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 .
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.
Claims 1-5, 9-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (US 20130164576) in view of Hermann et al. (US 20110132580).
Regarding claim 1, Cha teaches a battery pack 20/60, comprising:
a battery assembly, wherein the battery assembly comprises at least one battery unit, the battery unit comprises a plurality of cells 10, a length direction of each cell is a first direction, and the plurality of cells are disposed along a second direction (Fig. 1.6.8); and
a tray 120, wherein the tray comprises at least one temperature adjustment unit, or heat exchanging member 100 the temperature adjustment unit comprises a bottom plate 120b and a temperature adjustment flow channel, or tube 110 (P31-33.37-43; Fig. 1-2);
the temperature adjustment flow channel, or tube 110 extends in the first direction and is disposed along the second direction while disposed opposite to the battery unit in a vertical direction to exchange heat with a cell 10 of the cells (P31-33.37-43; Fig. 1-2) and has an outlet in the first direction (P68; Fig. 7-8).
Cha is silent in teaching a confluence flow channel formed on the bottom plate, also disposed to extend in the first direction and along the second direction staggered from the battery unit in the vertical direction to prevent heat exchange with the cell; however, Hermann, in a similar field of endeavor related to cooling of a battery assembly, also teaches a tray, wherein the tray comprises at least one temperature adjustment unit, or cooling element 1, the temperature adjustment unit 1 comprises a bottom plate and a temperature adjustment flow channel, or first flow 30 and a confluence flow channel, or second flow 30’ formed on the bottom plate, the temperature adjustment flow channel 30 is disposed opposite to the battery unit 18 in a vertical direction to exchange heat with the battery assembly 18 and the confluence flow channel 30’ is disposed to stagger from the battery unit in the vertical direction to prevent heat exchange with the cell (P1-97; Fig. 4-7.32-33).
The confluence flow channels 30’, that have an inlet end that communicates with the outlet end of the temperature adjustment flow channel 30 is disposed in parallel with the temperature flow channel and allows the inlet and outlet to be located on one side of the cooling element for ease of manufacture (P92-96).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include a confluence flow channel formed on the bottom plate of the assembly of Cha, such that is also disposed to extend in the first direction and along the second direction staggered from the battery unit in the vertical direction to prevent heat exchange with the cell where the confluence flow channel has an inlet end that communicates with the outlet end of the temperature adjustment flow channel, the second direction intersects the first direction, to have an arrangement wherein the inlet and outlet can be located on one side of the cooling element, as taught by Hermann. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that a method of enhancing a particular class of devices (methods, or products) has been made part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art based upon the teaching of such improvement in other situations. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known method of enhancement to a "base" device (method, or product) in the prior art and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2143 C
Furthermore, with respect to the above combination of overall element, the rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 The results are not unexpected because merely routing the flow channels back to a certain location does not change the function of the flow channels, cooler, or ports and provides the exact functionality as taught – to provide cooling to a battery assembly while routing cooling fluid in a desired pathway.
Regarding claim 2, modified Cha in view of Hermann teaches the temperature adjustment unit further comprises: a communicating flow channel, or diverter block 32, a liquid inlet, and a liquid outlet 11 formed on the bottom plate, wherein the liquid inlet 11 communicates with the temperature adjustment flow channel 30, the liquid outlet communicates with the confluence flow channel 30’, the communicating flow channel, or diverter block 32 or diverter block 32, is disposed adjacent to the outlet end of the temperature adjustment flow channel 30 and the inlet end of the confluence flow channel 30’, the communicating flow channel 32 causes the outlet end of the temperature adjustment flow channel to be in communication with the inlet end of the confluence flow channel, and the liquid inlet and the liquid outlet are disposed on a side of the temperature adjustment flow channel 30 and the confluence flow channel 30’ away from the communicating flow channel 32 in the first direction (P91-97; Fig. 32-33), such that when applied to the assembly of modified Cha the communicating flow channel would be utilized in the second buffer portion 340 (Fig. 6-7). The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. The use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. MPEP 2143 C
Regarding claim 3, modified Cha in view of Hermann teaches two ends of the bottom plate in the first direction are respectively a first end portion and a second end portion, the liquid inlet and the liquid outlet are located at the first end portion, and the communicating flow channel is located at the second end portion (P91-97; Fig. 32-33).
Regarding claim 4, modified Cha teaches the bottom plate comprises a first bottom plate 320b and a second bottom plate 320a disposed opposite to each other in a thickness direction of the bottom plate, the temperature adjustment flow channel and the confluence flow channel (in light of Hermann) are disposed between the first bottom plate and the second bottom plate (Cha; Fig. 7-8).
Modified Cha is silent in teaching the liquid inlet and the liquid outlet are formed to penetrate through the first bottom plate, but teaches the portion of the inlet and outlet abutting the first bottom plate (P43-46; Fig. 7). However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the first bottom plate and upper surface of buffers 33/340 can be made integrally to form for ease of manufacture and replacement and as it would not produce any new of different function, and thus have the liquid inlet and the liquid outlet are formed to penetrate through the first bottom plate.
The convenience of putting the holding portions together in one chamber portion, though perhaps a matter of great convenience, did not produce a ‘new’ or ‘different function’” and that to those skilled in the art the use of the old elements in combination would have been obvious. MPEP 2143 A
Regarding claim 5, modified Cha teaches wherein the at least one temperature adjustment unit comprises a plurality of temperature adjustment flow channels including the temperature adjustment flow channel (Fig.7-9), wherein, in view of Hermann, an outlet end of each of the temperature adjustment flow channels communicates with the inlet end of the confluence flow channel (P91-97; Fig, 32-33).
Regarding claim 9, modified Cha teaches the at least one temperature adjustment unit comprises N temperature adjustment flow channels and in view of Hermann, has M confluence flow channels, wherein M is an integer greater than or equal to 1, and N is an integer greater than or equal to 1; and a sum of width of the N temperature adjustment flow channels is greater than a sum of width of the M confluence flow channels (Hermann; Fig. 32). Further, it is also well established that where the difference between the prior art and the claims are a recitation of relative dimension of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device
Regarding claim 10, modified Cha in view of Hermann teaches including in the at least one temperature adjustment unit an adapter piece, wherein the adapter piece, or manifold block 11 with first flow channel and a second flow channel separated from each other, the first flow channel communicates with the temperature adjustment flow channel, and the second flow channel communicates with the confluence flow channel (Hermann; P91-97; Fig. 32-33); wherein modified Cha teaches an external connecting tube 460, wherein the external connecting tube 460 comprises a liquid inlet pipe and a liquid outlet pipe (Cha; P75; Fig. 8), and therefore, in light of the modification of Hermann, the liquid inlet pipe is connected to the adapter piece and communicates with the first flow channel, and the liquid outlet pipe is connected to the adapter piece and communicates with the second flow channel. with respect to the above combination of overall element, the rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04
Regarding claims 11-13, modified Cha teaches the battery of claims 2-4 respectively, wherein the at least one temperature adjustment unit comprises a plurality of temperature adjustment flow channels including the temperature adjustment flow channel (Fig.7-9), wherein, in view of Hermann, an outlet end of each of the temperature adjustment flow channels communicates with the inlet end of the confluence flow channel (P91-97; Fig, 32-33).
Regarding claim 14-17 and 19, modified Cha in view of Hermann teaches the battery of claims 2-5 and 9 respectively, including in the at least one temperature adjustment unit an adapter piece, wherein the adapter piece, or manifold block 11 with first flow channel and a second flow channel separated from each other, the first flow channel communicates with the temperature adjustment flow channel, and the second flow channel communicates with the confluence flow channel (Hermann; P91-97; Fig. 32-33); wherein modified Cha teaches an external connecting tube 460, wherein the external connecting tube 460 comprises a liquid inlet pipe and a liquid outlet pipe (Cha; P75; Fig. 8), and therefore, in light of the modification of Hermann, the liquid inlet pipe is connected to the adapter piece and communicates with the first flow channel, and the liquid outlet pipe is connected to the adapter piece and communicates with the second flow channel. with respect to the above combination of overall element, the rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Cha in view of Hermann as applied to at least claim 1 above, and further in view of Addanki et al. (US 20170346144).
Regarding claim 7, modified Cha in view of Hermann is silent in teaching the at least one temperature adjustment unit comprises two temperature adjustment units, and the two temperature adjustment units are disposed at an interval along the second direction, and each of the two temperature adjustment units comprises a plurality of temperature adjustment flow channels and a confluence flow channel; however, Addanki, in a similar field of endeavor related to battery pack cooling, teaches using a single tray with two temperature adjustment units cooling disposed at an interval along the second direction when a plurality of modules are included. This assembly allows ease of manufacture and variable design (P4-12.40-49; Fig. 2B.5-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have the at least one temperature adjustment unit of modified Cha comprise two temperature adjustment units, and the two temperature adjustment units are disposed at an interval along the second direction, as taught by Addanki to account for multiple modules within the pack and ease of manufacture, and wherein each of the two temperature adjustment units comprises a plurality of temperature adjustment flow channels and a confluence flow channel, as taught by modified Cha in view of Hermann.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6, dependent on claims 5 and 1, and claim 8, dependent on claims 7 and 1, 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: none of the prior art of record, alone, or in combination, appears to teach, suggest, or render obvious the inventions of claims 6 and 8 in light of claims 1 and 5 or 7, respectively.
Claim 6 recites the temperature adjustment flow channels are disposed on a same side of the confluence flow channel along the second direction.
Claim 8 recites the tray further comprises a frame, the frame is connected to the bottom plate and defines an accommodating cavity with the bottom plate, the frame comprises a support beam extending in the first direction, the support beam is located above a portion between the two temperature adjustment units, and the confluence flow channel in each temperature adjustment unit is disposed opposite to each other with respect to the support beam.
The closest prior art includes:
Hermann et al. (US 20110132580) teaches the temperature adjustment channels arranged on the same side of the confluence channels in the vertical direction (P91-97; Fig. 32-33). One of ordinary skill in the art would not modify the position of the temperature adjustment channels relative to the confluence channels because Hermann teaches this positioning is necessary in order to have the confluence channels not effect cooling of the storage element.
Baumann et al. (US 20180151924) teaches a tray comprising a temperature adjustment unit 1 with coolant flowing from inlet 19 through channels, or tubular bodies 6 to the outlet 20, wherein the inlet 19 and outlet 20 are located on the same end of a bottom plate (P34.45; Fig. 1). on the same side. The temperature adjustment unit 1 is formed between two plates, or housing 3 bounding interior 2 with bottom 4 of metal and lid 5 of plastic, with batteries in contact with bottom 4 (P33). Hollow spaces 8 of unit 1 are used with a heating element 9 to thermally heat cells (P34).
Burgers et al. (US 20180205125) teaches flow channels 44/46 as feed and return fluid flow paths arranged on a bottom plate and disposed opposite to the battery unit in a vertical direction via i.e. troughs or elongate ridges 52 (P49-55; Fig. 2.8) with the first flow passage 44 being a feed flow passage and the second flow passage 46 being a return flow passage, or vice versa, depending on the direction of fluid flow
Xiao et al. (US20180316072) teaches a first flow channel disposed closer to a first longitudinal edge of a sheet member than a second flow channel. The first flow channel has a first cross-sectional area and a coolant flowing through the first flow channel having a first velocity. The second flow channel has a second cross-sectional area that is less than the first cross-sectional area of the first flow channel such that the coolant flowing through the second flow channel has a second velocity that is greater than the first velocity (P30-35; Fig. 5-7). In an example the flow rate is modified by changing the size of the flow channel in the vertical direction; however, the channels are still positioned at the same vertical direction away from the battery module (P35-38; Fig. 7-9).
Sakakibara (US 20090269655) teaches an insulating material 75 arranged between cells 72-1/2/3 and cooling air passage 92 to prevent the cells from being overcooled (P98) and thus allowing downstream cells 72-8/9 to be more efficiently cooled allowing substantially uniform cooling. Insulation may also be created by providing a stagger, or air gap in the vertical direction (P98-99.114-116; Fig. 8.18)
Handing et al. (US 20180212216) teaches thermally insulating channel 113 from base wall 105 (P99; Fig.8B); however, this space is not a flow channel, but a chamber 103 used to provide structural support to the cells (P72-73).
Therefore, the references fail to teach or suggest the particulars of claim 6 and 8, and it’s not obvious to modify these teachings to give the instant claimed invention. Claim 18 depends on claim 6 and therefore comprises the allowable subject matter of claim 6. Thus, none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination appear to teach, suggest or render obvious the invention of claims 6 (or 18) and 8 in light of claims 1 and 5 or 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amanda Rosenbaum whose telephone number is (571)272-8218. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/Amanda Rosenbaum/ Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752