DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
1. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
3. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/2/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
4. In response to the amendment received on 6/2/2026:
Claims 1-2, 5, and 7-12 are pending in the current application. Claim 1 has been amended and Claims 3-4, 6, and 12 are cancelled.
The cores of the previous prior art-based rejections have been maintained in light of the amendment and are updated to reflect changes in the claims.
Claim Interpretation
5. All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. Claims 1-2, 7, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang US PG Publication 2020/0313260 in view of Qi CN210607415 and Won US PG Publication 2020/0037436.
Regarding Claims 1, 9, and 11-12, Wang discloses a battery pack 12 (meeting Claim 11) battery disconnect unit 26 comprising a contactor 20, a busbar 18 electrically connected to the contactor 20, a heat dissipation sheet (isolation component that is highly thermally conductive, paras 0034-0035) 32 formed together with at least a part of the busbar 18 (para 0034: “the isolation component 32 may be a lamination disposed on each of the plurality of bus bars 18 such that each of the plurality of bus bars 18 is a laminated bus bar”), and a cooling plate 28 formed under and directly contactinging the heat dissipation sheet 32 (Fig 4, and para 0034: isolation component 32 disposed between and in contact with the cooling plate 28 and each of the plurality of bus bars 18, meeting Claim 12), wherein the end portion of the busbar 18 is electrically connected to the contactor 20 (See entire disclosure and especially all figs and e.g. paras 0030-0036, 0038-0039, 0041-0042, 0045). See annotated Fig 2 below.
Wang discloses wherein the cooling plate 28 comprises a cooling flow path 44 including an inlet 40 and an outlet 42 formed on at least one side surface of the cooling plate 28 (Figs. 2, 4, paras 0037, 0045) but Wang fails to specifically disclose wherein the cooling flow path’s inlet and outlet are formed on a same side surface of the cooling plate and face in the same direction. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery cooling plate design, Qi discloses wherein a battery module having liquid cooling plates (side plates) 210 on opposing sides of the battery stack have cooling channels or cooling flow paths comprising an inlet (coolant inlet connector) 30 and an outlet (coolant outlet connector) 40 formed on a same side surface of the cooling plate and face in the same direction and result in a design that improves the liquid cooling effect and assembly efficiency and further, when the inlet and outlet are at the same end, coolant can flow under its own gravity (see e.g. Figs 1-2; paras 0059-0066). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the battery disconnect unit of Wang such that the cooling flow path’s inlet and outlet are formed on a same side surface of the cooling plate and face in the same direction because Qi teaches that this allows coolant to flow under its own gravity and also improves liquid cooling effect and assembly efficiency.
PNG
media_image1.png
813
951
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wang modified by Qi fails to specifically disclose wherein the busbar is embedded in the heat dissipation sheet or that the thickness of the busbar is less than a thickness of the heat dissipation sheet and fails to disclose wherein the busbar has a first portion, the first portion being exposed, a second portion, the second portion being embedded in the heat dissipation sheet, and a third portion, the third portion being exposed, and wherein a length of the second portion is greater than a length of the first portion and greater than a length of the third portion. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery module design, Won teaches that battery busbars connected to a cooling plate 110 (a supporting plate having heat dissipation properties) wherein the busbars are embedded or completely buried inside the plate with the benefit that the busbars can be securely fixed to the plate with efficient space usage (see e.g. Figs 2-9, paras 0034-0044). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to embed the busbar of Wang modified by Qi in the heat dissipation sheet since Won teaches that this type of arrangement provides secure attachment between the same elements with the benefit of efficient space usage. The Office notes that Won also teaches the benefit of coating bus bars with heat dissipation coating layer to supplement heat dissipation performance (para 0101) which is also considered “embedding” of the bus bar in a heat dissipation layer and renders obvious the claim in light of the advantage that this coating would provide to Wang. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the heat dissipation sheet (111 in Won) in which the busbar is embedded in Wang modified by Qi and Won to be thicker than the busbar itself because Won teaches this structure as a secure configuration (see Fig 9 of Won) (meeting Claim 9). The use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Regarding the limitations directed to relative lengths of the first, second, and third portions, the claims do not limit the lengths to be the total lengths but instead recite “a length” which is reasonably interpreted as parts of the recited sections. See annotated figure below. The skilled artisan would be capable of selecting lengths of the first through third portions that would correlate with the claimed lengths since there is no structural difference otherwise. The boxes on the figure below short the “lengths” that can be assigned, the length assigned to the second portion being longer than those of the first and third portions.
PNG
media_image2.png
408
754
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Further, the Office notes if the claim were interpreted according to Applicant’s intent as opposed to the true scope of the claim, embedding the longer portion of the busbar into the heat dissipation member would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application because providing increased surface area to the portion of the bus bar embedded in the heat conductive dissipation member would improve heat dissipation and a change in proportion or relative dimension is obvious in the absence of unexpected results. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Regarding Claim 2, Fig. 2 of Wang shoes that the end portion of the busbar is bent in a direction parenpendular to an upper surface of the heat dissipation sheet and extends toward the contactor 20.
Regarding Claim 7, Wang discloses where in the battery disconnect unit further comprises a heat transfer pad (thermal pad) 34 located between the heat dissipation sheet 32 and the cooling plate 32 (Fig. 2, para 0034).
Regarding Claim 10, Wang discloses in para 0034 that the thermal dissipation sheet is made of Mylar, which is a plastic material.
7. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang US PG Publication 2020/0313260 in view of Qi CN210607415 and Won US PG Publication 2020/0037436, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Shin US PG Publication 2019/0074557 (hereinafter “Shin 557”).
Regarding Claim 5, Wang modified by Qi and Won discloses the claimed battery disconnect unit as described above in the rejection of Claim 1, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. Wang discloses that the cooling fluid can be air or coolant (paras 0037-008) but fails to specifically disclose wherein a cooling water is injected into the inlet. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery module cooling system design, Shin ‘557 discloses that cooling air or water can be used as functional equivalents in a system where busbars are in heat sinks and cooling plates, for example (see para 0039). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use cooling water as the cooling fluid of Wang modified by Qi and Won because Shin ‘557 discloses that cooling air or water can be used as functional equivalents in a system where busbars are in heat sinks and cooling plates. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.). Although Shin ‘557 and Wang and Qi do not specifically call the introduction of the cooling fluid into the inlet “injection”, the introduction of the fluid (water) can be considered injection in the absence of any special definition of this term in the instant disclosure.
8. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang US PG Publication 2020/0313260 in view of Qi CN210607415 and Won US PG Publication 2020/0037436, as applied to Claim 7, and further in view of Shin US PG Publication 2018/0175468 (hereinafter “Shin ‘468”).
Regarding Claim 8, Wang modified by Qi and Won discloses the claimed battery disconnect unit as described above in the rejection of Claim 7, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. Wang in view of Qi and Won discloses the thermal/heat transfer pad but fails to specifically disclose that it comprises silicone resin and a thermally conductive material. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery module design, Shin ‘468 teaches that a thermal/heat transfer pad beneficially includes an elastic material to improve adhesion among connecting parts and should include silicone with a thermally conductive material, exemplifying silicon polymer and thermally conductive materials (see para 0052). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use silicone polymer (resin) and a thermally conductive material in the heat transfer pad of Wang, Qi and Won because Shin ‘468 discloses that these materials are appropriate for such use and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). Further, although the prior art does not specifically call the thermal pad a “plate”, there is no special definition of this term and the skilled artisan would reasonably consider the pad of Wang, which appears to be shaped like a plate, to be a plate.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims are based on the claims as amended. The amended claims have been addressed in the new rejection above. Further, the Office notes that Applicant’s arguments with respect to the new claim limitations do not provide any suggestion of criticality in the claimed first, second, and third busbar lengths. Such arguments, if appropriate and supported, may be helpful in establishing a case of patentability.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA S PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-3597. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30a to 3p Eastern Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached on 5712721481. 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.
/LISA S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights