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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 8-13, in the reply filed on 06/19/2023 is acknowledged.
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) 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,508,998 B2 (Suzuki) in view of US 11,679,267 B1 (Meskens).
Suzuki discloses, referring primarily to figures 1-6, an electronics layout for use in a battery pack including a housing (11, 13) and a plurality of battery cells (20), the electronics layout comprising: at least one printed circuit board (40) including electronics mounted thereon (col. 4, lines 20-45); and at least one thermally conductive wing (30b) coupled to and extending from the at least one printed circuit board, the at least one thermally conductive wing operable to spread heat generated by the electronics throughout the implantable battery pack (col. 7, line 45 – col. 8, line 20). Suzuki does not specifically state that the battery pack is an implantable battery pack [claim 8]. However, Suzuki teaches that the battery pack may be for mobile phones (col. 1, lines 15-25). Additionally, it is well known in the art that batteries for implantable medical devices and mobile phones may be interchangeably adapted for either purpose as evidenced by Meskens (col. 3, line 35 – col. 4, line 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to use the battery pack in the invention of Suzuki in an implantable medical device as is known in the art and evidenced by Meskens. The motivation for doing so would have been to have a medical device with improved temperature detection (Suzuki col. 2, lines 10-20).
Additionally, the modified invention of Suzuki teaches, wherein the at least one printed circuit board comprises a first printed circuit board including power conversion electronics and battery charging electronics mounted thereon, and wherein the first printed circuit board is located proximate a center of the implantable battery pack (Suzuki col. 4, lines 20-45) [claim 9], wherein the at least one thermally conductive wing comprises: a first thermally conductive wing (30b) extending from a first edge of the first printed circuit board; and a second thermally conductive wing (30a) extending from a second, opposite edge of the first printed circuit board [claim 10].
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Meskens as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of US 2013/0297899 (Jones).
The modified invention of Suzuki discloses the claimed invention as described above with respect to claim 8 except modified Suzuki does not specifically teach that the at least one thermally conductive wing is copper [claim 11]. However, Suzuki teaches that the wing is formed of a thermally conductive laminate (Suzuki col. 5, lines 55-65). It is well known in the are to comprise a thermally conductive laminate of copper in electric devices as evidenced by Jones ([0040]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to use copper as the material of the thermally conductive laminate in the modified invention of Suzuki. The motivation for doing so would have been to use a known material with high thermal conductivity.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Meskens as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of US 2011/0186265 A1 (Zheng).
The modified invention of Suzuki discloses the claimed invention as described above with respect to claim 8 except modified Suzuki does not specifically teach that the at least one thermally conductive wing comprises at least one solder connection for electrically coupling the at least one printed circuit board to the plurality of battery cells. However, Suzuki teaches that the wing and the circuit board are connected by a thermally conductive adhesive. (Suzuki col. 7, lines 10-20). It is well known in the art to use solder as a thermally conductive adhesive as evidenced by Zheng ([0003]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to use solder as the thermally conductive adhesive in the modified invention of Suzuki. The motivation for doing so would have been to use a known material for heat transfer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 13 states the limitation “a third printed circuit board connected to the second printed circuit board by a second flexible thermally conductive connector; and a fourth printed circuit board connected to the third printed circuit board by a third flexible thermally conductive connector, wherein the electronics layout is positionable in a folded configuration in which the second printed circuit board is stacked between the first printed circuit board and the fourth printed circuit board.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY C NORRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1932. The examiner can normally be reached 7:15-15:15 M-F.
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, Timothy Thompson can be reached at (571)272-2342. 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.
JEREMY C. NORRIS
Examiner
Art Unit 2847
/JEREMY C NORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights