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 § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Drabon (US 20180062224 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Drabon discloses a power storage device to be mounted below a floor of a vehicle, the power storage device comprising (see Figs. 1-22 [0045]):
a battery tray (12 and/or 13 and/ or 6, see Figs. 2, 3 and 14-22 [0047]) accommodating a secondary battery cell (2);
a battery frame (4 and 5 [0046] see Figs. 2, 3 and 14-22) surrounding the battery tray(12 and/or 13 and/ or 6, see Figs. 3, 4 and 14-22 [0047]); and
a cooling plate (8, see Figs. 2, 3 and Fig. 18) comprising a plate portion (38 see Fig. 15) provided above the battery tray (12 and/or 13 and/ or 6, see Figs. 2, 3 and 14-22 [0047]) and the battery frame (4 [0046] see Figs. 2, 3 and 14-22) and having a refrigerant flow path (41 see Fig. 18) through which a refrigerant is to flow, and a main pipe (inherently connected to a pipe outside of frame defined by 8 as input to source of 39 [0060]) disposed on an outer side of the battery frame so as to overlap the battery frame in a top bottom direction and continuous with the plate portion such that the refrigerant flow path (39 see Fig. 18) and an internal space of the main pipe (inherently connected to a pipe outside of frame defined by 8 as input to source of 39 [0060]) communicate with each other.
Regarding claim 2, Drabon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Drabon discloses wherein the battery frame (4 and 5 [0046] see Figs. 2, 3 and Fig. 8—note that 26 is part of 5 [0054]) and the cooling plate (see Figs. 2 and 3 [0054]) are fixed to the vehicle, and the battery tray (12 and/or 13 and/ or 6, see Figs. 14 or 15) is attachable to the battery frame (4 and 5 [0046] see Figs. 2, 3 and Fig. 8—note that 26 is part of 5 [0054]) from below.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Drabon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition Drabon discloses wherein the refrigerant flow path (39 see Fig. 18) in the plate portion (38 see Fig. 15) is formed by joining two plates (37 and 38 see Fig. 15 [0060]).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Drabon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Drabon discloses the claimed structure for the plate portion including the refrigerant flow path (see Fig. 18 [0065][0011]).
With regards to the plate portion is “formed by extrusion molding such that the refrigerant flow path is formed” the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus or product. The determination of patentability is based upon the apparatus structure itself. The patentability of a product or apparatus does not depend on its method of production or formation. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (see MPEP § 2113).
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.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drabon (US 20180062224 A1) as applied to claims 1-6 above and in further view of Herrmann (US 20110132580 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Drabon discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Drabon does not disclose wherein the battery tray comprises a spring member that presses the secondary battery cell upward.
Herrmann (see Fig. 24) discloses that at the interface between a battery surface and a supporting surface there are spring elements (22) to press the battery towards a cooling surface (1) ([0083]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the supporting surface of the battery tray of Drabon by adding spring elements at the interface of the supporting surface and the battery surface as disclosed by Herrmann to increase the contact between the battery and the cooling structure because this will increase the cooling of the battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726