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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 6, 2027 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received April 6, 2026:
Claims 1-5 and 8-15 are pending.
The previous prior art rejection is withdrawn in light of the amendment.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the indefinite article ‘a’ before “heat producing hotspot area…casing” (lines 7-8). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the indefinite article ‘a’ before “heat producing hotspot area…battery cells” (line 21). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the definite article ‘the’ before “heat producing hotspot area” (line 7) (antecedent basis given in claim 1, line 7). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the definite article ‘the’ before “heat producing hotspot area” (line 7) (antecedent basis given in claim 1, line 7). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the indefinite article ‘a’ before “heat producing hotspot area…casing” (lines 7-8). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the indefinite article ‘a’ before “heat producing hotspot area…battery cells” (line 21). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the indefinite article ‘a’ before “heat producing hotspot area…casing” (line 17). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: not having the indefinite article ‘a’ before “heat producing hotspot area…battery cells” (lines 20-21). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the fin” (singular) (line 16, 18 (two times)). However antecedent basis is given to “at least one fin” (singular or plural) (line 14). Thus, it is unclear what “the fin” refers to, rendering the claim unclear and indefinite. Since claims 2-5 and 8-13 are dependent upon claim 1, they are rejected for the same reason.
Claim 14 recites “the fin” (singular) (line 16, 18 (two times)). However antecedent basis is given to “at least one fin” (singular or plural) (line 14). Thus, it is unclear what “the fin” refers to, rendering the claim unclear and indefinite.
Claim 15 recites “the fin” (singular) (line 12, 14 (two times)). However antecedent basis is given to “at least one fin” (singular or plural) (line 10). Thus, it is unclear what “the fin” refers to, rendering the claim unclear and indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 and 8-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, appears to teach, suggest, or render obvious the invention of at least claims 1, 14, and 15.
Claims 1, 14, and 15 teach a system for thermal management of a battery pack, a battery pack, and a method for assembling a system for a battery pack thermal management comprising the elements therein. Notably claims 1, 14, and 15 require “at least one extension arranged on the first heat exchange surface, wherein the at least one extension comprises at least one fin projecting downwardly from the first heat exchange surface and extending only to an upper part of at least one end face of at least one battery cell, wherein the fin is configured to be in thermal contact with heat-producing surfaces of upper parts of the at least one battery cell, and wherein the fin is separate from the battery housing.”
GB 2562456 (Ximena et al.), previously relied upon, teaches a battery pack with a cooling element (heat exchange device [20]) (figs. 1, 9; p 5, ll 6-14, para bridging pp 53-54). US 2021/0020896 (Jang et al.), previously relied upon to render obvious the fin, does not teach the fin as currently claimed. No motivation exists to modify the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention (as Jang et al.’s structure extends around both upper and lower parts of the battery cells and serves as the housing). Thus, none of the prior art alone or in combination teaches, suggests, or renders obvious the claimed invention. Since claims 2-5 and 8-13 are dependent upon claim 1, they are allowable for the same reason.
Conclusion
Note: In hopes of promoting compact prosecution, the Examiner called and left messages for Applicant’s Representative Gregg Peacock on April 27, 2026, April 30, 2026, May 5, 2026, and May 12, 2026 proposing Examiner’s Amendments to put the application in condition for allowance. No response was received.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUGENIA WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4942. The examiner can normally be reached a flex schedule, generally Monday-Thursday 5:00 -7:30 (AM) and 9:45-3:15 ET.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/EUGENIA WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights