Ing DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed November 18th, 2025 have been entered. Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 5 has been cancelled.
The statutory double patenting rejections made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejections made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been maintained and updated to reflect Applicant’s amendments.
The Section 102 rejections over Kamo made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 102/103 rejections over Zhou (as the primary reference) made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 102 rejections over Sei made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 102/103 rejections over Zhu (as the primary reference) made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 102/103 rejections over Simmons (as the primary reference) made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
The Section 102/103 rejections over Aitharaju (as the primary reference) made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been maintained due to Applicant’s arguments being unpersuasive.
The Section 102/103 rejections over Eulitz OR Reichert/Eulitz made in the Office action mailed August 22nd, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 18th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant does not argue against secondary references Moon, Matas, or DaCosta regarding the metal thin film as claimed. Applicant attempts to blanket argue against the 103 combinations by stating that no reference teaches a metal thin film positioned between a faceplate and a core member and is fixed by a fusion layer.
Although technically neither does Applicant. Applicant mere states that the metal thin film is formed on one surface of the faceplate and then depicts an example of it being between the two [PGPub, 0054-0057]]. There is nothing that is cited as novel or nonobvious (either surface should be able to reduce the heat generation) about the metal thin film being on the inner surface nor any details about how a fusion “layer” (which is not claimed) is formed in relation to this, especially when the joining processes are rather broadly disclosed.
Therefore, each of Moon, Matas, or DaCosta teaches forming a metal thin film on a faceplate, wherein it is either broadly disclosed enough that either an external or internal surface is viable for metallic coating/deposition (i.e. Moon teaches that a conductive metal thin film may be formed on the outer surface, not that it is required; Matas teaches the EMC shielding metallic coating being formed on an inner side, not necessarily on an innermost surface; DaCosta teaches a single layer composite battery module compartment comprising a fire/heat barrier coating formed such that both surfaces can comprise a fire/heat reflective barrier coating [0050-0053], wherein if this layer were attached to the shaped core layer of the primary reference at least one of these layers would be disposed between the flat faceplate and the shaped core layer.
Therefore, any rejections regarding the above could be maintained. However, they have been withdrawn due to the entering of a new ground(s) of rejection as recited below.
Applicant arguments regarding Sei are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections over Sei have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Aitharaju are essentially that the aluminum plating must be a surface coating and therefore provided on the exterior are not persuasive.
The “e.g. corrosion resistant sprays, aluminum plating, paints, reinforced cellulosic material, or any combination thereof” is seen as modifying “optional laminate layers or surface coatings”, not solely the latter. Unless more evidence/unexpected results is seen regarding the metal thin film, it is the Examiner’s view that Aitharaju teaches a substantially equivalent disclosure to that of Applicant.
However, in an effort to boost clarity, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made and is recited below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 6, & 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”).
Regarding claims 1-4, 6, and 9-14, Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic, such as polyethylene in an example (pg. 10, lines 10-14), sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) that can be porous (selectively formed holes) to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic, such as polyethylene in an example (pg. 10, lines 10-14), film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces (inherently forming a groove orthogonal to the direction of bending) defining a plurality of channels which can be filled with air or a flexible air permeable material (inherently sound absorbing) (pg. 10, lines 30-33).
Claims 7-8 & 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takano (JP 2009-051016 A) (hereinafter “Takano”).
Regarding claims 7-8 and 15-16, the faceplate or core as comprising phase change material and/or extinguishant is not taught.
Takano teaches a thermoplastic resin sheet that contains blended therein a latent heat storage phase change material for the purpose of cooling or heat insulation usable as an interior decorative and/or building board material [0001, 0026-0027, 0046], wherein the resin may also be impregnated into a fibrous reinforcing base material, such as a nonwoven fabric [0064-0065], wherein the resin and heat storage material may additionally comprise a flame retardant [0032-0033].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a latent heat storage material and/or an extinguishant blended with the resin for the core and/or faceplate and/or the channel-filling air-permeable material. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide cooling and heat insulation to maintain temperatures within a desired range for a long period of time and also increase fire retardancy [Takano].
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ray et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0042981 A1) (hereinafter “Ray”), and optionally Orologio (U.S. Patent No. 6,322,873 B1) (hereinafter “Orologio”) OR Roithmayr (WO 2020/014721 A1) (hereinafter “Roithmayr”), respectively.
Regarding claims 15-16, an extinguishant provided between the core and faceplate or contained by the core or faceplate.
Ray teaches a reflective insulation material having metal layers facing shaped core member(s), wherein the reflective insulation material contains a fire retardant [0055].
Furthermore, Orologio teaches an improved heat insulation laminate, wherein an extinguishant is contained in the cavities defined between the faceplate and the core layer, which can assist especially in cases of polyethylene.
OR
Roithmayr teaches a heat insulation laminate, wherein the first (facing) layer and second (core) layer are formed of non-polyethylene flame-retardant materials [0017] or at least one can include a further layer comprising fire protection materials [0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide additional fire resistance either as a filler or as contained within the faceplate or core. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivate to provide fire resistance in at least one of only two known methods in the art [Ray], both of which are made explicit by Orologio OR Roithmayr.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, & 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamo (JP 2003-170515 A) (hereinafter “Kamo”) in view of Ros (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/00247083 A1) (hereinafter “Ros”) and Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”).
Regarding claims 1-4 and 9-11, Kamo teaches a hollow (pathways for gas/air flow within) plate-shaped material having sound and heat insulation and shock-absorbing and impact resistant qualities wherein each layer comprises non-chlorinated thermoplastic synthetic resins comprising at least one continuously corrugated (core) member such that waves/protruding portions extend in both directions from a geometric center surface, wherein the layers are all thermally bonded together, without adhesive, by selectively fusion bonding the core to a top and/or bottom sheet layer (faceplate) [0016, 0022, 0028], wherein particular thickness of the structure is decided by the number of layers which may be such that multiple core members are used [0029, 0035].
However, the structural panel is not taught to comprise a metal thin film formed on at least one surface of the faceplate between the faceplate and the shaped core member.
Ros teaches a modification on a honeycomb structural element that provides insulation properties [0006], wherein a faceplate having a metallic layer on only one side is necessary, wherein the metallic coating is provided for barrier properties and minimized heat transfer due to the thinness of the coating [0033-0035] that metallized side of the flat element preferably at least faces the cavities of the shaped core [0086, 0120-0122, 0128], wherein especially when performing ultrasonic welding the coating can be interrupted during or after application to provide the fused portions between the flat faceplate and the shaped core member [0120-0122].
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an exemplary embodiment of a heat insulating structural panel [Ros], or to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (Thierry).
Regarding claims 6-7, Ros further teaches the cells formed by the shaped core can be filled with a gas [0029] or with latent heat storage material [0032].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a filling member comprising latent heat storage material to cavities formed between the faceplate and the shaped core. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a device capable of storing thermal energy at low loss with many repetition cycles over extended periods of time [Ros].
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 104275836 A) (hereafter “Zhou”), in view of Ros (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/00247083 A1) (hereinafter “Ros”) and optionally Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”).
Regarding claims 1-4, 10-11, and 15, Zhou teaches a dimple-shaped honeycomb hollow (pathways for gas/air flow within) board, which does not use adhesives like the conventional prior art which also includes latticed grid honeycomb boards [0004], and thus the (thermo)plastic continuously dimpled/corrugated middle core is selectively melt-bonded (fused) to the upper and lower flat (face)plates [0011, 0047], wherein since the dimples/protruding portions extend from both surfaces such that it is easier to press and bond, allows each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [0019, 0049], wherein the thermoplastic forming the hollow board further has calcium carbonate and aluminum oxide therein both of which comprise known extinguishants.
However, the structural panel is not taught to comprise a metal thin film formed on at least one surface of the faceplate between the faceplate and the shaped core member.
Ros teaches a modification on a honeycomb structural element that provides insulation properties [0006], wherein a faceplate having a metallic layer on only one side is necessary, wherein the metallic coating is provided for barrier properties and minimized heat transfer due to the thinness of the coating [0033-0035] that metallized side of the flat element preferably at least faces the cavities of the shaped core [0086, 0120-0122, 0128], wherein especially when performing ultrasonic welding the coating can be interrupted during or after application to provide the fused portions between the flat faceplate and the shaped core member [0120-0122].
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an exemplary embodiment of a heat insulating structural panel [Ros], or to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (Thierry).
Regarding claims 6-7, Ros further teaches the cells formed by the shaped core can be filled with a gas [0029] or with latent heat storage material [0032].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a filling member comprising latent heat storage material to cavities formed between the faceplate and the shaped core. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a device capable of storing thermal energy at low loss with many repetition cycles over extended periods of time [Ros].
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Ros and optionally Yanai OR Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, optionally in view of Kamo (JP 2003-170515 A) (hereinafter “Kamo”).
Regarding claim 9, although Zhou does not teach a plurality of core layers, providing more than one core layers is merely a duplication of parts, wherein it has been held that a “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.
Alternatively, Kamo teaches that the thickness of hollow structured boards is easily changed via the use of multiple core members [0029, 0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a plurality of core members. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an easy method of increasing or decreasing thickness of the hollow plate.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (CN 112248562 A) (hereafter “Zhu”) in view of Ros (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/00247083 A1) (hereinafter “Ros”) and optionally Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”).
Regarding claims 1-4, 10-11, and 13, Sei teaches a plastic laminated plate having air layers (flow paths) inside [0004], wherein the thermoplastic corrugated core, such that waves/protruding portions alternately arranged on both sides, is selectively melt-bonded/welded (fused), without using adhesives, to the thermoplastic plate material [0011, 0012-0015, 0025-0026, 0067, 0089], wherein both the core and the plate are formed from fiber-reinforced thermoplastic [0011-0013, 0016, 0023, 0057, 0067], wherein the fibers are carbon fibers in the form of a nonwoven sheet [0011, 0017, 0023, 0057-0059], and wherein an additional plate may be heat-welded to the lower surface of the core for additional strength/rigidity [0049, 0052, 0103, Fig. 2], wherein the plastic laminated plate is intended to replace steel/metal sheets of such as in vehicles and provides a lightweight, thin, and high flexural rigidity characteristic [0055, 0128] and may comprise a surface treatment/coating to increase thermal insulation, which can be applied onto the main surface [0006, 0096].
However, the structural core panel is not taught to comprise a metal thin film formed on at least one surface of the faceplate between the faceplate and the shaped core member.
Ros teaches a modification on a honeycomb structural element that provides insulation properties [0006], wherein a faceplate having a metallic layer on only one side is necessary, wherein the metallic coating is provided for barrier properties and minimized heat transfer due to the thinness of the coating [0033-0035] that metallized side of the flat element preferably at least faces the cavities of the shaped core [0086, 0120-0122, 0128], wherein especially when performing ultrasonic welding the coating can be interrupted during or after application to provide the fused portions between the flat faceplate and the shaped core member [0120-0122].
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an exemplary embodiment of a heat insulating structural panel [Ros], or to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (Thierry).
Regarding claims 6-7, Ros further teaches the cells formed by the shaped core can be filled with a gas [0029] or with latent heat storage material [0032].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a filling member comprising latent heat storage material to cavities formed between the faceplate and the shaped core. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a device capable of storing thermal energy at low loss with many repetition cycles over extended periods of time [Ros].
Claims 8 & 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Ros and optionally Yanai OR Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Takano (JP 2009-051016 A) (hereinafter “Takano”), wherein claim 15 is further in view of Orologio (U.S. Patent No. 6,322,873 B1) (hereinafter “Orologio”).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Zhu teaches an interior decoration material comprising fiber reinforced skins selectively thermally welded to a honeycomb-like corrugated core, but does not teach the faceplate or core as comprising phase change material and/or extinguishant.
Takano teaches a thermoplastic resin sheet that contains blended therein a latent heat storage phase change material for the purpose of cooling or heat insulation usable as an interior decorative and/or building board material [0001, 0026-0027, 0046], wherein the resin may also be impregnated into a fibrous reinforcing base material, such as a nonwoven fabric [0064-0065], wherein the resin and heat storage material may additionally comprise a flame retardant [0032-0033].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a latent heat storage material and/or an extinguishant blended with the resin for the core and/or faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide cooling and heat insulation to maintain temperatures within a desired range for a long period of time and also increase fire retardancy.
Regarding claim 15, Orologio teaches an improved heat insulation laminate, wherein an extinguishant is contained in the cavities defined between the faceplate and the core layer (abstract), wherein known flame retardants tend to migrate and leach out of a resin surface layer during the life thereof and its presence can also reduce the efficiency of heat sealing (col. 3, lines 9-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to alternately or also provide extinguishants in the cavities formed between the core member and faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to replace or reduce/minimize the amount of extinguishant provided in the core and faceplate layers in order to decrease/prevent migration and leaching of the extinguishant out of a resin surface layer during the life thereof and to increase the efficiency of heat sealing/welding (col. 3, lines 9-20).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Ros and optionally Yanai OR Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, optionally further in view of Kamo (JP 2003-170515 A) (hereinafter “Kamo”) AND/OR Enderich et al. (DE 102010005808 A1) (hereinafter “Enderich”).
Regarding claim 9, Zhu teaches the structure may be used as a decorative/trim member, but does not teach a plurality of layers. However, providing more than one core layers is merely a duplication of parts, wherein it has been held that a “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.
Alternatively, Kamo teaches that the thickness of hollow structured boards is easily changed via the use of multiple core members [0029, 0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a plurality of core members. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an easy method of increasing or decreasing thickness of the hollow plate.
AND/OR
Enderich teaches vehicle energy absorbing elements usable in an interior of a vehicle comprising sandwich honeycomb and/or S-shaped (corrugated) panels [0001-0005, 0008-0010, 0015], wherein the wave height and/or wavelength of the adjacent waves of a corrugation could be changed from layer to layer to provide different thicknesses and desired deformation capacities for corresponding projected loads [0011, 0013-0014, 0025-0026, 0029-0030].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a plurality of core layers. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an easy method of increasing or decreasing thickness of the hollow plate [Kamo] AND/OR to provide different thicknesses and desired deformation capacities for corresponding projected loads [Enderich].
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (CN 112248562 A) (hereafter “Zhu”) in view of Ros (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/00247083 A1) (hereinafter “Ros”) and optionally Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”), and wherein claim 13 is evidenced by Sei (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0130320 A1) (hereinafter “Sei”).
Regarding claims 1-4, 10-11, and 13, Zhu teaches a continuous fiber reinforced plastic honeycomb panel for replacing traditional metal and wood [0004] by providing a thermoplastic core member comprising a plurality of continuously corrugated blisters (protruding portions) that comprises grooves formed between blisters in the same direction, wherein the blisters are selectively melt-bonded/fused to upper and lower thermoplastic skins without the use of adhesives [0047], wherein the upper and lower skins comprise continuous carbon fibers [0047] and may also comprise a foam (porous resin) layer [claim 2].
However, the honeycomb-like panel is not taught to comprise a metal thin film formed on at least one surface of the faceplate between the faceplate and the shaped core member.
Ros teaches a modification on a honeycomb structural element that provides insulation properties [0006], wherein a faceplate having a metallic layer on only one side is necessary, wherein the metallic coating is provided for barrier properties and minimized heat transfer due to the thinness of the coating [0033-0035] that metallized side of the flat element preferably at least faces the cavities of the shaped core [0086, 0120-0122, 0128], wherein especially when performing ultrasonic welding the coating can be interrupted during or after application to provide the fused portions between the flat faceplate and the shaped core member [0120-0122].
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an exemplary embodiment of a heat insulating structural panel [Ros], or to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (Thierry).
Regarding claims 6-7, Ros further teaches the cells formed by the shaped core can be filled with a gas [0029] or with latent heat storage material [0032].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a filling member comprising latent heat storage material to cavities formed between the faceplate and the shaped core. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a device capable of storing thermal energy at low loss with many repetition cycles over extended periods of time [Ros].
Further regarding claim 13, the carbon fibers are not explicitly taught as being formed in a nonwoven. However, it is well-known in the art that continuous fibers can be provided separately or in sheet form, which can be nonwoven, woven, or knitted and therefore could easily be chosen from a limited number of choices based on processing and structural needs/requirements. Alternatively, Sei evidences this teaching with nearly identical structure, wherein the carbon fiber reinforcing can be braided into a mesh shape (woven/knit), a plurality of laminated layers having continuous unidirectional fibers (unidirectional nonwoven) or in a random array nonwoven (nonwoven mat) [0058-0059].
Regarding claim 16, the skin and core layers can be selected based on flame retardant grade (i.e. containing extinguishant).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Ros and optionally Yanai OR Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Zhou (CN 104275836 A) (hereafter “Zhou”) OR Peccetti (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0147809 A1) (hereinafter “Peccetti”).
Regarding claim 2, in the event that the blisters/protruding portions are only extending in one direction:
Zhou teaches a dimple-shaped honeycomb hollow (pathways for gas/air flow within) board, which does not use adhesives like the conventional prior art which also includes latticed grid honeycomb boards [0004], and thus the (thermo)plastic continuously dimpled/corrugated middle core is selectively melt-bonded (fused) to the upper and lower flat (face)plates [0011, 0047], wherein since the dimples/protruding portions extend from both surfaces such that it is easier to press and bond, allows each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [0019, 0049].
OR
Peccetti teaches a honeycomb sandwich sheet or panel having a plurality of blisters extending from both sides of the sides/faces of the sheet selectively thermowelded to flat outer skins to provide a symmetrical structure that does not require stress relieving/tempering steps, lowering the potential for curling, increases mechanical properties, acoustic and thermal insulation, and crush/load resistance, allowing the increase of forming depth for both popular and less thermoformable materials [0006-0010, 0012, 0018-0021, 0025-0026, 0052, 0057, 0072-0074, 0080].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide protruding portions on both sides of the core member. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide easier pressing and bonding, allowing each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [Zhou] OR to provide a symmetrical structure that does not require stress relieving/tempering steps, lowering the potential for curling, increases mechanical properties, acoustic and thermal insulation, and crush/load resistance, allowing the increase of forming depth for both popular and less thermoformable materials [Peccetti].
Claims 8 & 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Ros and optionally Yanai OR Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Takano (JP 2009-051016 A) (hereinafter “Takano”), wherein claim 15 is further in view of Orologio (U.S. Patent No. 6,322,873 B1) (hereinafter “Orologio”).
Regarding claims 8 and 15-16, Zhu teaches an interior decoration material comprising fiber reinforced skins selectively thermally welded to a honeycomb-like corrugated core, but does not teach the faceplate or core as comprising phase change material and/or extinguishant.
Takano teaches a thermoplastic resin sheet that contains blended therein a latent heat storage phase change material for the purpose of cooling or heat insulation usable as an interior decorative and/or building board material [0001, 0026-0027, 0046], wherein the resin may also be impregnated into a fibrous reinforcing base material, such as a nonwoven fabric [0064-0065], wherein the resin and heat storage material may additionally comprise a flame retardant [0032-0033].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a latent heat storage material and/or an extinguishant blended with the resin for the core and/or faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide cooling and heat insulation to maintain temperatures within a desired range for a long period of time and also increase fire retardancy.
Further regarding claims 7 and 15, Orologio teaches an improved heat insulation laminate, wherein an extinguishant is contained in the cavities defined between the faceplate and the core layer (abstract), wherein known flame retardants tend to migrate and leach out of a resin surface layer during the life thereof and its presence can also reduce the efficiency of heat sealing (col. 3, lines 9-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to alternatively or additionally provide extinguishants in the cavities formed between the shaped core member and faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to replace or reduce/minimize the amount of extinguishant provided in the core and faceplate layers in order to decrease/prevent migration and leaching of the extinguishant out of a resin surface layer during the life thereof and to increase the efficiency of heat sealing/welding (col. 3, lines 9-20).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Ros and optionally Yanai OR Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, optionally further in view of Kamo (JP 2003-170515 A) (hereinafter “Kamo”) AND/OR Enderich et al. (DE 102010005808 A1) (hereinafter “Enderich”).
Regarding claim 9, Zhu teaches the structure may be used as a decorative/trim member, but does not teach a plurality of layers. However, providing more than one core layers is merely a duplication of parts, wherein it has been held that a “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.
Alternatively, Kamo teaches that the thickness of hollow structured boards is easily changed via the use of multiple core members [0029, 0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a plurality of core members. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an easy method of increasing or decreasing thickness of the hollow plate.
AND/OR
Enderich teaches vehicle energy absorbing elements usable in an interior of a vehicle comprising sandwich honeycomb and/or S-shaped (corrugated) panels [0001-0005, 0008-0010, 0015], wherein the wave height and/or wavelength of the adjacent waves of a corrugation could be changed from layer to layer to provide different thicknesses and desired deformation capacities for corresponding projected loads [0011, 0013-0014, 0025-0026, 0029-0030].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a plurality of core layers. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an easy method of increasing or decreasing thickness of the hollow plate [Kamo] AND/OR to provide different thicknesses and desired deformation capacities for corresponding projected loads [Enderich].
Claims 1-4 & 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Aitharaju et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0214021 A1) in view of Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”), wherein claim 13 is evidenced by or in view of Sei (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0130320 A1) (hereinafter “Sei”)
Regarding claims 1-3, and 10-11, Aitharaju teaches an impact protection structure for protecting the housing of battery packs comprising a first layer comprising a continuous carbon fibers embedded in thermoplastic/polymer matrix (All Figs. [150/250/350]) [0025, 0027, 0035] bonded a honeycomb or hollow continuous corrugated/waveform (extending from both sides) third layer (All Figs. [154/254/354]) comprising discontinuous or continuous carbon/glass/Kevlar fibers embedded in a thermoplastic matrix via compression/overmolding forming a selectively fused portion connecting the layers [0025, 0029, claim 5], wherein an additional fourth layer also comprising continuous carbon fibers embedded in thermoplastic/polymer matrix may be attached opposite to the first layer [0008, 0011] (All Figs. [364]).
In the event that a selectively fusing portion is not taught as claimed: Sei teaches a plastic laminated plate having air layers (flow paths) inside [0004], wherein the thermoplastic corrugated core, such that waves/protruding portions alternately arranged on both sides, is selectively melt-bonded/welded (fused), without using adhesives, to the thermoplastic plate material [0011, 0012-0015, 0025-0026, 0067, 0089], wherein both the core and the plate are formed from fiber-reinforced thermoplastic [0011-0013, 0016, 0023, 0057, 0067], wherein the fibers are carbon fibers in the form of a nonwoven sheet [0011, 0017, 0023, 0057-0059], and wherein an additional plate may be heat-welded to the lower surface of the core for additional strength/rigidity [0049, 0052, 0103, Fig. 2], wherein the plastic laminated plate is intended to replace steel/metal sheets of such as in vehicles and provides a lightweight, thin, and high flexural rigidity characteristic [0055, 0128]. It would have been obvious to and motivated for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to look to the art of compression overmolding demonstrating a fiber reinforced thermoplastic plate layer and corrugated layer by a selectively fused portion.
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR to provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (Thierry).
Regarding claim 4, the corrugations/waveform may have breaks in at least the peak portions orthogonal to the direction of formation (Fig. 2 at [158]).
Regarding claim 5, one of the outer (faceplate) layers comprises a surface coating of aluminum plating [0026].
Regarding claim 12, at least the faceplate is fabricated with multiple through-holes [0027].
Regarding claim 13, the carbon fibers of the first (or fourth) layer are not taught as being formed in a nonwoven. However, it is well-known in the art that continuous fibers can be provided separately or in sheet form, which can be nonwoven, woven, or knitted and therefore could easily be chosen from a limited number of choices based on processing and structural needs/requirements. Alternatively, Sei evidences/teaches this with nearly identical structure, wherein the carbon fiber reinforcing can be braided into a mesh shape (woven/knit), a plurality of laminated layers having unidirectional fibers (unidirectional nonwoven) or in a random array nonwoven (nonwoven mat) [0058-0059].
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aitharaju in view of Yanai or Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, (further) in view of Zhou (CN 104275836 A) (hereafter “Zhou”) OR Peccetti (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0147809 A1) (hereinafter “Peccetti”).
In the event that the corrugated layer of Aitharaju is not considered as extending from both sides, Aitharaju also teaches an impact protection structure comprising a lattice/grid honeycomb sandwich panel [Fig. 5].
Zhou teaches a dimple-shaped honeycomb hollow (pathways for gas/air flow within) board, which does not use adhesives like the conventional prior art which also includes latticed grid honeycomb boards [0004], and thus the (thermo)plastic continuously dimpled/corrugated middle core is selectively melt-bonded (fused) to the upper and lower flat (face)plates [0011, 0047], wherein since the dimples/protruding portions extend from both surfaces such that it is easier to press and bond, allows each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [0019, 0049].
OR
Peccetti teaches a honeycomb sandwich sheet or panel having a plurality of blisters extending from both sides of the sides/faces of the sheet selectively thermowelded to flat outer skins to provide a symmetrical structure that does not require stress relieving/tempering steps, lowering the potential for curling, increases mechanical properties, acoustic and thermal insulation, and crush/load resistance, allowing the increase of forming depth for both popular and less thermoformable materials [0006-0010, 0012, 0018-0021, 0025-0026, 0052, 0057, 0072-0074, 0080].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide protruding portions on both sides of the core member. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide easier pressing and bonding, allowing each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [Zhou] OR to provide a symmetrical structure that does not require stress relieving/tempering steps, lowering the potential for curling, increases mechanical properties, acoustic and thermal insulation, and crush/load resistance, allowing the increase of forming depth for both popular and less thermoformable materials [Peccetti].
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 10-12, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0313130 A1) (hereinafter “Eulitz”) in view of Tschismar (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0004808 A1) (hereinafter “Tschismar”) and optionally Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”);
OR
Claims 1-4, 6, 10-12, & 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reichert (DE 102013015837 A1) (hereinafter “Reichert”) in view of Eulitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0313130 A1) (hereinafter “Eulitz”), Tschismar (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0004808 A1) (hereinafter “Tschismar”) and optionally Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”).
Regarding claims 1, 3-4, 6, 10-12, and 16, Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electrically powered vehicle that is lightweight in comparison to metallic materials [0003, 0008], comprising one or more walls as comprising a two- or multi-layer sandwich structure, wherein at least each of the layers comprises a thermoplastic and one of the layers comprises a plurality of linear (continuous corrugation) and/or punctiform connections such that a selectively welded/integrally bonded connection (Fig. 2B [18]) is formed between the core (first) and faceplate (second) layers, wherein at least one of the layers is fiber-reinforced [0014, 0026, 0029-0030, 0043], wherein the connections provide at least one sandwich cavity that allows for a cooling medium to be stored (filling member) and/or circulated [0005-0007, 0044-0045, 0050], wherein the faceplates may further comprise selectively formed holes [0046] and may also comprise an organosheet comprising a plastic material with conductive filler for fire protection [0032, 0049].
OR
Regarding claims 1-4, 6, 10-12, and 15-16, Reichert teaches a battery housing for battery cells in an electric vehicle such as lithium ion batteries [0001-0003] non-metal such that it is a lightweight yet impact resistant sandwich structure [0008] comprising a plurality of continuous corrugations in a core and at least one flat covering/skin layer (faceplate) attached thereto [0004-0005], wherein the corrugations in the core between the facings provide a plurality of channels that allow cooling and/or heated air and extinguishant to be stored (filing member) and/or circulated [0006, 0010, 0014], wherein at least one of the core and skin/cover layer adjacent the batteries may have openings to provide flowpaths for the air conditions and/or tempering the battery cells with air.
However, Reichert does not teach the material forming the sandwich layers to be thermoplastic or the selectively formed fusing portion connecting the core and skin layer(s).
Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electrically powered vehicle that is lightweight in comparison to metallic materials [0003, 0008], comprising one or more walls as comprising a two- or multi-layer sandwich structure, wherein at least each of the layers comprises a thermoplastic and one of the layers comprises a plurality of linear (continuous corrugation) and/or punctiform connections shaped by thermoforming such that a selectively welded/integrally bonded connection (Fig. 2B [18]) is formed between the core (first) and faceplate (second) layers, wherein at least one of the layers is fiber-reinforced [0014, 0026, 0029-0030, 0043], wherein the connections provide at least one sandwich cavity that allows for a cooling medium to be stored and/or circulated [0005-0007, 0044-0045, 0050].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a sandwich panel comprising layers of (fiber-reinforced) thermoplastics connected by a selectively formed fusing portion formed between the core providing the spacing of the layers and the layers. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to the art for crash resistant, lightweight replacement materials for metal (steel or aluminum) meeting the requirements for stiffness, flexibility, pollutant emission, and fire protection [Eulitz].
Further regarding claim 1, neither teaches a metal thin film formed on at least one surface of the faceplate, wherein the metal thin fil is positioned between the faceplate and core member.
Tschismar teaches a housing for a battery in an electrically operated vehicle, wherein the housing is formed to provide a double wall housing having a plurality of ducts, pores, and/or openings to allow the flow of air and/or fluid, which may further comprise thermally insulating porous bodies [0013, 0017], wherein the walls may comprise metal or plastic, wherein the latter preferably has metal layers provided on (internal and/or external) wall sections to improve heat transfer [0013].
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR to provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (Thierry).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry OR Reichert in view of Eulitz, Tschismar, and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Guo et al. (CN 111600057 A) (hereinafter “Guo”) and Pratt (U.S. Patent No. 3,668,052) (hereinafter “Pratt”).
Both Eulitz and Reichert/Eulitz teach continuous corrugations on a core layer that bends to form grooves extending orthogonal to the direction of shaping but in the event that do not teach the grooves/slits as claimed.
Guo teaches composite material housing for a battery of an electric vehicle such that the composite material has a curved/arc shape [0005, 0007, 0009-0010] for maximization of visual and space-saving requirement [0004-0005].
Pratt teaches a corrugated core sandwich panel of reinforced plastics (col. 1, lines 5-13), wherein the corrugated core is bonded to first and optionally second facesheets, wherein the peaks and/or valleys of the corrugated core comprise transverse (orthogonal to direction of forming thereof) slits/slots such that the member can be formed in an arcuate shape.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel comprising at least one faceplate and a core comprising a plurality of protruding portions as continuous corrugations to provide slits/grooves in at least one of the peak or valley portions orthogonal to the direction of shaping thereof. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the battery housing as curved for maximization of visual and space-saving requirement [Guo] which is allowed along the corrugations due to the slits as claimed [Pratt].
Claims 2, 9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Remmele et al. (DE 102010055614 A1) (hereinafter “Remmele”), wherein claim 2 is even further in view of Zhou (CN 104275836 A) (hereafter “Zhou”) OR Peccetti (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0147809 A1) (hereinafter “Peccetti”);
OR
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reichert in view of Eulitz, as applied to claim 1, further in view of Remmele et al. (DE 102010055614 A1) (hereinafter “Remmele”).
Regarding claim 9, Eulitz (OR Reichert in view of Eulitz) teaches a battery housing for an electric vehicle as comprising a composite sandwich panel comprising at least one thermoplastic core layer having protrusions formed as corrugations thermally welded to an adjacent thermoplastic faceplate layer(s) to provide one or more cavities for storage and/or circulation of a cooling medium. However, more than one core member is not taught.
Remmele teaches a battery housing for electric vehicles [0002] as comprising plastic with at least two spaced layers forming at least one cavity therein, wherein multiple parallel cavities can be formed within a cavity [0011], or multiple cavities can be formed sequentially such as two cavities by three spaced layers [0024], wherein at least one cavity comprises flowing cooling liquid [0007] and/or at least one cavity comprises an extinguishant [0009], wherein the multiple cavities comprises a cavity with flowing cooling liquid and another cavity with extinguishing agent [0024-0027]. Applied to the layered structures of Eulitz OR Reichert in view of Eulitz at least one additional structured core would be needed to provide an additional sequential cavity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form a plurality of core members. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide multiple functions separated into different cavities such as one for cooling the batteries and the other for stopping problems such as fires that erupt from the area of the battery cells and optionally melts the most adjacent layer [Remmele; 0026].
Regarding claim 2, protruding portions on both sides is not taught by Eulitz.
Zhou teaches a dimple-shaped honeycomb hollow (pathways for gas/air flow within) board, which does not use adhesives like the conventional prior art which also includes latticed grid honeycomb boards [0004], and thus the (thermo)plastic continuously dimpled/corrugated middle core is selectively melt-bonded (fused) to the upper and lower flat (face)plates [0011, 0047], wherein since the dimples/protruding portions extend from both surfaces such that it is easier to press and bond, allows each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [0019, 0049].
OR
Peccetti teaches a honeycomb sandwich sheet or panel having a plurality of blisters extending from both sides of the sides/faces of the sheet selectively thermowelded to flat outer skins to provide a symmetrical structure that does not require stress relieving/tempering steps, lowering the potential for curling, increases mechanical properties, acoustic and thermal insulation, and crush/load resistance, allowing the increase of forming depth for both popular and less thermoformable materials [0006-0010, 0012, 0018-0021, 0025-0026, 0052, 0057, 0072-0074, 0080].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide protruding portions on both sides of the core member to connect first and third outer layers forming two sequential cavities. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide easier pressing and bonding, allowing each layer to be restrained allowing forces to be evenly distributed, and having an increased bearing capacity when subject to lateral forces [Zhou] OR to provide a symmetrical structure that does not require stress relieving/tempering steps, lowering the potential for curling, increases mechanical properties, acoustic and thermal insulation, and crush/load resistance, allowing the increase of forming depth for both popular and less thermoformable materials [Peccetti].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry OR Reichert in view of Eulitz, Tschismar, and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 6 above, (further) in view of Giere et al. (DE 102009050510 A1) (hereinafter “Giere”).
Regarding claim 7, Eulitz (OR Reichert in view of Eulitz) teaches a battery housing for an electric vehicle as comprising a composite sandwich panel comprising at least one thermoplastic core layer having protrusions formed as corrugations thermally welded to an adjacent thermoplastic faceplate layer(s) to provide one or more cavities for storage and/or circulation of a cooling medium. While Eulitz teaches this cooling medium may be phase changing [0010], it is unclear if this is a latent heat storage material.
Giere teaches a composite sandwich element comprising plate-shaped outer layers connected to each other by a core that may comprise a curved structure such that it forms at least one chamber therein [0002, 0005-0006, 0016, 0019, 0029], wherein the device is usable in a vehicle as battery housing, such as lithium-ion type batteries [0039] with a temperature control element comprising latent heat storage materials comprising a phase change material [0003, 0005, 0015-0017, 0019] which may be additionally supported by an active cooling unit [0014, 0021], such that the device is very light, having good mechanical properties, and the battery/power source is able to be operated at an optimal temperature in a very specific range, independent of external temperatures [0012, 0037-0039].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel to provide a latent heat storage material as the filling member/cooling medium as a replacement of or in addition to an active cooling/heating circuit. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the panel as battery housing for an electric vehicle as a lightweight yet strong structure with temperature control properties [Giere].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry OR Reichert in view of Eulitz, Tschismar, and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Nomura et al. (JP 2018-160419 A) (hereinafter “Nomura”).
Eulitz (OR Reichert in view of Eulitz) teaches a battery housing for an electric vehicle as comprising a composite sandwich panel comprising at least one thermoplastic core layer having protrusions formed as corrugations thermally welded to an adjacent thermoplastic faceplate layer(s) to provide one or more cavities for storage and/or circulation of a cooling medium.
Regarding claim 8, the thermoplastic materials forming the faceplate and/or the core are not taught to comprise latent heat storage materials.
Nomura teaches a battery case an electric motor vehicle, such as a lithium-ion battery [0001-0002], wherein it is necessary to keep the battery at a temperature within an appropriate range [0003-0004], wherein the case comprises one or more walls comprising a thermoplastic resin containing a phase change material [0011, 0026-0034, 0037, 0046], which can be further supported by an active cooling and/or heating system circulated therethrough [0012, 0018, 0039, 0043-0045].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel to provide a latent heat storage material to the thermoplastic material core and/or faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the panel as battery housing for an electric vehicle as a lightweight yet strong structure with temperature control properties [Nomura].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Matas et al. (GB 2553537 A) (hereinafter “Matas”) as evidenced by Yin et al. (CN 107933005 A) (hereinafter “Yin”).
Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electric vehicle as comprising a composite sandwich panel comprising at least one thermoplastic core layer having protrusions formed as corrugations thermally welded to an adjacent thermoplastic faceplate layer(s) to provide one or more cavities.
Regarding claims 12, selectively formed holes through the faceplate and/or core layer (for reasons other than attachment) are not taught.
Matas teaches a battery box for a battery pack of an electric vehicle, wherein the lid, sidewalls, and floor are formed from a lightweight honeycomb thermoplastic core structure and thermoplastic skins bonded to opposing sides of the core, which may be any form that provides air spaces/cavities between the skins (pg. 13, line 35 – pg. 14, line 8), wherein Yin evidences that a composite sandwich material battery case of comprising cores structures of ribs (honeycomb) and corrugated structures are relatable/corresponding/equivalent or replacement sandwich core structures [0015, 0030], suitable for composite plastic layers replacing the conventional metallic battery box materials, and the floor (pg. 2, lines 25-34), and the sidewalls and floor panel further comprise vent holes selectively extending therethrough (faceplates and/core) to provide fluid communication for cooling and/or heating (pg. 7, lines 4-7 & pg. 12, line 18 – pg. 13, line 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form a metal film on a skin/faceplate and/or holes in at least one of the faceplate or skin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide flow paths entirely through the core and into the battery containment area for an externally derived circulation of cooling and/or heated air/fluid [Matas].
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry OR Reichert in view of Eulitz, Tschismar, and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Da Costa (WO 2020/099752 A1) (hereinafter “Da Costa”).
Eulitz (OR Reichert in view of Eulitz) teach(es) a battery housing for an electric vehicle as comprising a composite sandwich panel comprising at least one thermoplastic core layer having protrusions formed as corrugations thermally welded to an adjacent thermoplastic faceplate layer(s), wherein at least one of the core and/or skin layer(s) is fiber reinforced.
Regarding claim 13, however structure of the fiber reinforcement being nonwoven is not taught.
Da Costa teaches a thermoplastic housing for a battery in a motor vehicle [0003-0004] improved over the conventional metallic and thermoset housing [0007-0008], wherein Da Costa teaches that thermoplastic resins are impregnated into glass or carbon fibers in the form of a sheet (well-known in the art to be nonwoven, woven, or knitted) [0009, 0022], at least one of the sheets comprising an outer skin/faceplate layer comprising a fire barrier such as a thermoplastic film with fire-resistant additives (extinguishant, like the organosheet of Eulitz), a layer of aramid, or a metal layer/film [0013-0017, 0055-0056].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form a metal thin film formed on a faceplate and/or carbon fiber nonwoven reinforced faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a known fiber type in a conventionally known form.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eulitz in view of Tschismar and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Reichert (DE 102013015837 A1) (hereinafter “Reichert”), wherein claim 14 is even further in view of Hu et al. (CN 103730616 A) (hereinafter “Hu”);
OR claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reichert in view of Eulitz, Tschismar, and optionally Thierry, as applied to claim 1, further in view of Hu et al. (CN 103730616 A) (hereinafter “Hu”).
Regarding claims 14-15, Eulitz (OR Reichert in view of Eulitz) teaches a battery housing for an electric vehicle as comprising a composite sandwich panel comprising at least one thermoplastic core layer having protrusions formed as corrugations thermally welded to an adjacent thermoplastic faceplate layer(s) to provide one or more cavities for storage and/or circulation of a cooling medium, wherein Reichert teaches and makes obvious/motivates the use of an extinguishant stored (or circulated) between the core and the skin(s) to suppress fires.
However, the material of a stored extinguishant is not taught to comprise a sound absorbing member.
Hu teaches a corrugated sandwich panel of battery box for an electric vehicle [0002-0004] comprising upper and lower outer panels having a corrugated core fixed therebetween for impact and collision absorption [0014], wherein the core space is filled with a filler for fire prevention such as sponge or foam material that prevents the battery from burning or exploding (extinguishant) and can also absorb vibration energy from vehicle bumps and other vibration conditions (inherently sound/noise).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel for a battery box to provide a stored extinguishant that was also beneficial for vibration (sound/noise) absorption. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a multifunctional filling.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 9-14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of copending Application No. 18/276,330, optionally in view of Yanai (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0029777 A1) (hereinafter “Yanai”) OR Thierry (GB 2496739 A) (hereinafter “Thierry”).
Regarding claim 1, ‘330 teaches a substantial duplicate of claim 4, except the metal thin film taught to be between the faceplate and the core member. However, the metal film is depicted to be between a shaped core member and the faceplate (Fig. 8 [16]).
In the event that the internal placement of the metal film between the shaped core member and a faceplate is not properly motivated:
Yanai teaches an insulation structure comprising a base member (Fig. 1 [10]) having a low emissivity metallized surface (Fig. 1 [12]) [0016-0017] facing the cavity forming side of a structured core layer that is attached either directly via heat-sealing/welding or indirectly via gluing [0008, 0010, 0020-0021], wherein the internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [0003, 0007].
OR
Thierry teaches a multilayer heat and acoustic insulation (panel structure) comprising at least one thermoplastic sheet shaped corrugated core member(s) comprising at least one sheet shaped thermoplastic film (faceplate), which can also be porous (pg. 12, lines 5-9) that is bonded by glue points or ultrasonic welding forming fusing portions (pg. 9, lines 1-4) forming a series of protruding points extending from both surfaces defining a plurality of channels to allow for circulation (flow path) (pg. 2, line 35 – pg. 3, line 15), wherein the metallized (faceplate) surface facing the channels forms a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a metal thin film between a flat faceplate and a shaped core structure that comprises fusing portions also therebetween. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide an exemplary embodiment [‘330], or to provide an internal low emissivity metallized surface is protected from dust and corrosion, which happens to externally placed metallized coatings of the prior art [Yanai] OR provide the flat metallized surface facing the air flow channels as a wall with a very strong reflectivity or low emissivity which is an advantage in terms of insulating properties of the product (pg. 2, lines 23-29).
Claims 2-3, 6, and 9-14 are substantial duplicates of claims 2-11 of ‘330.
Claim 4 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of copending Application No. 18/276,330 in view of Eulitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0313130 A1) (hereinafter “Eulitz”) AND/OR Reichert (DE 102013015837 A1) (hereinafter “Reichert”), Guo et al. (CN 111600057 A) (hereinafter “Guo”), and Pratt (U.S. Patent No. 3,668,052) (hereinafter “Pratt”).
‘330 teaches a panel structure including a sheet-shaped core member having a thermoplastic property and including a plurality of protruding portions (formed as continuous corrugations) on at least one surface, a sheet shaped faceplate that is disposed on the plurality of protruding portions and has a thermoplastic property, and a fusing portion that is selectively formed between the faceplate and the plurality of protruding portions and joins the core member and the faceplate to each other.
Regarding claim 4, ‘300 does not teach the continuous corrugations to comprise slits/grooves in at least one of the peak or valley portions orthogonal to the direction of shaping thereof.
Reichert teaches a battery housing for battery cells in an electric vehicle such as lithium ion batteries [0001-0003] non-metal such that it is a lightweight yet impact resistant sandwich structure [0008] comprising a plurality of continuous corrugations in a core and at least one facing/skin layer attached thereto [0004-0005], wherein the corrugations in the core between the facings provide a plurality of channels that allow cooling and/or heated air and extinguishant to be stored and/or circulated [0006, 0010, 0014].
AND/OR
Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electrically powered vehicle that is lightweight in comparison to metallic materials [0003, 0008], comprising one or more walls as comprising a two- or multi-layer sandwich structure, wherein at least each of the layers comprises a thermoplastic and one of the layers comprises a plurality of linear (continuous corrugation) and/or punctiform connections such that a welded/integrally bonded connection is formed between the core (first) and faceplate (second) layers, wherein at least one of the layers is fiber-reinforced thermoplastics [0014, 0026, 0029-0030, 0043], wherein the layers provide at least one wall cavity that allows for a cooling medium to be stored and/or circulated [0005-0007, 0044-0045, 0050].
Guo teaches composite material housing for a battery of an electric vehicle such that the composite material has a curved/arc shape [0005, 0007, 0009-0010] for maximization of visual and space-saving requirement [0004-0005].
Pratt teaches a corrugated core sandwich panel of reinforced plastics (col. 1, lines 5-13), wherein the corrugated core is bonded to first and optionally second facesheets, wherein the peaks and/or valleys of the corrugated core comprise transverse (orthogonal to direction of forming thereof) slits/slots such that the member can be formed in an arcuate shape in a direction extending along the peaks.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel comprising at least one faceplate and a core comprising a plurality of protruding portions as continuous corrugations to provide slits/grooves in at least one of the peak or valley portions orthogonal to the direction of shaping thereof. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the panel as battery housing for an electric vehicle as a lightweight yet impact resistant structure [Reichert and/or Eulitz], which may be curved for maximization of visual and space-saving requirement [Guo] which is allowed along the corrugations due to the slits as claimed [Pratt].
Claim 7 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of copending Application No. 18/276,330 in view of Giere et al. (DE 102009050510 A1) (hereinafter “Giere”), optionally Eulitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0313130 A1) (hereinafter “Eulitz”).
‘330 teaches a panel structure including a sheet-shaped core member having a thermoplastic property and including a plurality of protruding portions on at least one surface, a sheet shaped faceplate that is disposed on the plurality of protruding portions and has a thermoplastic property, and a fusing portion that is selectively formed between the faceplate and the plurality of protruding portions and joins the core member and the faceplate to each other, wherein a filling material is disposed in a space between the core member and the faceplate.
Regarding claim 7, ‘330 does not teach a latent heat storage material as the filling member.
Giere teaches a composite sandwich element comprising plate-shaped outer layers connected to each other by a core that may comprise a curved structure such that it forms at least one chamber therein [0002, 0005-0006, 0016, 0019, 0029], wherein the device is usable in a vehicle as battery housing, such as lithium-ion type batteries [0039] with a temperature control element comprising latent heat storage materials comprising a phase change material [0003, 0005, 0015-0017, 0019] which may be additionally supported by an active cooling unit [0014, 0021], such that the device is very light, having good mechanical properties, and the battery/power source is able to be operated at an optimal temperature in a very specific range, independent of external temperatures [0012, 0037-0039].
Furthermore, Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electrically powered vehicle that is lightweight in comparison to metallic materials [0003, 0008], comprising one or more walls as comprising a two- or multi-layer sandwich structure, wherein at least each of the layers comprises a thermoplastic and one of the layers comprises a plurality of linear (continuous corrugation) and/or punctiform connections such that a welded/integrally bonded connection is formed between the core (first) and faceplate (second) layers, wherein at least one of the layers is fiber-reinforced thermoplastics [0014, 0026, 0029-0030, 0043, 0046], wherein the layers provide at least one wall cavity that allows for a cooling medium to be stored and/or circulated [0005-0007, 0044-0045, 0050].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel to provide a latent heat storage material as the filling member. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the panel as battery housing for an electric vehicle as a lightweight yet strong structure with temperature control properties [Giere], wherein layers of the sandwich panel are thermoplastic such that the battery housing layers are weldable to form an integral connection is preferred for a lightweight option [Eulitz].
Claim 8 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/276,330 in view of Nomura et al. (JP 2018-160419 A) (hereinafter “Nomura”), and optionally Eulitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0313130 A1) (hereinafter “Eulitz”).
‘330 teaches a panel structure including a sheet-shaped core member having a thermoplastic property and including a plurality of protruding portions on at least one surface, a sheet shaped faceplate that is disposed on the plurality of protruding portions and has a thermoplastic property, and a fusing portion that is selectively formed between the faceplate and the plurality of protruding portions and joins the core member and the faceplate to each other, wherein a filling material is disposed in a space between the core member and the faceplate.
Regarding claim 8, ‘330 does not teach a latent heat storage material as the faceplate or the core material.
Nomura teaches a battery case an electric motor vehicle, such as a lithium-ion battery [0001-0002], wherein it is necessary to keep the battery at a temperature within an appropriate range [0003-0004], wherein the case comprises one or more walls comprising a thermoplastic resin containing a phase change material [0011, 0026-0034, 0037, 0046], which can be further supported by an active cooling and/or heating system [0012, 0018, 0039, 0043-0045].
Furthermore, Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electrically powered vehicle that is lightweight in comparison to metallic materials [0003, 0008], comprising one or more walls as comprising a two- or multi-layer sandwich structure, wherein at least each of the layers comprises a thermoplastic and one of the layers comprises a plurality of linear (continuous corrugation) and/or punctiform connections such that a welded/integrally bonded connection is formed between the core (first) and faceplate (second) layers, wherein at least one of the layers is fiber-reinforced thermoplastics [0014, 0026, 0029-0030, 0043, 0046], wherein the layers provide at least one wall cavity that allows for a cooling medium to be stored and/or circulated [0005-0007, 0044-0045, 0050].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel to provide a latent heat storage material to the thermoplastic material core and/or faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the panel as battery housing for an electric vehicle as a lightweight yet strong structure with temperature control properties [Nomura], wherein layers of the sandwich panel are thermoplastic such that the battery housing layers are weldable to form an integral connection is preferred for a lightweight option [Eulitz].
Claims 15-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/276,330 in view of Reichert (DE 102013015837 A1) (hereinafter “Reichert”), and optionally Eulitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0313130 A1) (hereinafter “Eulitz”).
‘330 teaches a panel structure including a sheet-shaped core member having a thermoplastic property and including a plurality of protruding portions on at least one surface, a sheet shaped faceplate that is disposed on the plurality of protruding portions and has a thermoplastic property, and a fusing portion that is selectively formed between the faceplate and the plurality of protruding portions and joins the core member and the faceplate to each other, wherein a filling material is disposed in a space between the core member and the faceplate.
Regarding claims 15-16, an extinguishant is not taught to be provided as filled in between the core member and the faceplate and/or contained in the core member or faceplate.
Reichert teaches a battery housing for battery cells in an electric vehicle such as lithium ion batteries [0001-0003] non-metal such that it is a lightweight yet impact resistant sandwich structure [0008] comprising a plurality of continuous corrugations in a core and at least one facing/skin layer attached thereto [0004-0005], wherein the corrugations in the core between the facings provide a plurality of channels that allow cooling and/or heated air and extinguishant to be stored and/or circulated [0006, 0010, 0014], wherein the layers of the sandwich element should be made of fire-retardant materials (extinguishant) to suppress fire [0011].
Furthermore, Eulitz teaches a battery housing for an electrically powered vehicle that is lightweight in comparison to metallic materials [0003, 0008], comprising one or more walls as comprising a two- or multi-layer sandwich structure, wherein at least each of the layers comprises a thermoplastic and one of the layers comprises a plurality of linear (continuous corrugation) and/or punctiform connections such that a welded/integrally bonded connection is formed between the core (first) and faceplate (second) layers, wherein at least one of the layers is fiber-reinforced thermoplastics [0014, 0026, 0029-0030, 0043, 0046], wherein the layers provide at least one wall cavity that allows for a cooling medium to be stored and/or circulated [0005-0007, 0044-0045, 0050].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention forming a sandwich panel to provide an extinguishant to as a filling material between the (thermoplastic) core or the faceplate and/or contained within the (thermoplastic) core or the faceplate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to form the panel as battery housing for an electric vehicle as a lightweight yet impact resistant structure [Reichert and/or Eulitz], wherein layers of the sandwich panel are thermoplastic such that the battery housing layers are weldable to form an integral connection is preferred for a crash-resistant reinforced sandwich structure [Eulitz].
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 JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Frank J Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 February 10th, 2026