell (Campbell, 12’; figure 1) [Campbell, 0049] that are parallel to one another as shown in figure 1 of Campbell, wherein the plates have apertures (Campbell, 6a/6b; figure 1) on either side, corresponding to the end cap of the claim, wherein two interconnecting means (Campbell, 10/10’; figure 1), connected to a tubular portion (Campbell, 13 & 14; figure 4) corresponding to the two lateral tube sections, connected to the through channel that extends along past surfaces 15/32 as shown in figure 5 of Campbell [Campbell, 0070], and when interconnected, a continuous through channel is formed between the adjacent spigots and the tubular portions [Campbell, 0075], to form the distribution ducts.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 9, wherein the first tubular portion (Campbell, 13; figure 4) is connected to the second tubular potion (Campbell, 14; figure 4) via an O-ring (Campbell, 18; figure 4) [Campbell, 0072], corresponding to the flexible tube member of the claim, wherein the O-ring may be formed of nitrile or rubber or other suitable material [Campbell, 0071], therefore indicating ring to be flexible.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 9, wherein a series of protrusions (Campbell, 11; figure 1), in this embodiment, circular protrusions, also called flow disturbers, or supporting means [Campbell, 0057] and are shown in figure 1 to be on both the first and second half shells (Campbell, 12 & 12’; figure 1).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 1, wherein the interconnecting means (Campbell, 10/10’; figure 1), corresponding to the distribution cooling member of the claim, that comprises a sealing means to provide a fluid-tight seal [Campbell, 0010]. The spigot (Campbell, 10c/10c’; figure 3) that is on the end of the stack, corresponding to the end part, that is attached to the circular apertures (Campbell;, 5a/5a’/5b/5b’; figure 1) [Campbell, 0066], shown in figures 1 and 5 to extend substantially parallel to the plate members, within the spigot is the first and second tubular portion (Campbell, 13 & 14; figure 4), connected to a chamfer (Campbell, 20 & 21; figure 4) to form a receiving chamber and a circumferential groove (Campbell, 17; figure 4) [Campbell, 0071], corresponding to the connector stub for connecting to the inlet duct, the spigots 10a/10b/10c of Campbell, as shown in figure 5.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Campbell teaches a cooling member comprises a heat transfer device (Campbell, 1a/1b/1c; figure 3) formed of a first half shell (Campbell, 12; figure 1) and a second half shell (Campbell, 12’; figure 1) [Campbell, 0049] that are parallel to one another as shown in figure 1 of Campbell, wherein the plates have apertures (Campbell, 6a/6b; figure 1) on either side, corresponding to the end cap of the claim, wherein the interconnecting means (Campbell, 10/10’; figure 1), corresponding to the distribution cooling member of the claim, that comprises a sealing means to provide a fluid-tight seal [Campbell, 0010]. The spigot (Campbell, 10c/10c’; figure 3) that is on the end of the stack, corresponding to the end part, that is attached to the circular apertures (Campbell;, 5a/5a’/5b/5b’; figure 1) [Campbell, 0066], shown in figures 1 and 5 to extend substantially parallel to the plate members. The plates have apertures (Campbell, 6a/6b; figure 1) on either side, corresponding to the end cap of the claim, wherein two interconnecting means (Campbell, 10/10’; figure 1), connected to a tubular portion (Campbell, 13 & 14; figure 4) corresponding to the two lateral tube sections, connected to the through channel that extends along past surfaces 15/32 as shown in figure 5 of Campbell [Campbell, 0070], and when interconnected, a continuous through channel is formed between the adjacent spigots and the tubular portions [Campbell, 0075], to form the distribution ducts.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Campbell teaches the final heat transfer device may be connected to distribute a coolant in to a heat transfer assembly, battery pack, or stack or a part of an engine cooling system [Campbell, 0093].
Regarding Claim 17, modified Campbell teaches a vehicle, such as a motor land vehicle or aircraft, comprising a heat transfer device of claim 1 [Campbell, 0039]. However, Campbell is silent to teach the vehicle is an electric vehicle.
He teaches the power of a battery pack applied to an electric vehicle [He, 0003].
He and Campbell are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Campbell to be used as battery pack in an electric vehicle as taught by He because it is well-known to use a battery pack as a power source for an electric vehicle. Further, a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results supports prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2143, I, B).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell, US 20160003553 A1 (as cited in IDS) and He et al, US 20210175572 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Gandhi et al, US 20140178736 A1 (as cited in IDS).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 1, but is silent to teach on the front piece and the transverse member exerting a compressive force of 20 to 200 kN/m2 on the cells in the length direction.
Gandhi teaches the APM (Gandhi, 40; figure 2) and the battery pack assembly (Gandhi, 50; figure 2) are held together under compression to allow for coolant distribution by the liquid cooling system (Gandhi, 20; figure 1) to each of the cooling plates (Gandhi, 64; figure 2) [Gandhi, 0023].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Campbell to include the compressive system as taught by Gandhi because such modification would ensure the cooling plates are in thermal communication with the battery cells (Gandhi, 54; figure 2) [Gandhi, 0026], and eliminate the need for a separate cooling system [Gandhi, 0007].
While neither modified Campbell nor Gandhi explicitly teach the front piece and the transverse member exerting a compressive force of 20 kN/m2 to 200 kN/m2 on the cells in the length direction, Gandhi teaches a battery module (Gandhi, 30; figure 2) includes and end plate (Gandhi, 34; figure 2), corresponding to the front piece of the claim, and an end frame (Gandhi, 72; figure 2), corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, cooperate with tie rods (Gandhi, 32; figure 2) to hold the APM (Gandhi, 40; figure 2) and the cooling plates (Gandhi, 64; figure 2) under compression to ensure the cooling plates are in thermal communication with the APM, and such that the coolant may flow through the APM, and/or the battery pack assembly (Gandhi, 50; figure 2) to each of the cooling plates without the coolant leaking [Gandhi, 0028]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to optimize the amount of compression exerted onto the battery cells in the length direction to be between 20 kN/m2 to 200 kN/m2, and is a result-effective variable, to prevent coolant from leaking [Gandhi, 0028] and achieve the most desirable and efficient battery pack, such when the cooling plates are in thermal communication with the battery cells [Gandhi, 0026].Moreover, according to MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A), “where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”. In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1995.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Campbell teaches the battery pack of claim 1, wherein a heat transfer device (Campbell, 1; figure 7), corresponding to the cooling member of the claim, is provided between the alignment plate (Campbell, 33; figure 7) corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, and the each of the cell stack [Campbell, 0084], but is silent to teach on a cooling member provided between the transverse front piece and the adjacent transverse row of cells.
Gandhi teaches a battery pack assembly (Gandhi, 50; figure 2) which may include an end frame (Gandhi, 72; figure 2), corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, on at least one end of the end of the battery assembly [Gandhi, 0026].
While neither Campbell or Gandhi explicitly teach a cooling member provided between the transverse front piece and the adjacent transverse row of cells, Gandhi does teach the end frame (Gandhi, 72; figure 2), corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, on at least one end of the end of the battery assembly [Gandhi, 0026], indicating a preferred embodiment and a less preferred embodiment wherein the end frame does not need to be included on the front end of the battery assembly, therefore, the end plate (Gandhi, 34; figure 2), corresponding to the transverse front piece of the claim, may have the cooling plate (Gandhi, 64; figure 2), provided between the end plate and the transverse row of cells. There is a finite number of identified predictable solutions, such that a cooling member is provided between the transverse front piece and an adjacent transverse row of cells or such that a cooling member is not provided between. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, to modify Campbell to include the embodiment of Gandhi, wherein the end frame does not need to be included on the front end of the battery assembly, because such modification would ensure the cooling plates are under compression to ensure thermal communication [Gandhi, 0026]. Thus, absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, wherein, a cooling member is provided between the transverse front piece and an adjacent transverse row of cell, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, see MPEP 2143 (E).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell, US 20160003553 A1 (as cited in IDS) in view of He et al, US 20210175572 A1 and Gandhi et al, US 20140178736 A1 (as cited in IDS).
Regarding Claim 18, Campbell teaches a battery stack comprising a heat transfer device, wherein a battery cell, pack or pouch is located in between opposing heat transfer devices [Campbell, 0038]. Heat transfer devices (Campbell, 1a/1b/1c; figure 1), corresponding to the cooling members of the claim, shown in figure 1 of Campbell to be plate-shaped as required by the claim, wherein each battery pack, cell or pouch, is provided between adjacent heat transfer devices [Campbell, 0083] in the longitudinal direction and extending in the width direction from a first longitudinal side to a second longitudinal rise of array, as shown in figure 7 of Campbell. The securing plate (Campbell, 25; figure 7), corresponding to the transverse front piece of the claim, and an alignment plate (Campbell, 33; figure 7), corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, both plates extend in a width direction, as shown in figure 7 of Campbell, and are interconnected by bolts (Campbell, 24; figure 7), corresponding to the two spaced-apart sill members of the claim, which extend in a length direction, as shown in figure 7 of Campbell. Each heat transfer device is connected to the spigots (Campbell, 10a/10b/10c; figure 5), corresponding to the inlets and outlets of the claim, connected to the through channel that extends along past surfaces 15/32 as shown in figure 5 of Campbell [Campbell, 0070] corresponding to the distribution ducts of the claim. Each heat transfer device is formed similarly such that the spigots (Campbell, 10a/10b/10c; figure 5) along each side are in alignment [Campbell, 0067], wherein the through channels extending along past the surfaces of 15/32 as shown in figure 5 [Campbell, 0070], corresponding to the distribution ducts, extends in a direction that is parallel to the bolts, corresponding to the sill members, wherein a heat transfer fluid, corresponding to the coolant of the claim, may be fed along one of the rows of interconnected spigots, such that the heat transfer fluid flows through the internal volume of the heat transfer device to the row of interconnected spigots formed on the opposite site of the stack, therefore, the flow of the heat transfer medium is parallel across the heat transfer device [Campbell, 0086]. The heat transfer device comprises a plurality of fluid flow channels extending from the inlet to the outlet [Campbell, 0016], and the heat transfer device include channels (Campbell, 8; figure 6) [Campbell, 0046], configured to optimize the flow off cooling or other heat transfer medium from the inlet to outlet [Campbell, 0016], which would extend through the securing plate and/or the alignment plate.
Campbell is silent to teach on an array of at least two rows of battery cells extending side-by-side in the length direction.
He teaches an embodiment of a two cell array (He, 400; figure 18), distributed along a second direction [He, 0196], corresponding to the longitudinal direction of the claim.
He and Campbell are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Campbell to include the two cell array as taught by He because such modification would reduce the accumulation of errors along the second direction and facilitate assembly of the battery pack [He, 0170].
Campbell is silent to teach the clamping array between a transverse front piece and a transverse member extending in a width direction in order to compress the array.
Gandhi teaches the APM (Gandhi, 40; figure 2) and the battery pack assembly (Gandhi, 50; figure 2) are held together under compression to allow for coolant distribution by the liquid cooling system (Gandhi, 20; figure 1) to each of the cooling plates (Gandhi, 64; figure 2) [Gandhi, 0023].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Campbell to include the compressive system as taught by Gandhi because such modification would ensure the cooling plates are in thermal communication with the battery cells (Gandhi, 54; figure 2) [Gandhi, 0026], and eliminate the need for a separate cooling system [Gandhi, 0007].
While neither modified Campbell nor Gandhi explicitly teach clamping the array between a transverse front piece and a transverse member, Gandhi teaches a battery module (Gandhi, 30; figure 2) includes and end plate (Gandhi, 34; figure 2), corresponding to the front piece of the claim, and an end frame (Gandhi, 72; figure 2), corresponding to the transverse member of the claim, cooperate with tie rods (Gandhi, 32; figure 2) to hold the APM (Gandhi, 40; figure 2) and the cooling plates (Gandhi, 64; figure 2) under compression to ensure the cooling plates are in thermal communication with the APM, and such that the coolant may flow through the APM, and/or the battery pack assembly (Gandhi, 50; figure 2) to each of the cooling plates without the coolant leaking [Gandhi, 0028]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to optimize the clamping the array between a transverse front piece and a transverse member, to prevent coolant from leaking [Gandhi, 0028] and achieve the most desirable and efficient battery pack, such when the cooling plates are in thermal communication with the battery cells [Gandhi, 0026].Moreover, according to MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A), “where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”. In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1995).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Campbell teaches the method of claim 18, wherein two interconnecting means (Campbell, 10/10’; figure 1), connected to a tubular portion (Campbell, 13 & 14; figure 4) corresponding to the two lateral tube sections, connected to the through channel that extends along past surfaces 15/32 as shown in figure 5 of Campbell [Campbell, 0070], and when interconnected, a continuous through channel is formed between the adjacent spigots and the tubular portions [Campbell, 0075], to form the distribution ducts. The first tubular portion (Campbell, 13; figure 4) is connected to the second tubular potion (Campbell, 14; figure 4) via an O-ring (Campbell, 18; figure 4) [Campbell, 0072], corresponding to the flexible tube member of the claim, wherein the O-ring may be formed of nitrile or rubber or other suitable material [Campbell, 0071], therefore indicating ring to be flexible.
While modified Campbell does not explicitly teach the cooling members are interconnected via flexible tube segments prior to the connection of the sill members, Campbell teaches the heat transfer devices are aligned by the bolts (Campbell, 24; figure 7), corresponding to the sill members, which are fed through apertures formed in the periphery of each heat transfer device [Campbell, 0082], and it is shown in figure 7 of Campbell, the bolts are on the outside of the heat transfer array and battery packs, therefore, it would be obvious to optimize the method such that prior to the connection of the bolts, the cooling members would be interconnected via flexible tube segments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LILIAN ALICE ODOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM 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, NIKI BAKHTARI can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/LILIAN ALICE ODOM/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722