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
The amendment filed on 1/20/2026 does not place the application in condition for allowance.
The basis of the rejection of claims 1-4, 6, and 12-14 is maintained.
The cancellation of claims 5, 7-11 and 16-20 and the addition of claims 21-26 is acknowledged.
New analysis follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues newly amended claims 1 and 6 are not anticipated by Lee with the modification of the phase “a channel configured to communicate a fluid internally within the projection” however as outlined in the rejection of claims 1 and 6 below the main body and the bent part create a channel with the interior of the projection acting as part of the channel within which the fluid flows thereby meeting the required limitation of internally within the projection.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to new claims 21-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (US20120177965A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a battery pack(¶[0043]), comprising:
a battery array(i.e. battery module) including a plurality of battery cells, (ref. 100, ¶[0043]), wherein the plurality of battery cells includes a first battery cell and a second battery cell (see multiple cells Fig. 3); and
a thermal exchange plate(400a, cooling member), wherein the first battery cell is spaced-apart from the second battery cell by the thermal exchange plate(see two cells on each side of cooling member 400a), wherein the thermal exchange plate includes a main section(410a) and a projection extending outward from the main section(430a), wherein the projection includes a channel configured to communicate a fluid internally within the projection where the outer portion is identified by W2 and the inner portion is identified by W1 in Fig. 3 thereby defining the fluid channel internal to the exterior of the projection and this channel thermally conditions the battery array (see space between main body part 410a and bent part 430a, ¶[0014]).
PNG
media_image1.png
502
659
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3 of Lee
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 1, wherein:
the thermal exchange plate includes a first face and a second face opposite the first face (see annotated Fig. 3),
the projection includes a first portion extending outward from the first face of the thermal exchange plate(see annotated Fig. 3), and
the projection includes a second portion extending outward from the second face of the thermal exchange plate(see annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 2, wherein:
the first portion extends outward from the first face of the thermal exchange plate by a distance substantially equal to a thickness of one of the battery cells, and the second portion extends outward from the second face of the thermal exchange plate by a distance substantially equal to a thickness of one of the battery cells (See Fig. 3. where the first and second portions extend approximately over the thickness of the cells 100).
Regarding claims 4 and 6, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 3, the projection is a first projection and is adjacent a bottom of the first and second battery cells,
the thermal exchange plate includes a second projection including a channel configured to communicate a fluid internally within the projection where the outer portion is identified by W2 and the inner portion is identified by W1 in Fig. 3 thereby defining the fluid channel internal to the exterior of the projection in the same way as the first projection and this channel thermally conditions the battery array,
the second projection includes a first portion extending outward from the first face of the thermal exchange plate and arranged adjacent a top of the first battery cell, and
the second projection includes a second portion extending outward from the second face of the thermal exchange plate and arranged adjacent a top of the second battery cell, in this case see annotated Fig. 3 where the top projection is the second projection and the bottom projection is the first projection).
Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 1, Claim 13 is considered product-by-process claim where the thermal exchange plate is formed using an extrusion process. The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus or product. The determination of patentability is based upon the apparatus structure itself. The patentability of a product or apparatus does not depend on its method of production or formation. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (see MPEP § 2113).
Regarding claim 14, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 1, wherein the thermal exchange plate is made of a metallic material (¶[0023]).
Regarding claim 24, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 1, wherein
a length of the projection is equal to a distance between a first side and a second side opposite the first side of the thermal exchange plate(see end view of thermal exchange plate in Fig. 2 where the first side of the thermal exchange plate is shown and Fig. 4 where the closer end is the first side and the farther end is the second side of the thermal exchange plate), and
the channel of the projection exhibits a length equal to a length of the projection(see Fig. 1 where the length of bent parts 430 extends the length of the cells 100 and first and second side of the thermal exchange plate).
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.
Claims 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US20120177965A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takeuchi (JP2004362879A, reference made to attached English translation).
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the main section includes at least one channel configured to communicate fluid to thermally condition the battery pack.
Takeuchi, related to battery cooling, teaches a conductive member (8) which contains grooves (i.e. channels)(10) to be placed between battery cells for cooling(Fig. 1 and Fig. 3) where a cooling medium may flow(¶[0018]) and the temperature rise of the battery may be suppressed(¶[0019]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding he conductive member with grooves of Takeuchi to the thermal exchange plate of Lee would have resulted in improved temperature rise suppression.
Therefore it would have been obvious to have added the conductive member of Takeuchi to the thermal exchange plate of Lee to improve temperature rise suppression.
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 14, but does not disclose wherein the thermal exchange plate is made of aluminum.
Takeuchi, related to battery cooling, teaches a highly thermally conductive member (8) placed between battery cells for cooling(Fig. 1 and Fig. 3) and that the member may be made of aluminum to conduct heat such that the temperature rise of the battery may be suppressed(¶[0019]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized making the thermal exchange plate of Lee from the metal aluminum would have resulted in improved temperature rise suppression.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have made the thermal exchange plate of Lee from aluminum to improve temperature rise suppression.
Claims 21-23 and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US20120177965A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mascianica (US20170077566A1
Regarding claim 21 and 22, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the channel of the projection is within the first and second portion and extends continuously from the first portion, through the first face, through the main section, through the second face, and into the second portion.
Mascianica, related to battery cooling, teaches a coolant channel 224 which is projected from and aligned with the top side of the cells(Fig. 6, ¶[0004]) to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost(¶[0026]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding the cooling channels of Mascianica which span the top sides of the cells to the coolant channels of Lee which extend along the length of the cells to add cooling and to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost. This addition would extend the channels within the projection from the first portion, through the first face, through the main section, through the second face, and into the second portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have added the cooling channels of Mascianica to the coolant channels of Lee to provide added cooling and multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost.
Regarding claim 23, Lee discloses the battery pack as recited in claim 6, but does not disclose wherein: the channel of the first projection is present within the first portion and the second portion of the first projection, and the channel of the second projection is present within the first portion and the second portion of the second projection.
Mascianica, related to battery cooling, teaches a coolant channel 224 which is projected from and aligned with the top side of the cells(Fig. 6, ¶[0004]) to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost(¶[0026]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding the cooling channels of Mascianica which span the top sides of the cells to the coolant channels of Lee on the top and bottom of the cells which extend along the length of the cells to add cooling and to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost. This addition would extend the channels within the projection from the first portion, through the first face, through the main section, through the second face, and into the second portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have added the cooling channels of Mascianica to the coolant channels of Lee to provide added cooling and multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost.
The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 25, Lee discloses a battery pack(¶[0043]), comprising:
a battery array(i.e. battery module) including a plurality of battery cells, (ref. 100, ¶[0043]), wherein the plurality of battery cells includes a first battery cell and a second battery cell (see multiple cells Fig. 3); and
a thermal exchange plate(400a, cooling member), wherein the first battery cell is spaced-apart from the second battery cell by the thermal exchange plate(see two cells on each side of cooling member 400a), wherein the thermal exchange plate includes a main section(410a) having a first face and a second face opposite the first face (see annotated Fig. 3), and a projection extending outward from the main section(430a),
the projection includes a first portion extending outward from the first face of the thermal exchange plate(see annotated Fig. 3), and
the projection includes a second portion extending outward from the second face of the thermal exchange plate(see annotated Fig. 3).
wherein the projection includes a channel configured to communicate a fluid internally within the projection where the outer portion is identified by W2 and the inner portion is identified by W1 in Fig. 3 thereby defining the fluid channel internal to the exterior of the projection and this channel thermally conditions the battery array(see space between main body part 410a and bent part 430a, ¶[0014]), but does not disclose wherein the channel of the projection is within the first and second portion.
Mascianica, related to battery cooling, teaches a coolant channel 224 which is projected from and aligned with the top side of the cells(Fig. 6, ¶[0004]) to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost(¶[0026]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding the cooling channels of Mascianica which span the width of the top sides of the cells to the coolant channels of Lee, which extend along the length of the cells, would add cooling and to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost. This addition create a projection with a cooling channel within the projection including a first and second projection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have added the cooling channels of Mascianica to the coolant channels of Lee to provide added cooling and multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost.
Regarding claim 26, Lee discloses a battery pack(¶[0043]), comprising:
a battery array(i.e. battery module) including a plurality of battery cells, (ref. 100, ¶[0043]), wherein the plurality of battery cells includes a first battery cell and a second battery cell (see multiple cells Fig. 3); and
a thermal exchange plate(400a, cooling member), wherein the first battery cell is spaced-apart from the second battery cell by the thermal exchange plate(see two cells on each side of cooling member 400a), wherein the thermal exchange plate includes a main section(410a) having a first face and a second face opposite the first face (see annotated Fig. 3),
and a first and second projection adjacent to the bottom and top of the battery cells respectively with each including a first portion extending outward from the first face of the thermal exchange plate and a second portion extending outward from the second face of the thermal exchange plate(see annotated Fig. 3).
wherein the projection includes a channel configured to communicate a fluid internally within the projection where the outer portion is identified by W2 and the inner portion is identified by W1 in Fig. 3 thereby defining the fluid channel internal to the exterior of the projection and this channel thermally conditions the battery array(see space between main body part 410a and bent part 430a, ¶[0014]), but does not disclose wherein: the channel of the first projection is present within the first portion and the second portion of the first projection, and the channel of the second projection is present within the first portion and the second portion of the second projection.
Mascianica, related to battery cooling, teaches a coolant channel 224 which is projected from and aligned with the top side of the cells(Fig. 6, ¶[0004]) to provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost(¶[0026]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding the cooling channels of Mascianica which span the top sides of the cells to the coolant channels of Lee on the top and bottom of the cells which extend along the length of the cells would add cooling and provide multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost. This addition would extend the channels within the projection from the first portion, through the first face, through the main section, through the second face, and into the second portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have added the cooling channels of Mascianica to the coolant channels of Lee to provide added cooling and multiple advantages including cost, strength, durability, life cycle cost.
The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KAREN J. ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (703)756-1243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am-6 pm 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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/RYAN S CANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/K.J.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1726