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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0005] states “second cross-member” but [0044] states the battery cells are arranged between a pair of cross-member beams, therefore, it is believed “second cross-member” should be “second cross-member beam”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“second cross-member” should be “second-cross member beam”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Phlegm et al (US 11398653 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Phlegm teaches a traction battery pack (energy storage system 18 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially C4 / L22-23), comprising: a cell stack (energy storage cell pack 20 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially C4 / L27-29);
a thermal barrier assembly arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (“the first polymer foam pad 26 has a heat-resistant porous matrix structure 28. As shown in FIG. 3, the heat-resistant porous matrix structure 28 may include a conformable, lightweight, base material 28A, with thermally conductive, anisotropic and/or isotropic fillers 28B and voids or pores 28C. The cured lightweight, porous matrix structure of the first polymer foam pad 26 is configured to limit propagation of thermal energy between the first and second cells 20-1, 20-2, and facilitate transfer of the waste heat from the storage cell pack 20 to the heat sink 22”, C5 / L61 – C6 / L2);
a heat exchanger plate positioned adjacent to the cell stack (second thermal interface material 34; C8 / L22-32); and
a locator of the thermal barrier assembly received within a slot of the heat exchanger plate (see the bottom of first polymer foam pad 26 in Fig. 2 that extends into the second thermal interface material 34 in Fig. 2).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Heckenberger teaches a traction battery pack (cell device 100 in Fig. 1; see entire disclosure and especially P39), comprising: a cell stack (two electrochemical cells 120 in Fig. 1; see entire disclosure and especially P40);
a thermal barrier assembly arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (cooling sheet 110 in Fig. 1; see entire disclosure and especially P40; the cooling sheet is thermally conductive and forms a barrier between the two cells, therefore, can be said to be a “thermal barrier assembly” under broadest reasonable interpretation);
a heat exchanger plate positioned adjacent to the cell stack (cooling plate or heat sink 130 in Fig. 1; see entire disclosure and especially P39); and a locator of the thermal barrier assembly received within a slot of the heat exchanger plate (see the ‘prongs’ of sheet 110 between the slots of heat sink 130 in Fig. 1).
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..
The Examiner Notes that two rejections utilizing different interpretations of Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) have been used to meet the claimed limitations.
The first interpretation is found in numerals 11-15.
The second interpretation is found in numerals 16-21.
~~~ First Interpretation ~~~
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 10, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hermann teaches a traction battery pack (battery pack 400 in Fig. 4; see entire disclosure and especially P29), comprising: a cell stack (cells 203 in Fig. 4; see entire disclosure and especially P29);
a thermal barrier assembly arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (“thermal barrier elements 201 to separate cells 203 into groups. Thermal barrier elements 201 prevent the propagation of a thermal runaway event that is initiated in one group of cells from propagating to cells in other cell groups”, P29; one cell in one group can be considered a first battery cell and one cell in another group that is separated by thermal barrier element 201 can be considered the second battery cell);
a heat exchanger plate positioned adjacent to the cell stack (the thermal barrier element can be made of a central high thermal conductivity layer 1403 sandwiched between two low thermal conductivity layers 1405; the high thermal conductivity layer 1403 can be coupled to a heat sink 1409; see entire disclosure and especially P37 and Fig. 14; as seen in Fig. 14, the heat sink is indirectly adjacent to the cell stack).
Hermann further discloses that even though the cells in the cell stack are shown to be cylindrical, other batteries, such as pouch or rectangular cells, can also be used (see entire disclosure and especially P25; see also Figs. 5-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have chosen to use pouch or rectangular cells rather than cylindrical cells, given Hermann teaches these shapes can also be used in their design and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
However, Hermann does not disclose a locator of the thermal barrier assembly received within a slot of the heat exchanger plate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Heckenberger teaches a traction battery pack (cell device 100 in Fig. 1), comprising: a cell stack (two electrochemical cells 120 in Fig. 1), a cooling sheet arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (110 in Fig. 1), and a heat sink (130 in Fig. 1; P39-40).
Heckenberger teaches the heat sink includes a slot wherein projecting prongs (see connection region 116 in Figs. 1-3) of the cooling sheet extend through and are clamped to the heat sink via a fastening element and/or material bonding (P40). Heckenberger teaches if cell stack has a plurality of cooling sheets, then the heat sink can have a slot for each cooling sheet (P41). Heckenberger teaches the first battery cell and the second battery cell of the cell stack sit atop fold region of the cooling sheet (114 in Fig. 1; P40).
Heckenberger teaches their design allows for decoupling between a mechanical connection of the cooling sheet to the heat sink and, according to this approach, a thermally better contacting between the cooling sheet and heat sink by the decoupling of the force-fitting connection and the thermal contacting can be achieved (P14).Further, Heckenberger teaches that if a material bond connection is used, an optimal heat transfer via the material bonding connection can be present (P14-15). Heckenberger also teaches that the force-fitting connection allows the replacement of defective cells without intact cells being detrimentally affected thermally (P43).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Heckenberger and modified the central high thermal conductivity layer (and therefore the low thermal conductivity layers laying on top) of Hermann to have the same shape as described by Heckenberger, modified the heat sink of Hermann to have slots and a fastening member to receive and hold the central high thermal conductivity layer of Hermann to the heat sink in a force-fitting manner, rearranged the parts of Hermann such that the heat sink is provided on the bottom side of the cell stack such that the thermal barrier assemblies can be arranged thereon, and modified the traction battery of Hermann such that enough thermal barrier assemblies are arranged in the up-down direction (in Fig. 6) to provide for one cell on each fold region of each modified thermal barrier assembly, given this would provide the traction battery of Hermann an improved thermal connection between the central high thermal conductivity layer of the thermal barrier assembly and the heat sink, the ability to decouple a mechanical connection of the thermal barrier assembly and heat sink, and the ability to replace defective cells without other cells being detrimentally affected thermally. Further, the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04), and applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
The locator of modified Hermann is the bottom of the thermal barrier assembly that passes through the heat sink (see Heckenberger Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, modified Hermann discloses wherein the first battery cell, the second battery cell, and the thermal barrier assembly are arranged between a first cross-member beam and a second cross-member of the cell stack (see the annotated Fig. below as an example; in the modified version provided by the rejection above, there would be a plurality of thermal barrier assemblies 201, therefore, two of the thermal barrier assemblies can be considered cross-beam members and the single thermal barrier assembly between them can be drawn to the ‘thermal barrier assembly’ of claim 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
578
716
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Hermann Fig. 4
Regarding claim 3, modified Hermann discloses a third cross-member beam adjacent to the first cross-member beam, wherein the first cross-member beam and the third cross-member beam establish a cross-member assembly arranged between the cell stack and a second cell stack of the traction battery pack (see the annotated Fig. below as an example).
PNG
media_image2.png
578
903
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Hermann Fig. 4
Regarding claim 5, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the thermal barrier assembly includes a fin section configured to interface with an enclosure cover (the top of the thermal barrier assembly would interface with upper enclosure wall 603 in Fig. 6 of Hermann; see entire disclosure and especially P31).
Regarding claim 6, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the fin section is located on an opposite end of the thermal barrier assembly from the locator (the top of the thermal barrier assembly would interface with upper enclosure wall 603 in Fig. 6 of Hermann; the bottom of the thermal barrier assembly is where the locator lies through the slot in the heat sink).
Regarding claim 10, a slot of the slots of the heat sink of modified Hermann would be located between the first battery cell and second battery cell, therefore, given the slot is an empty space between the two cells, at the location of the slot there is a thermal break wherein thermal conduction cannot occur between the first battery cell and second battery cell.
Regarding claim 13, Hermann teaches a traction battery pack (battery pack 400 in Fig. 4; see entire disclosure and especially P29), comprising: a cell stack (cells 203 in Fig. 4; see entire disclosure and especially P29);
a thermal barrier assembly arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (“thermal barrier elements 201 to separate cells 203 into groups. Thermal barrier elements 201 prevent the propagation of a thermal runaway event that is initiated in one group of cells from propagating to cells in other cell groups”, P29; one cell in one group can be considered a first battery cell and one cell in another group that is separated by thermal barrier element 201 can be considered the second battery cell);
a heat exchanger plate positioned adjacent to the cell stack (the thermal barrier element can be made of a central high thermal conductivity layer 1403 sandwiched between two low thermal conductivity layers 1405; the high thermal conductivity layer 1403 can be coupled to a heat sink 1409; see entire disclosure and especially P37 and Fig. 14; as seen in Fig. 14, the heat sink is indirectly adjacent to the cell stack).
Hermann further discloses that even though the cells in the cell stack are shown to be cylindrical, other batteries, such as pouch or rectangular cells, can also be used (see entire disclosure and especially P25; see also Figs. 5-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have chosen to use pouch or rectangular cells rather than cylindrical cells, given Hermann teaches these shapes can also be used in their design and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
However, Hermann does not disclose a locator of the thermal barrier assembly received within a slot of the heat exchanger plate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Heckenberger teaches a traction battery pack (cell device 100 in Fig. 1), comprising: a cell stack (two electrochemical cells 120 in Fig. 1), a cooling sheet arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (110 in Fig. 1), and a heat sink (130 in Fig. 1; P39-40).
Heckenberger teaches the heat sink includes a slot wherein projecting prongs (see connection region 116 in Figs. 1-3) of the cooling sheet extend through and are clamped to the heat sink via a fastening element and/or material bonding (P40). Heckenberger teaches if cell stack has a plurality of cooling sheets, then the heat sink can have a slot for each cooling sheet (P41). Heckenberger teaches the first battery cell and the second battery cell of the cell stack sit atop fold region of the cooling sheet (114 in Fig. 1; P40).
Heckenberger teaches their design allows for decoupling between a mechanical connection of the cooling sheet to the heat sink and, according to this approach, a thermally better contacting between the cooling sheet and heat sink by the decoupling of the force-fitting connection and the thermal contacting can be achieved (P14).Further, Heckenberger teaches that if a material bond connection is used, an optimal heat transfer via the material bonding connection can be present (P14-15). Heckenberger also teaches that the force-fitting connection allows the replacement of defective cells without intact cells being detrimentally affected thermally (P43).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Heckenberger and modified the central high thermal conductivity layer (and therefore the low thermal conductivity layers laying on top) of Hermann to have the same shape as described by Heckenberger, modified the heat sink of Hermann to have slots and a fastening member to receive and hold the central high thermal conductivity layer of Hermann to the heat sink in a force-fitting manner, rearranged the parts of Hermann such that the heat sink is provided on the bottom side of the cell stack such that the thermal barrier assemblies can be arranged thereon, and modified the traction battery of Hermann such that enough thermal barrier assemblies are arranged in the up-down direction (in Fig. 6) to provide for one cell on each fold region of each modified thermal barrier assembly, given this would provide the traction battery of Hermann an improved thermal connection between the central high thermal conductivity layer of the thermal barrier assembly and the heat sink, the ability to decouple a mechanical connection of the thermal barrier assembly and heat sink, and the ability to replace defective cells without other cells being detrimentally affected thermally. Further, the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04), and applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
The locator of modified Hermann is the bottom of the thermal barrier assembly that passes through the heat sink (see Heckenberger Fig. 3). Further, a slot of the slots of the heat sink of modified Hermann would be located between the first battery cell and second battery cell, therefore, given the slot is an empty space between the two cells, at the location of the slot there is a thermal break wherein thermal conduction cannot occur between the first battery cell and second battery cell.
Regarding claim 14, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the thermal barrier assembly includes a fin section configured to interface with an enclosure cover (the top of the thermal barrier assembly would interface with upper enclosure wall 603 in Fig. 6 of Hermann; see entire disclosure and especially P31).
Regarding claim 15, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the fin section is located on an opposite end of the thermal barrier assembly from the locator (the top of the thermal barrier assembly would interface with upper enclosure wall 603 in Fig. 6 of Hermann; the bottom of the thermal barrier assembly is where the locator lies through the slot in the heat sink).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 5, further in view of Ho et al (US 20200244086 A1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation wherein the fin section is secured to the enclosure cover by an adhesive.
In a similar field of endeavor, Ho teaches one or more structural members can be attached or secured to a battery housing using adhesive materials (P21).
While Ho teaches the structural members are power devices attached to a battery housing rather than a fin section of a thermal barrier material attached to an enclosure lid of a battery enclosure cover, if a technique has been used to improve one device (such as utilize adhesive to attach and secure a structure to a battery housing), and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way (such as utilize adhesive to attach and secure a fin section of a thermal barrier material to an enclosure lid of a battery enclosure cover), using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill. SEE MPEP § 2141 (III) Rationale C, KSR v. Teleflex (Supreme Court 2007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Ho and provided wherein the fin section of modified Hermann is secured to the enclosure cover by an adhesive, given Ho teaches this can provide a secure attachment between two structures.
Claims 8-9 and 16-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 5, further in view of Miller et al (US 20160064708 A1).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation a thermal interface material between the cell stack and the heat exchanger plate. In Fig. 3 of Heckenberger, the thermal barrier assembly’s (cooling sheet) fold region has a gap between itself and the cooling plate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Miller teaches a thermal interface material in the form of a sheet, paste, glue, or adhesive can be provided between a thermal plate and a battery cell array in order to enhance heat transfer by filling, for example, voids and or air gaps that have found their way between the battery cells and thermal plate (P34).
While the battery cells of modified Hermann sit on the thermally barrier assembly (cooling sheet of Heckenberger) rather than the heat sink, it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a thermal interface material between the heat sink and the fold region of the thermal barrier assembly in order to ensure and enhance heat transfer between the two by removing the issue of voids or gaps that may be present between the heat sink and fold region of the thermal barrier assembly. Applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
Regarding claims 9 and 17, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein a projecting prong of the locator extends through the thermal interface material and at least partially fills the slot (given the thermal interface material is provided between the fold region of the thermal barrier assembly and the heat sink, and the fold region is provided on both sides of the thermal barrier assembly (see Heckenberger Fig. 3), there is a gap at which the prongs (see Heckenberger Fig. 3) extend through to fill the slot in the heat sink).
Regarding claim 18, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the projecting prong protrudes outwardly from a base portion of the locator (see the annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image3.png
346
515
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Heckenberger Fig. 3
Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 13 respectively, further in view of Hu et al (US 20110159340 A1).
Regarding claims 11 and 19, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation wherein the locator includes a solid plastic.
In a similar field of endeavor, Hu teaches a heat conduction layer can have a thermal conductivity coefficient k ranging from 100 W/mK to 450 W/mK, when the material of the heat conduction layer includes gold, silver, aluminum, aluminum alloy, copper, copper alloy, magnesium, magnesium alloy, metal oxide, or a composite material having one of the above materials mixed with a plastic material (P39). Hu teaches a metal polymer composite material can have a thermal conductivity coefficient k ranging from 50 W/mK to 150 W/mK (Table 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Hu and selected the material of the thermal barrier assembly of modified Hermann to be a metal polymer composite material, such as polymer and gold/silver/aluminum, given Hu teaches it as a known heat conducting material and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
A metal polymer composite used as a heat conduction layer would be solid at room temperature, therefore the thermal barrier assembly, including the locator, would include a solid plastic.
Claims 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 13 respectively, further in view of Ziegler et al (US 20110262795 A1).
Regarding claims 12 and 20, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation wherein the locator includes a compliant rubber.
In a similar field of endeavor, Ziegler teaches a thermal conduction element can have an electrically insulating coating (P17). Ziegler teaches a thermal conduction element can be made of copper or aluminum, coated with Kalrez (perfluor rubber (FFKN)), thereby providing high thermal conductivity and high electrical insulating capacity (P36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Hu and selected the material of the thermal barrier assembly of modified Hermann to be a copper or aluminum coated with Kalrez (perfluor rubber (FFKN)), given Ziegler teaches this provides high thermal conductivity and high electrical insulating capacity to a heat conducting structure and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Kalrez (perfluor rubber (FFKN)) is a known compliant rubber.
~~~ Second Interpretation ~~~
Claims 1-6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1).
Regarding claims 1-3, Hermann teaches a traction battery pack (battery pack 400 in Fig. 4; see entire disclosure and especially P29), comprising: a cell stack (cells 203 in Fig. 4; see entire disclosure and especially P29);
a first cross-member beam and a second cross-member beam; a first battery cell and second battery cell of the cell stack being arranged between the first cross-member beam and second cross-member beam; a third cross-member beam adjacent to the first cross-member beam, wherein the first cross-member beam and the third cross-member beam establish a cross-member assembly arranged between the cell stack and a second cell stack of the traction battery pack (see thermal barrier elements 201 Fig.4; see entire disclosure and especially P29; see also the annotated Fig. provided below).
PNG
media_image4.png
763
745
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4
Hermann teaches a heat exchanger plate positioned adjacent to the cell stack (the thermal barrier element can be made of a central high thermal conductivity layer 1403 sandwiched between two low thermal conductivity layers 1405; the high thermal conductivity layer 1403 can be coupled to a heat sink 1409; see entire disclosure and especially P37 and Fig. 14; as seen in Fig. 14, the heat sink is indirectly adjacent to the cell stack).
Hermann further discloses that even though the cells in the cell stack are shown to be cylindrical, other batteries, such as pouch or rectangular cells, can also be used (see entire disclosure and especially P25; see also Figs. 5-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have chosen to use pouch or rectangular cells rather than cylindrical cells, given Hermann teaches these shapes can also be used in their design and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
However, Hermann does not disclose a thermal barrier assembly arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell and a locator of the thermal barrier assembly received within a slot of the heat exchanger plate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Heckenberger teaches a traction battery pack (cell device 100 in Fig. 1), comprising: a cell stack (two electrochemical cells 120 in Fig. 1), a cooling sheet arranged between a first battery cell and a second battery cell of the cell stack (110 in Fig. 1), and a heat sink (130 in Fig. 1; P39-40).
Heckenberger teaches the heat sink includes a slot wherein projecting prongs (see connection region 116 in Figs. 1-3) of the cooling sheet extend through and are clamped to the heat sink via a fastening element and/or material bonding (P40). Heckenberger teaches if cell stack has a plurality of cooling sheets, then the heat sink can have a slot for each cooling sheet (P41). Heckenberger teaches the first battery cell and the second battery cell of the cell stack sit atop fold region of the cooling sheet (114 in Fig. 1; P40).
Heckenberger teaches their design allows for decoupling between a mechanical connection of the cooling sheet to the heat sink and, according to this approach, a thermally better contacting between the cooling sheet and heat sink by the decoupling of the force-fitting connection and the thermal contacting can be achieved (P14).Further, Heckenberger teaches that if a material bond connection is used, an optimal heat transfer via the material bonding connection can be present (P14-15). Heckenberger also teaches that the force-fitting connection allows the replacement of defective cells without intact cells being detrimentally affected thermally (P43).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Heckenberger provided a thermal barrier layer such as the cooling sheet of Heckenberger between the first battery cell and second battery cell, modified the heat sink of Hermann to have slots and a fastening member to receive and hold the cooling sheet to the heat sink in a force-fitting manner, rearranged the parts of Hermann such that the heat sink is provided on the bottom side of the cell stack such that the cooling sheets can be arranged thereon, and modified the traction battery of Hermann such that enough cooling sheets are arranged in the up-down direction (in Fig. 6) to provide for one cell on each fold region of each cooling sheet, given this would provide the traction battery of Hermann localized cooling of battery cells, a superior thermal connection between the cooling sheet and the heat sink, the ability to decouple a mechanical connection of the cooling sheet and heat sink, and the ability to replace defective cells without other cells being detrimentally affected thermally. Further, the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04), and applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
The cooling sheet of modified Hermann is drawn to the thermal barrier assembly claimed, and the locator of modified Hermann is the bottom of the cooling sheet that passes through the heat sink (see Heckenberger Fig. 3). The cooling sheet is thermally conductive and forms a barrier between the two cells, therefore, can be said to be a “thermal barrier assembly” under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 5, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the thermal barrier assembly includes a fin section configured to interface with an enclosure cover (the top of the thermal barrier assembly would interface with upper enclosure wall 603 in Fig. 6 of Hermann; see entire disclosure and especially P31).
Regarding claim 6, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the fin section is located on an opposite end of the thermal barrier assembly from the locator (the top of the thermal barrier assembly would interface with upper enclosure wall 603 in Fig. 6 of Hermann; the bottom of the thermal barrier assembly is where the locator lies through the slot in the heat sink).
Regarding claim 10, a slot of the slots of the heat sink of modified Hermann would be located between the first battery cell and second battery cell, therefore, given the slot is an empty space between the two cells, at the location of the slot there is a thermal break wherein thermal conduction cannot occur between the first battery cell and second battery cell.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 4, further in view of He et al (US 20210249725 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation a venting passageway disposed between the first cross-member beam and the third cross-member beam.
In a similar field of endeavor, He teaches a battery pack tray includes batteries having an explosion-proof valve and a first side beam (210 in Fig. 10; P85). He teaches the first side beam is provided with an exhaust passage and an exhaust vent that can communicate with the explosion-proof valve (P200).
He teaches if gas pressure inside the cell increases to a certain degree, the explosion-proof valve is opened, so that a flame, smoke or gas inside the cell will be discharged through the explosion-proof valve (P201). He teaches if the flame, smoke or gas accumulates inside the battery pack is not discharged in time, this causes secondary damage to the batteries (P201). He teaches the exhaust vent is placed next to the explosion-proof valve such that the flame, smoke, or gas the batteries release is exhausted to the exhaust passage and prevents the flame, smoke, or gas from accumulating in the battery pack tray, thereby causing damage to the batteries (P201).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of He and modified the battery cells of modified Hermann to include explosion-proof valves and modified the cross-member beam provided in the left-right direction in Hermann Fig. 4 to include an exhaust/venting passage including an exhaust vent, given He teaches this provides a way for flame, smoke, or gas accumulating inside a battery cell to escape without causing secondary damage to other cells or the battery pack itself.
As seen in the Examiner’s interpretation of modified Hermann below, the exhaust passage is disposed between the first cross-member beam and the third cross-member beam.
PNG
media_image5.png
685
745
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Interpretation of modified Hermann using Hermann Fig. 4
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 5, further in view of Ho et al (US 20200244086 A1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation wherein the fin section is secured to the enclosure cover by an adhesive.
In a similar field of endeavor, Ho teaches one or more structural members can be attached or secured to a battery housing using adhesive materials (P21).
While Ho teaches the structural members are power devices attached to a battery housing rather than a fin section of a thermal barrier material attached to an enclosure lid of a battery enclosure cover, if a technique has been used to improve one device (such as utilize adhesive to attach and secure a structure to a battery housing), and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way (such as utilize adhesive to attach and secure a fin section of a thermal barrier material to an enclosure lid of a battery enclosure cover), using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill. SEE MPEP § 2141 (III) Rationale C, KSR v. Teleflex (Supreme Court 2007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Ho and provided wherein the fin section of modified Hermann is secured to the enclosure cover by an adhesive, given Ho teaches this can provide a secure attachment between two structures.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 1 respectively, further in view of Hu et al (US 20110159340 A1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation wherein the locator includes a solid plastic.
In a similar field of endeavor, Hu teaches a heat conduction layer can have a thermal conductivity coefficient k ranging from 100 W/mK to 450 W/mK, when the material of the heat conduction layer includes gold, silver, aluminum, aluminum alloy, copper, copper alloy, magnesium, magnesium alloy, metal oxide, or a composite material having one of the above materials mixed with a plastic material (P39). Hu teaches a metal polymer composite material can have a thermal conductivity coefficient k ranging from 50 W/mK to 150 W/mK (Table 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Hu and selected the material of the thermal barrier assembly of modified Hermann to be a metal polymer composite material, such as polymer and gold/silver/aluminum, given Hu teaches it as a known heat conducting material and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
A metal polymer composite used as a heat conduction layer would be solid at room temperature, therefore the thermal barrier assembly, including the locator, would include a solid plastic.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Ziegler et al (US 20110262795 A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation wherein the locator includes a compliant rubber.
In a similar field of endeavor, Ziegler teaches a thermal conduction element can have an electrically insulating coating (P17). Ziegler teaches a thermal conduction element can be made of copper or aluminum, coated with Kalrez (perfluor rubber (FFKN)), thereby providing high thermal conductivity and high electrical insulating capacity (P36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Hu and selected the material of the thermal barrier assembly of modified Hermann to be a copper or aluminum coated with Kalrez (perfluor rubber (FFKN)), given Ziegler teaches this provides high thermal conductivity and high electrical insulating capacity to a heat conducting structure and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Kalrez (perfluor rubber (FFKN)) is a known compliant rubber.
Claims 8-9 and 16-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann et al (US 20100136404 A1, analogous to US 8541126 B2 as given in the 03/01/2023 IDS) in view of Heckenberger et al (US 20230420783 A1) as applied to claim 5, further in view of Miller et al (US 20160064708 A1).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, modified Hermann does not meet the limitation a thermal interface material between the cell stack and the heat exchanger plate. In Fig. 3 of Heckenberger, the thermal barrier assembly’s (cooling sheet) fold region has a gap between itself and the cooling plate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Miller teaches a thermal interface material in the form of a sheet, paste, glue, or adhesive can be provided between a thermal plate and a battery cell array in order to enhance heat transfer by filling, for example, voids and or air gaps that have found their way between the battery cells and thermal plate (P34).
While the battery cells of modified Hermann sit on the thermally barrier assembly (cooling sheet of Heckenberger) rather than the heat sink, it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a thermal interface material between the heat sink and the fold region of the thermal barrier assembly in order to ensure and enhance heat transfer between the two by removing the issue of voids or gaps that may be present between the heat sink and fold region of the thermal barrier assembly. Applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
Regarding claims 9 and 17, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein a projecting prong of the locator extends through the thermal interface material and at least partially fills the slot (given the thermal interface material is provided between the fold region of the thermal barrier assembly and the heat sink, and the fold region is provided on both sides of the thermal barrier assembly (see Heckenberger Fig. 3), there is a gap at which the prongs (see Heckenberger Fig. 3) extend through to fill the slot in the heat sink).
Regarding claim 18, modified Hermann meets the limitation wherein the projecting prong protrudes outwardly from a base portion of the locator (see the annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image3.png
346
515
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Heckenberger Fig. 3
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mary Byram whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/MARY GRACE BYRAM/Examiner, Art Unit 1729