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 § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHIANG (US 20210391607) in view of MORISHITA (US 5747186).
Regarding claim 1: Chiang discloses a heat dissipation structure of a lithium battery (Fig. 1 & [0016]), the heat dissipation structure comprising: a battery cell (Fig. 2, Element 10), comprising a battery core (Fig. 2, Element 11) and two electrode tabs (Fig. 2, Element 12 & [0017]); and a metal housing (Fig. 1, Element 20 & [0018]), comprising a heat dissipation surface (Fig. 2, Element 21 & [0018]) attached to the battery core and a frame (Fig. 1, Element 22 & [0018]) surrounding the heat dissipation surface ([0018]), and wherein a buffer space (Fig. 2, Element 200 & [0018]) is defined concavely toward the battery cell between the frame and the heat dissipation surface ([0018]).
Chiang does not disclose the limitation, “and a plurality of cooling slots are defined on the frame and communicate with the buffer space and an external environment.”.
Examiner notes that the objective of Chiang to create a battery module to house a battery core that provides temperature equalization and maintain good heat dissipation.
Morishita discloses a similar storage battery with a heat dissipation structure (Fig. 1, Element 10). The battery comprises of a battery cell (Fig. 1, Element 10), and a plurality of cooling slots are defined by spaces between ribs on the frame (casing) (Fig. 1, Elements 20 and 24).
Elements 20 and 24 are the ribs that protrude from the surface of the Morishita’s frame. While the ribs themselves cannot be considered to be cooling slots, the ribs that form the spaces read on the claimed, “cooling slots”. Morishita teaches, “a plurality of parallel ribs formed on the outer surface of the battery casing in the stacking direction, which ensures spaces allowing air flow between the cells. Therefore, the heat dissipation is properly effected.”(Col. 3, Line 63-67).
Morishita teaches the purpose of the inclusion of ribs that are formed along the battery casing, is to have air flow for improved heat dissipation (Col. 5, line 48-50).
Examiner notes that Morishita has segmented ribs along the lid of the battery (Fig. 1, Element 24). The ribs are also segmented between the lid and the casing (Fig. 1, Element 20 and 24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Chiang to segment along the metal frame around the heat dissipation structure using the teaching of Morishita. The segmented frame will now act as ribs that will create spaces/cooling ports for air flow. As the spaces between the ribs are formed on the frame, they will interact with the buffer space and any external environment by air moving between the segmented frames in order to properly effect heat dissipation, thus render obvious the limitation “a plurality of cooling slots are defined on the frame and communicate with the buffer space and an external environment.”.
Regarding claim 2: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 1 (Set forth in the limitations above), wherein the metal housing comprises a first casing (Fig. 2, Element 201) and a second casing (Fig. 2, Element 202) opposite to each other ([0019]); the first casing and the second casing cover the battery core and respectively have the buffer space ([0024]); and the two electrode tabs are disposed protrusively between the first casing and the second casing (Fig. 1, Element 12 & [0024]).
Regarding claim 3: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 1 (Set forth in the limitations in claim 1), further comprising a thermal conductive layer (Fig. 2, Element 30), disposed between the metal housing and the battery core ([0020]).
Regarding claim 4: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 3 (Set forth in the limitations above), wherein the thermal conductive layer (Fig. 2, Element 30), is a thermal conductive adhesive ([0020]).
Regarding claim 5: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 1 (Set forth in the limitations in claim 1), further comprising a plurality of buffer sheets (Fig. 2, Element 40), disposed between the frame of the metal housing and the battery core ([0021]).
Regarding claim 6: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 5 (Set forth in the limitations above), wherein the buffer sheets (Fig. 2, Element 30) include a plurality of buffer side plates (Fig. 2, Element 41), a buffer bottom plate(Fig. 2, Element 42), and a plurality of buffer strips (Fig. 2, Element 43 & [0022]); the buffer side plates are located at two sides of the battery core ([0022]); the buffer bottom plate is located at a bottom side of the battery core ([0022]); and the buffer strips are arranged parallelly between the buffer bottom plate and a bottom side of the battery core ([0022] & Fig. 2, Element 43).
Regarding claim 7: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 1 (Set forth in the limitations in claim 1), and based on the modification of Chiang, the segmented frame create cooling slots on the top/bottom of the frame, along with the side of the frame, which reads on the limitation, “wherein the frame comprises a pair of side-frames disposed opposite to each other, and the cooling slots are arranged spacedly on the pair of side-frames.”.
Regarding claim 8: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 1 (Set forth in the limitations in claim 1), and based on the modification of Chiang, the segmented frame create cooling slots on the top/bottom of the frame, along with the side of the frame, which reads on the limitation, “wherein the frame comprises a lower frame and an upper frame opposite to each other, and the cooling slots are arranged spacedly on the lower frame and the upper frame.”
Regarding claim 9: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 1 (Set forth in the limitations in claim 1), wherein the battery cell (Fig. 2, Element 10) and the metal casing (Fig. 1, Element 20) are multiple in number ([0025]); a plurality of battery cells is stacked with each other ([0025]), and the buffer space is defined between two battery cores adjacent to each other ([0025]). Based on Fig. 5 & 6, an expansion space (Fig. 5, Element 200a’) is already formed when two batteries are together. Modified Chiang will only segment the frame which is around the module and does not interfere with the buffer space (Fig. 5, Element 200a), which reads on the limitation, “an expansion space and the cooling slots connected together are defined by the buffer space of the battery cores adjacent to each other.”
Regarding claim 10: Modified Chiang discloses the heat dissipation structure according to claim 9 (Set forth in the limitations above), wherein the buffer space is defined concavely toward the battery cell on an outer side of an outermost metal housing ([0026]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art not relied upon includes the teaching of ribs on the exterior casing of a battery to allow air flow. The purpose disclosed in the prior art for the ribs is to improve heat dissipation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIK L TILLMAN-SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-8848. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7am-4pm (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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/ELTS/Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights