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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/23/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Fig 9 contains reference character 900 and Fig. 3b contains reference character 362b. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: par. [0102] of the instant specification refers to elements 362a and 36b. Element 36b is not present in the drawings, however, element 362b is. .
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 10 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 10 recites the limitation "each first section" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what constitutes a first section.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 18-21, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wuensche et al. (US 20210129684 A1) hereinafter "Wuensche".
Regarding claim 1, Wuensche teaches an electrochemical cell comprising: a housing defining an interior space of the electrochemical cell; a lid disposed on a first face of the electrochemical cell defined by a length and a thickness of the housing, in which a dimension of the housing extending perpendicular to the first face of the electrochemical cell is a height of the housing (Fig. 3-5; [0085]-[0089]), and in which the length of the housing is greater than the height of the housing ([0066] each sub-cell is rectangular; Fig. 3 and 5 show a cell 85 in which the length is greater than the height); an anode and a cathode disposed in the interior space of the electrochemical cell, at least one of the anode or the cathode connected to the lid ([0093] positive and negative terminals are connected to elements 60 and 68). Claim 1 is being interpreted in light of the instant specification which describes an electrochemical cell that can includes an electrode stack or multiple electrode stacks disposed in a respective compartment ([0087]; Fig. 1B and 3B; [0102]-[0103]). Thus, both the battery cell array of Wuensche, which includes multiple electrode stacks disposed in a respective compartment (element 85 in Fig. 3; [0064]-[0069]), and the battery cell (Fig. 1 element 80; [0060] “rectangular rechargeable battery cell”) are considered equivalent to the claimed battery cell.
PNG
media_image1.png
500
681
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Wuensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1. Wuensche further teaches where the anode comprises: a metal substrate extending along the height of the electrochemical cell; and an anode material coated on a portion of a surface of the metal substrate ([0061]-[0064]), and in which an uncoated portion of the metal substrate is in contact with an inner surface of the lid ([0069] uncoated portion is in contact with elements 60 and 68 via current collecting tab and terminals; Fig. 2-3; [0093]).
Regarding claim 19, Wuensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1. Wuensche further teaches where the cathode comprises: a metal substrate extending along the height of the electrochemical cell; and a cathode material coated on a portion of a surface of the metal substrate ([0061]-[0064]), and in which an uncoated portion of the metal substrate is in contact with an inner surface of the lid ([0069] uncoated portion is in contact with elements 60 and 68 via current collecting tab and terminals; Fig. 2-3; [0093]).
Regarding claim 20, Wuensche further teaches a battery pack comprising an array of the electrochemical cells ([0091]; Fig. 8; [0108]).
Regarding claim 21, Wuensche further teaches where the electrochemical cells in the array are arranged such that a largest face of each electrochemical cell faces a largest face of an adjacent electrochemical cell (Fig. 8, annotated below).
PNG
media_image2.png
402
618
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Wuensche further teaches where the battery pack is disposed in a vehicle ([0039]; Claim 14).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensche (US 20210129684 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200127350 A1) hereinafter “Lee”.
Regarding claim 2, Wuensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1, in which the lid is a first lid, and in which the electrochemical cell comprises: a second lid disposed on a second face of the electrochemical cell opposite the first face, the second lid separated from the first lid by the height of the housing (Fig. 3; [0088]-[0089]).
Wuensche does not teach where the anode is connected to the first lid and the cathode is connected to the second lid.
However, Lee teaches an electrochemical device comprising first and second covers (Fig. 1&2A; [0051]-[0054] element 110a/b and 100a/b are considered a first and second lid). Lee teaches wherein a anode is connected to the first lid and a cathode is connected to the second lid ([0052]; Fig. 1; sub-cell terminal are located on either side of individual sub-cells).
Both Wuensche and Lee teach rectangular battery cell arrays with a first and second lid. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the sub-cells of Wuensche could be substituted for the sub-cells of Lee because both serve the same function. One of ordinary skill in the art could have done this with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the predictable result of producing a rectangular electrochemical cell.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrochemical cell taught by Wuensche such that the anode is connected to the first lid and the cathode is connected to the second lid to in achieve the predictable result of producing a rectangular electrochemical cell.
Regarding claim 22, Wuensche teaches the battery pack of claim 20.
Wuensche does not teach where the lid comprises a first lid to which the anode is connected, and in which each electrochemical cell comprises a second lid disposed on a second face of the electrochemical cell opposite the first face, in which the cathode is connected to the second lid, and in which the electrochemical cells in the array are arranged such that the first lid of a first electrochemical cell in the array faces in a first direction, and the first lid of an adjacent electrochemical cell in the array faces in a second direction opposite the first direction.
However, Lee teaches a battery pack comprising first and second covers (Fig. 11; [0048]; [0051]-[0054] element 110a/b are considered a first and second lid; [0163]; [0179]-[0180]). Lee teaches wherein a anode is connected to the first lid and a cathode is connected to the second lid ([0052]; Fig. 1; sub-cell terminal are located on either side of individual sub-cells). Lee teaches that battery cells may be arranged to reverse polarities such that first and second batteries have opposite polarities and form a spatial height difference ([0154]; Fig. 1 &11). Lee teaches wherein a protruding portion of a sub-cell is located on one side of a battery cell and a recessed portion on the other and wherein the height different between a recessed portion and a protruding portion is reflected in the first and second cover providing a discharge path for emission gas from a battery cell ([0160]-[0161]; [0168]; [0179]-[0180]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack taught by Wuensche such that the electrochemical cells in the array are arranged such that the first lid of a first electrochemical cell in the array faces in a first direction, and the first lid of an adjacent electrochemical cell in the array faces in a second direction opposite the first direction as taught by Lee.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the battery pack taught by Wuensche such that the electrochemical cells in the array are arranged such that the first lid of a first electrochemical cell in the array faces in a first direction, and the first lid of an adjacent electrochemical cell in the array faces in a second direction opposite the first direction as taught by Lee because the configuration of cells and associated spatial height difference allows a discharge path for emissions from battery cells ([0160]-[0161]; [0168]).
Claim(s) 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensche (US 20210129684 A1) in view of He et al. (US 20210175572 A1) hereinafter “He”.
Regarding claim 3, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1.
Wuensche does not teach where a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than 1 and less than 40.
However, He teaches a battery pack including a housing with a plurality of rectangular cells arranged in at least one rectangular accommodating unit ([0013]-[0014]). He teaches where a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than or equal to 4 and less than or equal to 20 ([0160]-[0161]). He teaches that an elongated rectangular cell can be adapted to the width of a vehicle ([0161]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche such that a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than or equal to 4 and less than or equal to 20 as taught by He.
Both Wuensche and He teach rectangular electrochemical cells. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche such that a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than or equal to 4 and less than or equal to 20 as taught by He to achieve the predictable result of a rectangular electrochemical cell as changes in size are within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See in Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) (MPEP2144.04).
Regarding claim 4, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1.
Wuensche does not teach where the height of the housing is less than 500 mm.
However, He teaches a battery pack including a housing with a plurality of rectangular cells arranged in at least one rectangular accommodating unit ([0013]-[0014]). He teaches where a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than or equal to 4 and less than or equal to 20 ([0160]-[0161]). He teaches that an elongated rectangular cell can be adapted to the width of a vehicle ([0161]). He teaches an electrochemical cell where the height of the housing is less than 500 mm ([0161] a length of 600mm and a L/H of 4 corresponds to a height of 150mm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche to have a height less than 500mm as taught by He.
Both Wuensche and He teach rectangular electrochemical cells. He teaches an electrochemical cell with a height of less than 500mm. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche to have a height less than 500mm as taught by He to achieve the predictable result of a rectangular electrochemical cell as changes in size are within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See in Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) (MPEP2144.04). Further, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding claim 5, modified Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 4.
Wuensche does not teach where the height of the housing is less than 125 mm.
However, He teaches a battery pack including a housing with a plurality of rectangular cells arranged in at least one rectangular accommodating unit ([0013]-[0014]). He teaches where a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than or equal to 4 and less than or equal to 20 ([0160]-[0161]). He teaches that an elongated rectangular cell can be adapted to the width of a vehicle ([0161]). He teaches an electrochemical cell where the height of the housing is less than 125 mm ([0161] a length of 600mm and a L/H of 20 corresponds to a height of 30mm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche to have a height less than 125mm as taught by He.
Both Wuensche and He teach rectangular electrochemical cells. He teaches an electrochemical cell with a height of less than 125mm. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche to have a height less than 500mm as taught by He to achieve the predictable result of a rectangular electrochemical cell as changes in size are within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See in Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) (MPEP2144.04). Further, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding claim 6, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1.
Wuensche does not teach where the length of the housing is at least 100 mm.
However, He teaches a battery pack including a housing with a plurality of rectangular cells arranged in at least one rectangular accommodating unit ([0013]-[0014]). He teaches where a ratio between the length of the housing and the height of the housing is greater than or equal to 4 and less than or equal to 20 ([0160]-[0161]). He teaches that an elongated rectangular cell can be adapted to the width of a vehicle ([0161]). He teaches wherein an elongated rectangular cell has a length of 600-2500mm ([0161]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche to have a length of 600-2500mm as taught by He.
Both Wuensche and He teach rectangular electrochemical cells. He teaches an electrochemical cell with a length of 600-2500mm. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could modify the size of the rectangular cells taught by Wuensche to have a length of 600-2500mm as taught by He to achieve the predictable result of a rectangular electrochemical cell as changes in size are within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See in Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) (MPEP2144.04).
Regarding claim 7, modified Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 6. Modified Wuensch further teaches where the length of the housing is greater than 500 mm ([0161]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 7. Modified Wuensch further teaches where the length of the housing is greater than 500 mm ([0161]). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensche (US 20210129684 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 20200067040 A1) hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claim 9, Wuensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1.
Wuensche does not teach where the electrochemical cell is configured such that current flow in the electrochemical cell is substantially in a direction parallel to the height of the electrochemical cell.
However, Kim teaches a plurality of battery cells in a housing ([0013]; Fig. 2; [0018]). Kim teaches where the electrochemical cell is configured such that current flow in the electrochemical cell is substantially in a direction parallel to the height of the electrochemical cell (Fig. 2 annotated below; [0063]).
PNG
media_image3.png
575
657
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the terminal configuration in the electrochemical cell taught by Muensche such that current flow in the electrochemical cell is substantially in a direction parallel to the height of the electrochemical cell as taught by Kim.
Both Muensche and Kim teach an array of battery cells for use in an electric vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that an electrochemical cell configuration in which tabs are located on opposite sides of a battery cell and current flow is substantially in a direction parallel to the height of the electrochemical cell is known in the art as an alternate tab configuration.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the could have modified the terminal configuration in the electrochemical cell taught by Muensche such that current flow in the electrochemical cell is substantially in a direction parallel to the height of the electrochemical cell as taught by Kim with a reasonable expectation of successfully producing an electrochemical cell.
Claim(s) 10-14, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensche (US 20210129684 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1. Wuensche further teaches where the lid comprises multiple electrically conductive sections([0093]).
Wuensche does not explicitly teach where each first section is electrically isolated from each other section.
However, Wuensche teaches a lid component comprising conductive members connected to a positive terminal and a negative terminal (Fig. 3; [0093]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that conductive members associate with each terminal should be electrically isolated from each other to prevent short circuit.
Regarding claim 11, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 10. Wuensche further teaches where the cathode comprises multiple cathode elements, in which a corresponding subset of the cathode elements is connected to each section of the lid ([0093]).
Regarding claim 12, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 10. Wuensche further teaches where the anode comprises multiple anode elements, in which a corresponding subset of the anode elements is connected to each section of the lid ([0093]).
Regarding claim 13, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 12. Wuensche further teaches where multiple sub-cells are defined within the interior of the space of the electrochemical cell, each sub-cell containing a respective subset of the anode elements ([0085]; Fig. 3 element 80 considered sub-cell; [0060]; [0064]; [0093]).
Regarding claim 14, Wuensch teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 13. Wuensche further teaches where each sub-cell is fluidically isolated from each other of sub-cell ([0060]-[0065]; sub-cells each have their own individual case).
Regarding claim 24, Wuensche teaches the battery pack of claim 23.
Wuensche is silent as to the orientation of the electrochemical cells in relation to a vehicle axle.
However, He teaches wherein a battery pack is disposed in a vehicle such that the length of the electrochemical cells in the battery pack is oriented parallel to an axle of the vehicle (Fig. 25, 12 & 19; the length of the cells is located parallel to element 204 which is parallel to a wheel axle)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack taught by Wuensche such that the length of the electrochemical cells in the battery pack is oriented parallel to an axle of the vehicle.
Both Muensch and He teach battery packs for electric vehicles. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that there are multiple orientations of cells and modules with respect to an axle.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have modified the battery pack taught by Wuensche such that the length of the electrochemical cells in the battery pack is oriented parallel to an axle of the vehicle with a reasonable expectation of successfully locating a battery pack in a vehicle. Rearrangement of parts is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claim(s) 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensche (US 20210129684 A1) in view of Thompson et al. (US 20200058968 A1) hereinafter “Thompson”.
Regarding claim 15, Wuensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 13.
Wuensche does not teach where at least one sub-cell has a performance characteristic that differs from a performance characteristic of one or more other of the sub-cells.
However, Thompson teaches a battery pack having a thermal management system which communicates with cells configured to provide high temperature operation and cells configured to provide low temperature operation ([0027]). Thompson teaches that a battery pack containing cells configured to operate at high temperature and low temperature can provide operation over a larger temperature range can be supported ([0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrochemical cell taught by Muensche such that at least one sub-cell has a performance characteristic that differs from a performance characteristic of one or more other of the sub-cells as taught by Thompson.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the electrochemical cell taught by Muensche such that at least one sub-cell has a performance characteristic that differs from a performance characteristic of one or more other of the sub-cells as taught by Thomspon to provide operation over a larger temperature range ([0027]).
Regarding claim 16, Muensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 13.
Muensche does not teach where at least one sub-cell is controllable independently from one or more other of the sub-cells.
However, Thompson teaches a battery pack having a thermal management system which communicates with cells configured to provide high temperature operation and cells configured to provide low temperature operation ([0027]). Thompson teaches that a battery pack containing cells configured to operate at high temperature and low temperature can provide operation over a larger temperature range can be supported ([0027]). Thompson teaches that active selection among cells can be done with a switch to control of cells ([0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrochemical cell taught by Muensche such that at least one sub-cell has a performance characteristic that differs from a performance characteristic of one or more other of the sub-cells which are actively managed as taught by Thompson.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the electrochemical cell taught by Muensche such that at least one sub-cell has a performance characteristic that differs from a performance characteristic of one or more other of the sub-cells which are actively managed as taught by Thomspon to provide operation over a larger temperature range ([0027]).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensche (US 20210129684 A1) in view of Proll (US 20230216106 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Muensche teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1.
Muensche does not teach where a fluid channel is defined on an inner surface of the lid.
However, Proll teaches a battery pack for an electric vehicle ([0021]-[0022]; Fig. 1A). Proll teaches a cell cooling cover with a channel system fixedly arranged at the cover plate, wherein the channel system is arranged in the cover plate or affixed to the bottom side of the cover plate ([0019]; [0040]-[0041]; [0071]; [0079]-[0080]). Proll teaches that the cell cooling cover separates venting gas from the electrical circuitry and cools the venting gas to prevent deflagration at the outlet of the battery housing and further, reduces temperatures at the venting structure of a damaged cell, mitigating heat transfer to neighboring cells ([0044]-[0048]; [0052]).
One of ordinary skill in the art could modify the lid taught by Muensche to include a cooling fluid channel as taught by Proll.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include a cooling fluid channel as taught by Proll to cool venting gas to prevent deflagration at the outlet of the battery housing and to reduce temperatures at the venting structure of a damaged cell, mitigating heat transfer to neighboring cells ([0044]-[0048]; [0052]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELICITY B. ALBAN whose telephone number is (703)756-5398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
/F.B.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728