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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09-04-2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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) 1-7, 12, 14, 23-24, 26, 33, 36, 40, 43, 50, 52-53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2012/0224326 hereinafter Kohlberger in view U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2011/0020676 hereinafter Kurosawa.
Regarding Claim 1, Kohlberger teaches a modular system [100] comprising: energy storage modules [104], wherein each energy storage module comprises a plurality of battery cells; and a thermal management system (cooling fluid connection) [206, 412], wherein the thermal management system comprises a cooling duct, an inlet-side fluid connection, and an outlet-side fluid connection, wherein the inlet-side is in fluid communication with the outlet-side via the cooling duct, and wherein the cooling fluid connection structure provides a way for supplying and removing the cooling fluid conducted through the cooling plate (paragraphs 45-59, see figures 1-9).
Kohlberger teaches a cooling fluid connection structure that comprises a cooling duct (see figure 8) but does not specify that the cooling duct is a flexible and inflatable duct.
However, Kurosawa teaches a battery unit [10] that comprises a refrigerant pipe (cooling duct) constructed by using a flexible tube (paragraph 187). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form a cooling duct made of flexible tube before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Kurosawa discloses that such configuration can effectively cool the battery cells (paragraph 187).
Regarding Claims 2-7, the combination teaches that the thermal management system (cooling fluid connection) comprises a plurality of distribution conduits attached to the cooling duct (see figures 1-9 of Kohlberger).
Regarding Claims 12 and 14, the combination teaches that the thermal management system (cooling fluid connection) comprises attachment means having a seal (see figures 1-8 of Kohlberger).
Regarding Claims 23-24 and 26, the combination teaches that the thermal management system (cooling fluid connection) comprises a cooling duct that is a flexible tube, and the energy storage modules has a spacer disposed therebetween (see figures 1-8 of Kohlberger and paragraph 187 of Kurosawa).
Regarding Claims 33 and 36, the combination teaches a modular system [100] that comprises a plurality of energy storage modules [104] arranged therein (see figures 1-3 of Kohlberger).
Regarding Claims 40 and 43, the combination teaches a modular system [100] that comprises a plurality of energy storage modules [104] and an electrical connection structure for providing electrical connections between the modules (paragraph 46, see figures 2-3 of Kohlberger).
Regarding Claims 50, 52, and 53, the combination a modular system [100] that comprises a plurality of energy storage modules [104] that are mechanically connected to one another via a support structure (see figures 1-9 of Kohlberger) and the fluid connection structure is provided between adjacent modules inlet-side fluid delivery means of each battery module is in fluid communication with the inlet-side fluid delivery means of at least one other battery module (see figure 9).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSEI K AMPONSAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571)272-8760. 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.
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752