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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 6-9 are amended.
Status of Amendment
The amendment filed on July 16th, 2026 has been fully considered but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
Status of Objections and Rejections Pending Since the Office Action of May 12th, 2026
The 112(b) rejections of claims 7-9 have been withdrawn in view of the Applicant's amendment.
The 102 rejection of claim 10 is withdrawn in view of the Applicant's amendment.
The 103 rejections of claim 1-10 are withdrawn in view of the Applicant's amendment.
The objection to the drawings is maintained because a replacement drawing of Fig. 1 has not been submitted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 3rd, 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final Office Action on May 12th, 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiramatsu (US 2019/0214805 A1) and further in view of Jeong (US 2020/0161723 A1) and Eom (US 2015/0295283 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hiramatsu teaches an electrical junction box (title) comprising a positive electrode main relay (Fig. 3, 50B; [0045]), a negative electrode main relay (Fig. 3, 50C; [0045]), several busbars associated with said relays (Fig. 3, 80A, 80B, 80C, 80D, and 80E; [0054]), and a cooling case (Fig. 3, 20; [0034]) that is filled with coolant [0037] and portions of the busbars [0006]. These relays are situated on top of a main plate (a portion of the switchboard; Fig. 3, 40; [0040]) where the main plate is the bottom of the pack case. The pack case further comprises a plurality of first slits (Fig. 3, P2; [0060]) through which the vertical portion of the busbars extend.
PNG
media_image1.png
749
624
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hiramatsu continues to teach how the busbar has vertical portions that extend through a plurality of first slits and a horizontal portion that would be buried in the cooling member [0006].
PNG
media_image2.png
460
520
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Hiramatsu does not explicitly teach a single busbar that comprises a horizontal portion, a first vertical portion, and a second vertical portion. All of the busbars have a horizontal portion but only one vertical portion because the busbars’ construction/design involves all of them having a terminal end in the cooling member. However, Hiramatsu teaches that the busbars have a particular shape “in accordance with the wiring route” [0054]. Therefore, depending on the design of the electrical system, one of ordinary skill in the art may construct a single busbar that has a buried horizontal portion as well as a first and second vertical portion at the edges of the horizontal portion where each of the vertical portions extend through a slit of the plurality of first slits. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to use a busbar with the claimed first vertical portion, second vertical portion, and a horizontal portion in Hiramatsu’s disclosure with a reasonable expectation of success based on the desired wiring pathways. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV) (B).
Hiramatsu also teaches that the electrical components connected by busbars in their disclosure are electrical relays [0039] and fails to teach that they are batteries. Jeong is analogous art to Hiramatsu because both discuss electrical devices (Hiramatsu, title; Jeong, title). Although the intent of Hiramatsu’s disclosure is to provide an electrical junction box with a cooling system to cool busbars, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that busbars are used in the electrical arts in other devices, including batteries. Jeong teaches the usage of batteries with busbars (Jeong, [0007]) and discusses cooling the busbars as a method of cooling a battery pack (Jeong, [0015]). The inventive concept of submerging portions of busbars into a cooling member full of liquid coolant (Hiramatsu, abstract) would prompt one of ordinary skill to introduce batteries into Hiramatsu’s system to achieve the same cooling benefits. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to use batteries in Hiramatsu’s system in order to create a battery pack whose batteries have busbars that are cooled by being submersed in cooling member full of liquid. See MPEP 2143 (I) (F).
Hiramatsu does not explicitly teach a pack case that contains the batteries. Eom is analogous art to Hiramatsu because both discuss electrical devices (Hiramatsu, title; Eom, title). Eom teaches that a pack case may be used as an exterior material of a battery pack to protect the electric components against an external impact [0077]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to use a pack case to cover modified Hiramatsu’s battery pack based on the teachings of Eom to protect the electronic components inside the battery pack.
Regarding claim 3, Hiramatsu’s cooling member comprises a body portion (main body shown in Fig. 5) and an outlet pipe (Fig. 5, 26; [0034]).
PNG
media_image3.png
652
769
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Hiramatsu doesn’t teach that the outlet pipe is buried inside the body portion, but extending the length of the pipe (i.e., increasing its size) such that it is inside of the body portion is an obvious modification. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV) (B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to change the size of the outlet pipe because changing the size of a component is an obvious modification.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Hiramatsu teaches that the horizontal portion of the busbar and parts of the vertical portions are buried in the body portion (abstract; Fig. 11 below). Additionally, as seen in the figure below, the cooling pipe (26P), is beneath the busbar.
PNG
media_image4.png
611
711
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Hiramatsu mentions that batteries are used in used in electric cars [0002]. Hiramatsu, modified by Jeong, teaches a battery that is suitable to be used in an electric car. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended supports an obviousness determination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to use modified Hiramatsu’s battery in an electric car/device based on the battery’s suitability for such an intended use. See MPEP 2144.07.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 6, and 9 are 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 2 requires both an upper pack case and a lower pack case in addition to the cooling member. However, there is no obvious motivation in the prior art to use a structure comprising an upper pack case and a lower case when a singular structure suffices to carry out the necessary function. Claim 6 is objected to due to its dependence on claim 2.
Claim 4 requires that the body portion have a set of slits that the vertical portions of the busbar also extend through. However, since there is only one plate/layer separating the pack case from the cooling member, there is only one set of slits through which the busbars need to extend. It is nonobvious to add a plurality of slits to the body portion of the Hiramatsu’s cooling member as there is no motivation to modify Hiramatsu to add a plurality of second slits.
Claim 9 requires that the busbars be integrally formed with the body portion of the cooling member. Hiramatsu’s disclosure cannot be modified in a way to sustain a rejection. Hiramatsu’s cooling member is made of a synthetic, insulating resin [0034] and the busbars are made of a conductive material, typically metal. Since these qualities oppose each other, it is nonobvious to make them an integrated structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to application’s disclosure:
Dulle (US 2016/0093456 A1) teaches a system comprising electrical relays and batteries.
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 RYAN K BLACKWELL-RUDASILL whose telephone number is (571)270-0563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
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 Bakhtiari 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.
/R.B.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
