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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 07/30/2026 has been entered. Support is found in the drawings as originally filed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 07/30/2026 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. Henon is only still relied upon for its teaching of absorption material choice. The amendment substantively narrowed the scope of claim 1 and added new independent claim 17 which necessitated updated search and consideration that yielded the new grounds of rejection below
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) 1-3, 10-12, 14-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadoi (US 2010/0116568 A1) in view of Higashino et al. (US 2008/0017262 A1, as cited in the 06/18/2026 IDS) and Ikeda et al. (US 2022/0410694 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kadoi teaches a cooling structure of a battery pack ([0005]), the cooling structure comprising:
a battery case containing a battery module (battery unit 5 is constituted by a plurality of battery modules each of which includes a plurality of battery cells, the battery unit 5 is housed in a battery unit container 8 defined by a floor panel 6 and a shield plate 7; [0043] and Fig. 1);
an intake duct communicating with the battery case (at connection of 16h and 8a, [0049] and Figs. 1-2) and being configured to send cooling air for cooling the battery module (duct 16 extends between the air conditioning unit 15 and the battery unit container 8, and serves as an air flow path R, via which cold airstreams S are guided to the battery unit container 8 from the air conditioning unit 15; [0045] and Fig. 1); and
a blower (outlet 15a of the air conditioning unit 15, [0050] and Fig. 1) being configured to supply the cooling air to the intake duct (duct 16 has its front end 16a connected to the outlet 15A of the air conditioning unit 15, the front end 16 a has a rectangular opening 16c, into which the outlet 15A of the air conditioning unit 15 is fitted, [0046] and Figs. 1-2; also exhaust fan 12 attracts airstreams in the battery unit container 8, [0044] and Fig. 1),
the intake duct having a bent section (duct 16 is bent by approximately 90 degrees between its front end 16a and rear end 16b, [0046] and Figs. 1-2) including a first bent part (at shoulder 16d downwardly shaped between 16a and 16e, [0046-0047] and Fig. 2), a horizontal part (center 16e is substantially horizontal, [0047] and Fig. 2), and a second bent part (from 16e toward 16b such that 16b is above 16e, [0047] and Fig. 2) arranged in this order along a flow direction of the cooling air ([0045] and Figs. 1-2),
the bent section being configured such that the cooling air that is sent from an upper side to a lower side at the first bent part is changed in direction to flow through the horizontal part (from 16a through bend at 16d to horizontal 16e, [0046-0047] and Figs. 1-2), and is sent again from the lower side to the upper side at the second bent part (from 16e, which is lowest position of duct, back up to 16b such that opening 16h is present at a position which is higher than the position of the center 16e; [0047, 0049] and Figs. 1-2),
but fails to teach:
wherein in the bent section of the intake duct, a vibration absorber comprising a porous flexible material is provided at least at a collision area of the first bent part to be collided with the cooling air, and
the vibration absorber extends along the intake duct so as to partially block a passage cross section of the intake duct while leaving a remaining part of the passage cross section unblocked, such that at least a portion of the cooling air passes through an inside of the vibration absorber.
However, Kadoi does teach ribs 18a/18b present on the center 16e to form airstream flow paths that reliably guide a necessary amount of cold airstreams and to reinforce the center 16e so that the duct 16 remains strong ([0047, 0051] and Figs. 2 and 4), and the airstream flow paths R1 to R3 created by the ribs at the center 16e have a sectional area which is substantially equal to a sectional area of the opening 16c which is effective in minimizing a pressure loss ([0048] and Figs 2, 4). These ribs read on the functionality of “to partially block a passage cross section of the intake duct while leaving a remaining part of the passage cross section unblocked” as instantly claimed. Kadoi also teaches toward a floor carpet 24 that extends over the floor 6A and a bulk material 21 is placed between the floor 6A and the floor carpet 24, which forms a space 22 between them where the center 16 e is present in the space 22, and further teaches a heat resistant material 23 is attached to the bottom 16g of the duct 16 ([0048] and Figs. 1-4). The floor carpet and heat resistant material can be interpreted as vibration absorbers. Specifically in Fig. 1, floor 6A includes the location of the first bent part such that floor carper 24 thereon per [0048] reads on “a vibration absorber comprising a porous flexible material is provided at least at a collision area of the first bent part”.
Higashino is analogous in the art of duct structures for vehicle battery cooling (abstract, [0039], Fig. 1) and teaches:
wherein in the bent section of the intake duct (wherein flow channel 18 changes direction from 12 toward 10/11, and then from 10/11 toward 13; Figs. 2-4), a vibration absorber comprising a flexible material is provided at least at a collision area of the first bent part to be collided with the cooling air (sound absorbing material 17 on inner wall faces of 18N/18W, [0040] and Fig. 7; must be flexible to adhere to walls as shown; reads on "vibration absorber" since sounds waves are vibrations of air), and
the vibration absorber extends along the intake duct (Fig. 7) so as to partially block a passage cross section of the intake duct while leaving a remaining part of the passage cross section unblocked (Figs. 4-5 and 8 in view of Figs. 13-14 and [0070-0072]), such that at least a portion of the cooling air passes through an inside of the vibration absorber (block 15X can be formed with the sound absorbing material 17, [0072]).
Thus, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include a sound/vibration absorber along the bent section of the intake duct, and specifically at the ribs thereof partially blocking the cross-section within Kadoi, as taught in view of Higashino in order to absorb sound of the cooling air flowing through the duct and therefore expectedly mitigate noise reaching the passenger space. Accordingly, one inventive goal of Kadoi is to increase comfort of the passenger space ([0003]). Use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way supports a conclusion of obviousness per MPEP 2143 I C.
Higashino does not explicitly teach the vibration absorber comprising a “porous” material. However, Ikeda provides evidence that examples of the sound absorbing material 30 include a porous member ([0050]). Ikeda is pertinent to the problem of using sound absorbing material within a duct flow path wherein sound can be generated by a cooling fan and/or an engine ([0061-0062]). The selection of a known material (e.g., porous member as sound absorbing material of Ikeda) suitable for the intended function (i.e., sound absorbing material for use in Higashino) is a prima facie obvious choice for a person having ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.07).
Furthermore, although the Kadoi air conditioning unit 15 is interpreted as reading on the instantly claimed “blower” (because such is a known normal function of a vehicle air conditioner, i.e. to blow air) as cited above, Higashino also explicitly teaches that operating an electric fan 4 introduces the air from an inlet port 8 opening on the vehicle compartment 1A's inner side, and then introduces the air into the cell assembly case 3 by way of a chamber case (first duct) 5 ([0039] and Fig. 1), wherein such “electric fan” reads on the claimed “blower being configured to supply the cooling air to the intake duct”. Therefore, in additional view of Higashino, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the air intake system of Kadoi to explicitly use an electric fan (blower) in order to ensure sufficient introduction of cooling air from the air conditioner unit into the intake duct and downstream battery case.
Thereby, claim 1 is rendered obvious
Regarding claim 2, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above and wherein the bent section is provided at a position lower than an upper surface of the battery case (Kadoi Fig. 1 showing bent section of 16 lower than upper surface of 8 at 6), and the intake duct is coupled to the battery case at a position higher than the bent section (connection of 16b to 8a at opening 16h is higher than bent section since 16e is lowest position, Kadoi [0049-0050] and Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above and wherein a chamber that allows the cooling air to pass therethrough is provided in a middle part of the intake duct (airstream flow paths R1 to R3 formed within 16e, Kadoi [0047] and Fig. 4 – R1,R2,R3 read on “chamber” surrounded by ribs 18a,18b), and the bent section is provided in the chamber (16e surrounded by first and second bent parts at its ends, between 16a and 16b respectively, such that 16e being the lowermost portion of duct 16 corresponds overall to the bent section – see Kadoi Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 10, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above and the second bent part is positioned downstream of the vibration absorber (second bend between 16e and 16b is downstream/after first bend at 16d and after ribs in central 16e in airflow direction per Kadoi Fig. 2, where first bend and ribs are where absorber is disposed when modified in view of Higashino as explained in rejection of claim 1 above), and
the intake duct is configured such that water vapor contained in the cooling air separates from the cooling air at the second bent part due to a difference in specific gravity between the water vapor and the cooling air (duct 16 shape is modified in order to prevent dew drops, Kadoi [0041, 0051]; 16e is lowest position and the end of the duct connected to the power unit is positioned higher than its lowest position, which is effective in preventing water which comes into the duct 16 from flowing into the battery unit container 8 and protecting the battery unit 5 when duct receives cold airstream from air conditioning unit 15, Kadoi [0013, 0050] – lowest position capturing the water from the airstream reads on “due to a difference in specific gravity between the water vapor and the cooling air”).
Regarding claim 11, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 10 above and wherein the intake duct extends in an approximately vertical direction along a side surface of the battery case (portions 16a and 16b of duct 16 are approximately vertical and are along front side of battery case 8 under 6, Kadoi Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above and wherein the blower is an axial blower (fan 12 of Kadoi and fan 4 of Higashino are axial blower; see propellers of 12 in Kadoi Fig. 1, and see spiral airflow at 14 connected to 4 in Higashino Fig. 10 in view of Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above and wherein the vibration absorber is disposed so as to leave a space from a center part to an upper part of the passage cross section of the intake duct unblocked, and to occupy the passage cross section from the center part to a lower part thereof (see shape of 15X in Higashino Fig. 13, occupying/blocking only the lower passage 18N and leaving the upper passage space 18W free in view of Higashino Fig. 8, where 15X is made of sound absorbing material per Higashino [0072]), in an area extending from the first bent part to a middle part of the horizontal part (as applied to the ribs 18a/b location in from end of first bend 16d through horizontal central part 16e of Kadoi Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 15, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 3 above and wherein the chamber has a passage cross-sectional area greater than a passage cross-sectional area of the intake duct (overall cross-section of 16e-16b is larger than cross-section of 16c-16a, Kadoi Fig. 2). Kadoi also teaches in [0048] that cross-section affect pressure loss of airflow streams, and Higashino Fig. 2 teaches toward a chamber case 5 mid-section having a larger gross section than an inlet pipe 12.
Regarding claim 16, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 3 above and wherein the vibration absorber covers approximately an entire inner surface of the chamber (sound absorbing material 17 covering inner surfaces of chambers 18N and 18W in Higashino Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 17, Kadoi teaches a cooling structure of a battery pack ([0005]), the cooling structure comprising:
a battery case containing a battery module (battery unit 5 is constituted by a plurality of battery modules each of which includes a plurality of battery cells, the battery unit 5 is housed in a battery unit container 8 defined by a floor panel 6 and a shield plate 7; [0043] and Fig. 1);
an intake duct communicating with the battery case (at connection of 16h and 8a, [0049] and Figs. 1-2) and being configured to send cooling air for cooling the battery module (duct 16 extends between the air conditioning unit 15 and the battery unit container 8, and serves as an air flow path R, via which cold airstreams S are guided to the battery unit container 8 from the air conditioning unit 15; [0045] and Fig. 1); and
a blower (outlet 15a of the air conditioning unit 15, [0050] and Fig. 1) being configured to supply the cooling air to the intake duct (duct 16 has its front end 16a connected to the outlet 15A of the air conditioning unit 15, the front end 16 a has a rectangular opening 16c, into which the outlet 15A of the air conditioning unit 15 is fitted, [0046] and Figs. 1-2; also exhaust fan 12 attracts airstreams in the battery unit container 8, [0044] and Fig. 1),
the intake duct having a bent section (duct 16 is bent by approximately 90 degrees between its front end 16a and rear end 16b, [0046] and Figs. 1-2) in which the cooling air that is sent from an upper side to a lower side at a first bent part is changed in direction to flow through the horizontal part (from 16a through bend at 16d to horizontal 16e, [0046-0047] and Figs. 1-2; where first bent part is at shoulder 16d downwardly shaped between 16a and 16e, [0046-0047] and Fig. 2) and is sent again from the lower side to the upper side at a second bent part (from 16e, which is lowest position of duct, back up to 16b such that opening 16h is present at a position which is higher than the position of the center 16e; [0047, 0049] and Figs. 1-2; where second bent part is from 16e toward 16b such that 16b is above 16e, [0047] and Fig. 2), …
the intake duct is configured such that water vapor contained in the cooling air separates from the cooling air at the second bent part due to a difference in specific gravity between the water vapor and the cooling air (duct 16 shape is modified in order to prevent dew drops, Kadoi [0041, 0051]; 16e is lowest position and the end of the duct connected to the power unit is positioned higher than its lowest position, which is effective in preventing water which comes into the duct 16 from flowing into the battery unit container 8 and protecting the battery unit 5 when duct receives cold airstream from air conditioning unit 15, Kadoi [0013, 0050] – lowest position capturing the water from the airstream reads on “due to a difference in specific gravity between the water vapor and the cooling air”);
but fails to teach:
wherein in the bent section of the intake duct, a vibration absorber comprising a porous flexible material is provided at least at a collision area of the first bent part to be collided with the cooling air, and
the vibration absorber extends along the intake duct so as to partially block a passage cross section of the intake duct while leaving a remaining part of the passage cross section unblocked, such that at least a portion of the cooling air passes through an inside of the vibration absorber.
However, Kadoi does teach ribs 18a/18b present on the center 16e to form airstream flow paths that reliably guide a necessary amount of cold airstreams and to reinforce the center 16e so that the duct 16 remains strong ([0047, 0051] and Figs. 2 and 4), and the airstream flow paths R1 to R3 created by the ribs at the center 16e have a sectional area which is substantially equal to a sectional area of the opening 16c which is effective in minimizing a pressure loss ([0048] and Figs 2, 4). These ribs read on the functionality of “to partially block a passage cross section of the intake duct while leaving a remaining part of the passage cross section unblocked” as instantly claimed. Kadoi also teaches toward a floor carpet 24 that extends over the floor 6A and a bulk material 21 is placed between the floor 6A and the floor carpet 24, which forms a space 22 between them where the center 16 e is present in the space 22, and further teaches a heat resistant material 23 is attached to the bottom 16g of the duct 16 ([0048] and Figs. 1-4). The floor carpet and heat resistant material can be interpreted as vibration absorbers. Specifically in Fig. 1, floor 6A includes the location of the first bent part such that floor carper 24 thereon per [0048] reads on “a vibration absorber comprising a porous flexible material is provided at least at a collision area of the first bent part”.
Higashino is analogous in the art of duct structures for vehicle battery cooling (abstract, [0039], Fig. 1) and teaches:
wherein in the bent section of the intake duct (wherein flow channel 18 changes direction from 12 toward 10/11, and then from 10/11 toward 13; Figs. 2-4), a vibration absorber comprising a flexible material is provided at least at a collision area of the first bent part to be collided with the cooling air (sound absorbing material 17 on inner wall faces of 18N/18W, [0040] and Fig. 7; must be flexible to adhere to walls as shown; reads on "vibration absorber" since sounds waves are vibrations of air), and
the vibration absorber extends along the intake duct (Fig. 7) so as to partially block a passage cross section of the intake duct while leaving a remaining part of the passage cross section unblocked (Figs. 4-5 and 8 in view of Figs. 13-14 and [0070-0072]), such that at least a portion of the cooling air passes through an inside of the vibration absorber (block 15X can be formed with the sound absorbing material 17, [0072]).
Thus, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include a sound/vibration absorber along the bent section of the intake duct, and specifically at the ribs thereof partially blocking the cross-section within Kadoi, as taught in view of Higashino in order to absorb sound of the cooling air flowing through the duct and therefore expectedly mitigate noise reaching the passenger space. Accordingly, one inventive goal of Kadoi is to increase comfort of the passenger space ([0003]). Use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way supports a conclusion of obviousness per MPEP 2143 I C.
Higashino does not explicitly teach the vibration absorber comprising a “porous” material. However, Ikeda provides evidence that examples of the sound absorbing material 30 include a porous member ([0050]). Ikeda is pertinent to the problem of using sound absorbing material within a duct flow path wherein sound can be generated by a cooling fan and/or an engine ([0061-0062]). The selection of a known material (e.g., porous member as sound absorbing material of Ikeda) suitable for the intended function (i.e., sound absorbing material for use in Higashino) is a prima facie obvious choice for a person having ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.07).
Furthermore, although the Kadoi air conditioning unit 15 is interpreted as reading on the instantly claimed “blower” (because such is a known normal function of a vehicle air conditioner, i.e. to blow air) as cited above, Higashino also explicitly teaches that operating an electric fan 4 introduces the air from an inlet port 8 opening on the vehicle compartment 1A's inner side, and then introduces the air into the cell assembly case 3 by way of a chamber case (first duct) 5 ([0039] and Fig. 1), wherein such “electric fan” reads on the claimed “blower being configured to supply the cooling air to the intake duct”. Therefore, in additional view of Higashino, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the air intake system of Kadoi to explicitly use an electric fan (blower) in order to ensure sufficient introduction of cooling air from the air conditioner unit into the intake duct and downstream battery case.
Thereby, claim 17 is rendered obvious
Regarding claim 19, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 17 above and wherein the bent section is provided at a position lower than an upper surface of the battery case (Kadoi Fig. 1 showing bent section of 16 lower than upper surface of 8 at 6), and the intake duct is coupled to the battery case at a position higher than the bent section (connection of 16b to 8a at opening 16h is higher than bent section since 16e is lowest position, Kadoi [0049-0050] and Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 20, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 17 above and wherein a chamber that allows the cooling air to pass therethrough is provided in a middle part of the intake duct (airstream flow paths R1 to R3 formed within 16e, Kadoi [0047] and Fig. 4 – R1,R2,R3 read on “chamber” surrounded by ribs 18a,18b), and the bent section is provided in the chamber (16e surrounded by first and second bent parts at its ends, between 16a and 16b respectively, such that 16e being the lowermost portion of duct 16 corresponds overall to the bent section – see Kadoi Figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 4-6 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadoi (US 2010/0116568 A1) in view of Higashino et al. (US 2008/0017262 A1, as cited in the 06/18/2026 IDS) and Ikeda et al. (US 2022/0410694 A1) as applied to claims 1-3 and 17 above, and further in view of Henon et al. (US 2021/0001714 A1, as cited in the 05/01/2026 Office action).
Regarding claim 4, claim 5, claim 6, and claim 18, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claims 1, 2, 3 and 17 above but does not explicitly teach the vibration absorber is made of non-woven fabric.
Henon is also analogous in the art of vehicle battery cooling (Henon abstract and [0005]) and teaches in a bent section of an intake duct (a duct 2 defining a flow channel 4 with an inlet 20 and an outlet 22 in which flows an air stream; Henon [0039] and Fig. 1 showing bent shape from 20 to 22), a vibration absorber is provided at least at a collision area to be collided with the cooling air (sound absorption means 70 correspond to a sound absorbing coating 72 arranged on the walls of the duct 2, Henon [0041] and Figs. 1,5d - coating 72 shown at upper and lower bent portions in duct 2 within Fig. 1, through which the cooling air stream necessarily contacts while flowing from inlet 20 to outlet 22 within regulating device 1 per [0039]). Henon (at [0040] in view of [0005]) teaches such sound absorption means is beneficial to suppress or at least limit the propagation of noise to the outside of the duct and thus mitigate the noise annoyance for the user. Therefore, Henon shares the inventive goal of sound absorption with Higashino and Ikeda, and of increasing comfort for users/passengers with Kadoi. Henon teaches that coating 72 can correspond to a layer of non-woven material such as wool or an insulating synthetic textile (Henon [0041]).
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination per MPEP 2144.07, such that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to select of non-woven material such as wool or an insulating synthetic textile taught toward by Henon to serve as the flexible porous vibration absorbing material within modified Kadoi.
Thereby, claims 4-6 and 18 are rendered obvious.
Claim(s) 8-9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadoi (US 2010/0116568 A1) in view of Higashino et al. (US 2008/0017262 A1, as cited in the 06/18/2026 IDS) and Ikeda et al. (US 2022/0410694 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Misu et al. (US 2001/0030069 A1).
Regarding claim 8 and claim 9, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above but fails to teach the vibration absorber is further configured to function as a filter that removes foreign matter from the cooling air; nor wherein the porous flexible material comprises sponge.
Misu is analogous in the art of cooling air inlet ducts connected into vehicle battery casings (abstract) and teaches a dust-and-sound-proof cover 119 including a sound absorber 126 formed of a urethane sponge bonded to the inner surface 122 of 119 ([0083] and Fig. 9); the urethan sponge sound absorber of Misu [0083] reads on “the porous flexible material comprises sponge”. Misu attributes the dust/dirt protection to the curved shape of 119 ([0081]), which is also the shape of sponge 126 thereagainst (Fig. 9); such reads on “the vibration absorber is further configured to function as a filter that removes foreign matter from the cooling air” since 119/126 as a laminate achieve both functions of dust/dirt filtering/blocking and sound absorption.
Therefore, in view of these teachings by Misu, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to select a sponge material as the sound/vibration absorption material within modified Kadoi (see also MPEP 2144.07) and to arrange such along dust-and-sound-proof cover like that taught by Misu to further achieve the benefit of filtering/blocking dirt from entering the battery case of modified Kadoi (see also MPEP 2143 I C).
Thereby, claims 8 and 9 are rendered obvious.
Regarding claim 13, modified Kadoi teaches the limitations from claim 1 above but fails to teach further comprising a dust filter disposed upstream of the blower and configured to remove foreign matter from air before the air is supplied to the blower as the cooling air.
Misu is analogous in the art of cooling air inlet ducts connected into vehicle battery casings (abstract) and teaches a dust-and-sound-proof cover 119 ([0083] and Fig. 9). Misu teaches such dust-and-sound-proof cover being disposed upstream of a blower fan 31 (Fig. 9) and acts as a shield to reduce the amount of foreign matters which are introduced into the air inlet sleeve 110 of the blower fan 31 ([0080-0081]). Misu also teaches an embodiment of a dust-and-sound-proof cover 166 which has an air flow aperture 164 ([0105] and Figs. 17-18), which reads on intake into the air inlet sleeve 110 (in view of Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify Kadoi to include a dust-and-sound-proof cover serving as a dust filter disposed upstream of the blower and configured to remove foreign matter from air before the air is supplied to the blower as the cooling air as taught by Misu, with the motivation of such acting as a shield and reduce the amount of undesirable foreign matters introduced into the air inlet.
Thereby, claim 13 is rendered obvious.
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 Jessie Walls-Murray whose telephone number is (571)272-1664. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, typically 10-4.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/JESSIE WALLS-MURRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
