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
Applicant’s amendment filed 12/17/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-7 and 9-18 are currently pending. Claim 8 is cancelled. Claims 16-18 are new. Claim 1 is amended. Support for the new and amended claims is found in page 10, lines 25-35 of the present specification, as well as in figures 1-4. Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the previously mailed Office Action.
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 1, 4-5, 10 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima et al. (US 20180034116 A1) in view of Sohn (US 20110304297 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tajima discloses a battery assembly (paragraph 0006, figure 1) comprising: at least one battery module including a battery module housing defining a battery module interior, at least one battery cell (paragraph 0030, figure 1, battery case 16, battery cells 18), at least one capillary assembly (paragraph 0038, figure 1, cooling element 22), and a refrigerant arranged in the battery module housing (paragraph 0034, figure 1, cooling liquid 20), wherein the at least one capillary assembly is arranged so as to externally abut against at least one of the at least one battery cells (figure 1, battery cells 18 and cooling elements 22), wherein the capillary assembly is configured so as to receive liquid refrigerant from a refrigerant supply arranged at the first end of the battery cell (paragraph 0038, figure 1, cooling liquid 20) and release gaseous refrigerant into the battery module interior at least at the second end of the battery cell (paragraphs 0038-0041, figures 1-2, steam flow grooves 28). Tajima is silent regarding wherein the capillary assembly is wound in a spiral fashion about an exterior of the battery cell starting from a first end of the battery cell towards a second end of the battery cell.
Sohn discloses a charging apparatus including a battery module mounted to a housing and a coolant pipe spirally wound a battery and contacting the battery module (Sohn paragraphs 0042-0045, 0056, figure 5). Sohn teaches that this cooling pipe configuration improves cooling efficiency and lowers contamination (Sohn paragraph 0059). Sohn and Tajima are analogous because they both disclose cooling assemblies for battery modules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the capillary cooling element disclosed by Tajima to be spirally wound the exterior of the battery from the first end toward the second end like the cooling element disclosed by Sohn. Doing so would increase cooling efficiency and lower contamination.
Regarding claim 4, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima further discloses that at least one fluid channel is formed between the battery cells and the battery module housing, via which the battery module interior is fluidly connected between a first wall and a second wall of the battery module housing, such that a flow of refrigerant is enabled (paragraphs 0050-0051, figure 1, flow grooves 28 guide coolant fluid into an upper space of the battery case).
Regarding claim 5, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 4. Tajima further discloses that a cavity is disposed at least in regions between the battery cells and the first wall, which cavity allows for an accumulation of liquid refrigerant and a formation of a refrigerant sump (paragraph 0051, annotated figure 1, cooling liquid 20 between battery cells and bottom wall).
Regarding claim 10, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima further discloses that the material of the capillary assembly is formed at least in regions to be open-pored or open-porous (paragraphs 0038, 0058).
Regarding claim 15, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima further discloses a motor vehicle comprising the battery assembly and an electric motor (paragraph 0029).
Regarding claim 16, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima further discloses that the capillary assembly is immersed in the refrigerant supply arranged at the first end of the battery cell (paragraphs 0037, 0048, figure 1).
Claims 6-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima et al. (US 20180034116 A1) in view of Sohn (US 20110304297 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Droulez et al. (US 20210098838 A1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 5. Tajima is silent regarding wherein a surface of the second wall facing the battery module interior is structured so that refrigerant condensed thereon is guided to a position located above a second end of a battery cell before it is detached from the surface of the second wall facing the battery module interior due to gravity and at least portions thereof fall onto the second end of the battery cells.
Droulez discloses a system for cooling a vehicle battery pack including a closed compartment in which battery cells are received, a cooling fluid, and a cooling plate to cool the fluid (Droulez paragraph 0087-0090). Droulez further discloses that the compartment formed by a housing which receives the cells includes a heat exchange face including inclined faces arranged above the cells so that condensed liquid can fall by gravity onto the cells (Droulez paragraphs 0134-0146, figures 4-5). The reference teaches that this structure provides cooling of the battery cells by evaporation and facilitates the flow of the condensates (Droulez paragraphs 0010-0014). Droulez and Tajima are analogous because they both disclose cooling systems for battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cooling system disclosed by Tajima to include the structure of Droulez in the second wall. Doing so would provide cooling of the battery cells by evaporation and facilitates the flow of the condensates.
Regarding claim 7, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima is silent regarding at least one cooling element, which is arranged in a first and/or a second wall of the battery module housing or is connected to an exterior of the first and/or a second wall of the battery module housing in a thermally conductive manner and configured so as to cool the first and/or second wall at least in sections, in order to allow a condensation of the refrigerant.
Droulez discloses a system for cooling a vehicle battery pack including a closed compartment in which battery cells are received, a cooling fluid, and a cooling plate to cool the fluid (Droulez paragraph 0087-0090). Droulez further discloses a cooling device formed in the top wall of the compartment which circulates cooling fluid and includes a condenser to allow condensation of the cooling fluid (Droulez paragraphs 0087-0090, 0101, 0103, 0130, figures 2, 4-5). The reference teaches that the fluid condenses on the cold face of the heat exchanger allowing for cooling of the batteries by gravity through the drops of the cooling fluid (Droulez paragraphs 0011-0014). Droulez and Tajima are analogous because they both disclose cooling systems for battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cooling system disclosed by Tajima to include the cooling and condensation device disclosed by Droulez. Doing so would allow for cooling of the batteries by gravity through the drops of the condensed cooling fluid.
Regarding claim 9, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 7. Tajima further discloses that at least the second wall is spaced apart from the second end of the battery cell, such that there is no direct connection between the capillary assembly and the second wall (figure 1, battery cells 18 are spaced from both walls).
Claims 2-3 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima et al. (US 20180034116 A1) in view of Sohn (US 20110304297 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pehnert et al. (DE 102018123707 A1).
Regarding claim 2, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima further discloses that the at least one capillary assembly has a greater length than width (figure 1, cooling elements 22). Tajima is silent regarding wherein lateral regions of the at least one capillary assembly extending along the length of the capillary assembly do not contact one another, such that there exists a clearance laterally adjacent to the at least one capillary assembly, through which condensed refrigerant can reach the refrigerant supply along the at least one battery cell.
Pehnert discloses a battery module comprising at least one battery cell and at least one cooling device with at least one heat pipe (Pehnert paragraph 0001). Pehnert further discloses that the heat pipe comprises an evaporation and condensation section and may operate through capillary forces (Pehnert paragraph 0014). The reference teaches steam and condensate channels that operate via capillary forces and are offset from each other, creating lateral clearances, wherein the condensate channels return the condensed working medium (Pehnert paragraphs 0014, 0044-0046, figure 2, condensate channels 17). Pehnert discloses that this configuration ensures uniform and effective cooling of individual cells (Pehnert paragraph 0045). Pehnert and Tajima are analogous because they both disclose capillary cooling means for battery modules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery module disclosed by Tajima to include the capillary condensate channel structure disclosed by Pehnert. Doing so would ensure uniform and effective cooling of individual battery cells.
Regarding claim 3, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 2. Tajima further discloses that two or more of said capillary assemblies are arranged on the at least one battery cell, whose lateral regions do not contact one another (figure 1, cooling elements 22).
Regarding claims 11-14, modified Tajima discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tajima is silent regarding in which an absolute pressure in the battery module housing is lower than 1.0 bar at 20°C in order to decrease the evaporation temperature of the refrigerant compared to an absolute pressure of 1.0 bar, in which the absolute pressure is between 0.1 and 0.8 bar, in which the absolute pressure is between 0.2 bar and 0.6 bar, and in which the absolute pressure is between 0.3 bar and 0.5 bar.
Pehnert discloses a battery module comprising at least one battery cell and at least one cooling device with at least one heat pipe (Pehnert paragraph 0001). Pehnert further discloses that the heat pipe comprises an evaporation and condensation section and may operate through capillary forces (Pehnert paragraph 0014). The reference teaches that a negative pressure is preferred and is adjusted to adapt to the medium ad operating temperatures (Penhert paragraph 0024). The pressure is selected to so that the working medium evaporates at a lower temperature (Pehnert paragraph 0042), and to match the evaporation temperature (Pehnert paragraph 0052). Pehnert is clearly teaching that the absolute pressure is a results effective variable that controls the evaporation temperature of the working medium. Pehnert and Tajima are analogous because they both disclose capillary cooling means for battery modules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have between 0.3 to 0.5 bar of absolute pressure because it has been held by the courts that optimization of a results effective variable is not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-18 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.
Claim 17 would be allowable for reciting wherein said surface of the second wall has a plurality of pointed tips extending downward toward the battery cells. Claim 18 would be allowable for being dependent upon claim 17.
The closest prior art includes:
Droulez discloses a system for cooling a vehicle battery pack including a closed compartment in which battery cells are received, a cooling fluid, and a cooling plate to cool the fluid (Droulez paragraph 0087-0090). Droulez further discloses that the compartment formed by a housing which receives the cells includes a heat exchange face including inclined faces arranged above the cells so that condensed liquid can fall by gravity onto the cells (Droulez paragraphs 0134-0146, figures 4-5). However, Droulez teaches a structure of spaced inclined faces and guide walls to guide the condensed cooling fluid and fails to teach the claimed structure including pointed tips extending towards the battery cells.
Tajima discloses a battery assembly (paragraph 0006, figure 1) comprising: at least one battery module including a battery module housing defining a battery module interior, at least one battery cell (paragraph 0030, figure 1, battery case 16, battery cells 18), at least one capillary assembly (paragraph 0038, figure 1, cooling element 22), and a refrigerant arranged in the battery module housing (paragraph 0034, figure 1, cooling liquid 20), wherein the at least one capillary assembly is arranged so as to externally abut against at least one of the at least one battery cells (figure 1, battery cells 18 and cooling elements 22), wherein the capillary assembly is configured so as to receive liquid refrigerant from a refrigerant supply arranged at the first end of the battery cell (paragraph 0038, figure 1, cooling liquid 20) and release gaseous refrigerant into the battery module interior at least at the second end of the battery cell (paragraphs 0038-0041, figures 1-2, steam flow grooves 28). While Tajima teaches condensing the coolant to be introduced back into the battery case wherein the coolant is stored (Tajima paragraph 0044, figure 1), the reference fails to disclose the claimed structure, and instead employs a heat exchanger and outlet channel connected to the housing.
Pehnert discloses a battery module comprising at least one battery cell and at least one cooling device with at least one heat pipe (Pehnert paragraph 0001). Pehnert further discloses that the heat pipe comprises an evaporation and condensation section and may operate through capillary forces (Pehnert paragraph 0014). The reference teaches steam and condensate channels that operate via capillary forces and are offset from each other, creating lateral clearances, wherein the condensate channels return the condensed working medium (Pehnert paragraphs 0014, 0044-0046, figure 2, condensate channels 17). The reference teaches that the condensate can be led back to the channels trough gravity (Pehnert paragraph 0014), but fails to disclose the claimed structure including pointed tips extending toward the cells.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 6 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.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 2-3 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 2-3, Applicant argues that it is unknown whether the capillary assemblies disclosed by Tajima are spaces to define a clearance and that Pehnert does not remedy these deficiencies. However, Pehnert does disclose these features including a clearance formed by the cross section of the capillary structures and offset channels (see claims 2-3 rejections, Pehnert paragraphs 0044-0047, figure 2), rendering the claim obvious.
Conclusion
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 BENJAMIN T LUSTGRAAF whose telephone number is (571)272-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/B.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727