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 16 and 17 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.
Regarding claim 16 the claim recites “the cooling plate comprises a first main pipe and a second main pipe” it is unclear if the main pipes recited are the same as the main pipe recited in claim 1. Further clarification and appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 17 the claim recites “wherein the battery tray comprises a bottom member and a frame member projecting upward” it is unclear if the frame member recited in claim 16 is an additional frame to the battery frame recited in claim 1 which claim 17 is dependent on.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tan (US 20230112735 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tan discloses a power storage device (see Figs. 1-6, 100 see Fig. 1 [0018]) and to be mounted below a floor of a vehicle (see Fig. 6 [0006]), the
power storage device (100) comprising:
a battery tray (150/101, see Fig. 2) accommodating a secondary battery cell (20, see Fig. 2);
a battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) surrounding the battery tray; and
a cooling plate (120 and 140 [0039]) comprising a plate portion (see Fig. 2) provided above the battery tray (150/101) and the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) and having a refrigerant flow path (140 and entrance and exits ports shown which are below plate extend beyond 602, see Figs. 1 and 2 [0039]) through which a refrigerant is to flow, and a main pipe (entrance and exits ports shown which are below plate and inserted into 602, see Figs. 1 and 2 [0039]) disposed on an outer side of the battery frame (outside of 602, see Figs. 1 and 2) and continuous with the plate portion such that the refrigerant flow path and an internal space of the main pipe communicate with each other and wherein the main pipe extends below an upper surface of the battery frame (see Fig. 2, is below top surface of 602 which is part of frame).
Regarding claim 19, Tan discloses a power storage device (see Figs. 1-6, 100 see Fig. 1 [0018]) to be mounted below a floor of a vehicle (see Fig. 6 [0006]), the power storage device (100) comprising:
a battery tray (150/101, see Fig. 2) accommodating a secondary battery cell (20, see Fig. 2);
a battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) surrounding the battery tray(150/101, see Fig. 2); and
a cooling plate (120 and 140 [0039]) including:
a plate portion (see Fig. 2) provided above the battery tray (150/101, see Fig. 2) and the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) and having a refrigerant flow path (140 and entrance and exits ports shown which are below plate extend beyond 602, see Figs. 1 and 2 [0039]) through which a refrigerant is to flow; and
a main pipe (entrance and exits ports shown which are below plate and inserted into 602, see Figs. 1 and 2 [0039]) disposed on an outer side of the battery frame (outside of 602, see Figs. 1 and 2) in a lateral direction of the vehicle (entrance and exits ports of 140 shown which are below plate and extend beyond 602 in lateral direction, see Fig. 2 [0022]) so as to overlap the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) in a top-bottom direction (overlaps in top-bottom and left to right direction) and connected with the plate portion (120) such that the refrigerant flow path (140) and an internal space of the main pipe communicate (entrance and exits ports shown which are below plate and inserted into 602, see Fig. 2 [0039]) with each other, wherein the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) is positioned between the main pipe (entrance and exits ports shown which are below plate and inserted into 602, see Fig. 2) and the battery tray in the lateral direction. Furthermore, with regards to the limitation “the external force is applied to the main pipe prior to the battery frame, and when the main pipe is broken, refrigerant leaking from the main pipe is prevented by the battery frame from entering the battery tray” this will be present since if the coolant exit and entrance ports are broken since they lie outside of 602 the refrigerant leaking from the main pipe is prevented by the battery frame from entering the battery tray.
Regarding claim 2, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Tan discloses wherein the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) and the cooling plate (120) are fixed to the vehicle ([0006]), and the battery tray (150/101, see Fig. 2) is attachable to the battery frame from below (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Tan discloses the claimed structure for the plate portion including the refrigerant flow path (120 and 140 [0039]).
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).
Regarding claim 9, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Tan discloses wherein the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) is positioned between the main pipe (entrance and exits ports of 140 shown which are below plate and extend beyond 602 in lateral direction, see Fig. 2) and the battery tray(150/101, see Fig. 2) in a lateral direction of the vehicle ([0022]).
Regarding claim 11, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Tan discloses wherein the cooling plate (120 and 140 [0039]) covers the battery frame (60 and 602, see Fig. 2) from above and serves as an upper lid of the power storage device (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 16, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Tan discloses wherein the cooling plate comprises a first main pipe (coolant entrance [0039][0041]) and a second main pipe (coolant exit [0039][0041]) each disposed on a respective outer side of the battery frame in a lateral direction of the vehicle ([0041]), the refrigerant being supplied to the plate portion from the first main pipe and collected from the plate portion by the second main pipe ([0039][0041]).
Regarding claim 17, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Tan discloses wherein the battery tray (150/101) comprises a bottom member and a frame member (60/602) projecting upward from the bottom member, and the secondary battery cell (20) is accommodated in a space surrounded by the bottom member and the frame member (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US 20230112735 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Tan discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the refrigerant flow path in the plate portion is formed by joining two plates. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to form the refrigerant flow path in the plate portion by joining two plates, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Claim(s) 7, 8, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US 20230112735 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 above and in further view of Herrmann (US 20110132580 A1).
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 18, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Tan 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 Tan 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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US 20230112735 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 above and in further view of Ishitobi (US 20220344739 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Tan does not disclose wherein the main pipe is formed of a member having lower rigidity than the battery frame.
Ishitobi discloses that cooling elements can be formed of aluminum and the battery frame is made of high tension steel ([0078][0130]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cooling element main pipe of Tan by forming it of aluminum and modifying the material of the frame by forming it of high tension steel as disclosed by Ishitobi because it will improve the cooling characteristics of the coolant plate and rigidity for the frame which protects the batteries.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US 20230112735 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 above and in further view of Lee (US 20220085452 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Tan does not disclose wherein the plate portion comprises an exhaust flow path that is separated from the secondary battery cell in the top-bottom direction and through which gas generated by the secondary battery cell is dischargeable to an outside of the power storage device
Lee discloses a power storage device (See Fig. 2) and an external wall (11) that comprises an exhaust flow path (see 130 Figs. 2a-2d [0056] [0058]) that is separated from the secondary battery cell in the top-bottom direction and through which gas generated by the secondary battery cell is dischargeable to an outside of the power storage device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cooling plate to including exhaust flow path as disclosed by Lee because it will decrease the likelihood of a fire.
Regarding claim 13, modified Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, modified Tan does not disclose wherein the exhaust flow path is formed between adjacent refrigerant flow paths in a front-rear direction of the vehicle, and is formed by a portion of a lower plate of the plate portion being recessed upward.
In addition Lee discloses that the arrangement of the venting member may be varied ([0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the position of the exhaust flow path (venting member) of Tan so that it is between adjacent refrigerant flow paths in a front-rear direction of the vehicle, and is formed by a portion of a lower plate of the plate portion being recessed upward because Lee discloses that it is appropriate to have any external wall can house the venting member and therefore the position of the exhaust flow path can be varied to be between adjacent refrigerant flow paths.
Furthermore as shown in Figs. 2a-2d of Lee the exhaust flow path is recessed upward.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US 20230112735 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 above and in further view of Luo (CN 114566741 A, Machine Translation).
Regarding claim 12, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Tan does not disclose wherein the plate portion comprises an exhaust flow path that is separated from the secondary battery cell in the top-bottom direction and through which gas generated by the secondary battery cell is dischargeable to an outside of the power storage device.
Luo discloses a power storage device (See Fig. 2) a cooling plate (3) that comprises an exhaust flow path (see Figs. 5a and 5b, 35) that is separated from the secondary battery cell in the top-bottom direction and through which gas generated by the secondary battery cell is dischargeable to an outside of the power storage device (see pg. 5 paragraph beginning with As shown in FIG. 1a to FIG. 5b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cooling plate of Tan to include exhaust flow paths which discharge gases to the outside as disclosed by Luo because it will decrease the likelihood of a fire.
Claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US 20230112735 A1) as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17, and 19 above and in further view of Zimmerman (US 20190252744 A1).
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Tan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Tan does not disclose wherein the secondary battery cell comprises a bus bar on an upper surface thereof coupling adjacent secondary battery cells, and
the plate portion is in contact with the bus bar via a thermally conductive insulating member.
Zimmerman discloses a power storage apparatus wherein the battery cells are interconnected with bus bars (12) and the bus bars (12) are connect to a cooling plate (2) through a thermally conductive insulation layer (11) ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the orientation and the placement of busbars of Tan by having the batteries as disclosed by Zimmerman connected with the bus bar and further by having the thermally conductive insulation layer between the bus bar and the cooling plate as disclosed by Zimmerman because Zimmerman discloses that this a known orientation and method to connect batteries in a power storage device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights