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 .
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 4-5 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 4 recites the terms “a boundary surface” and “an upper side” but it is unclear how the boundary surface and upper side are structurally related to the other claimed parts of the housing.
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(s) 1-3, 6-8 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by CN 107615566 (see English translation included with this action for page citations).
CN’566 discloses a housing for a battery module including a temperature adjusting system wherein the housing includes an inlet portion (301) and a baffle portion (311) having a curved surface with an inflection point to direct airflow from the opening in the housing to a flow channel around a plurality of battery cells (see Figures 1A, 1B, 1C; Figure explanation on pp 16-17; pp. 5-7).
With regard to claims 2-3 and 6-8, see annotated Fig 1C:
PNG
media_image1.png
323
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 12-14 are met for the foregoing reasons.
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.
Claim(s) 9-11 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 107615566 (see English translation included with this action for page citations), in view of Lee et al. (US 2006/0093901).
CN 107615566 discloses all of the limitations of the claims, as detailed above under section 102, but fails to disclose an upper housing having a downward inclined portion facing the battery cell laminate.
Lee et al. teaches that it was known in the art to use an inclined housing in order to better direct airflow to a flow path around a battery cell stack (see Fig 10, upper housing 534 and battery cells 110; para [0058]-[0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form an incline in the outer housing surface (300) in the battery housing structure taught by CN’566 in order to better channel air from the inlet to the through hole (122) in the baffle structure 311.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WO 2007/097594 is cited as art of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY RICKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1514. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Tues, and Thurs 9am-3pm 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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.
/Holly Rickman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785