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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on page 5, lines 6 – 9, “one or more first housing protrusion parts” should be pluralized appropriately to allow for one part or more than one parts, e.g., --one or more first housing protrusion part or parts-- or --one or more first housing protrusion part(s)--; on page 5, line 9, “protrusion parts” should read --first housing protrusion part or parts-- or --first housing protrusion part(s)--; on page 5, line 10 and line 19, “protrudes” should read --protrude--; on page 5, lines 15 – 18, “one or more second housing protrusion parts” should be pluralized appropriately to allow for one part or more than one parts, e.g., --one or more second housing protrusion part or parts-- or --one or more second housing protrusion part(s)--; on page 7, line 24, “on or below” presumably should read --on or above--; on page 12, line 16, “second lower plate” should read --first lower plate--; on page 17, lines 15 – 16, “to be adjacent to both sides facing each other at the bottom part 210a of the housing 200, respectively” is unclear but presumably should read “to be adjacent to both sides 210b at the bottom part 210a of the housing 200”; on page 18, line 5, “similarly on the opposite side” should read --similarly to the opposite side--; on page 19, line 20, “through between” should read --between--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 9, 10, 12, 13, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: claims 9, 10, 12, and 13 use the plural “parts” to refer to positively recited elements of which there may be “one or more”, i.e., one or more first housing protrusion parts (claims 9 and 10), one or more second housing protrusion parts (claims 12 and 13), one or more first heat sink protrusion parts (claim 10), and one or more second heat sink protrusion parts (claim 13); the term “parts” should reflect the possibility of one part e.g., --part or parts-- or --part(s)--. The final limitation of claim 14 reads “the second refrigerant flow path formed” but should read -- the second refrigerant flow path--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9, 10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 9 and 12 positively recite one or more housing protrusion parts. They further specify that a refrigerant injection port is connected to one of the housing protrusion parts and a refrigerant discharge port is connected to the other of the housing protrusion parts. In the case that only one housing protrusion part is present, it is unclear what “other” housing protrusion part the refrigerant discharge port would be connected to. For the purposes of prosecution, the examiner will interpret claims 9 and 12 to allow both the refrigerant injection and discharge ports to connect to a single housing protrusion part when only one is present. Claims 10 and 13 are rendered indefinite by virtue of their dependency on claims 9 and 12, respectively.
Claims 12 and 13 positively recite one or more second housing protrusion parts and claim 13 further recites one or more second heat sink protrusion parts. Claims 9 and 10 positively recite one or more first housing protrusion parts and claim 10 further recites one or more first heat sink protrusion parts. However, claims 12 and 13 do not depend on claims 9 or 10, instead claim 13 depends on claim 12 which depends on claim 1. Since claim 1 does not recite a first housing protrusion part or first heat sink protrusion part, it is unclear what the housing protrusion parts and heat sink protrusion parts recited in claims 12 and 13 are second to. For the purposes of prosecution, in claims 12 and 13 the examiner interprets the term “second” when included in “second housing protrusion parts” or “second heat sink protrusion parts” to be purely cosmetic and to not a require first housing protrusion parts or first heat sink protrusion parts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (CN 110718723 A), hereinafter “Jin”, in view of Chung et al. (US 2020006823 A1), hereinafter “Chung”, and Tanjou et al. (US 20030215702 A1), hereinafter “Tanjou”, wherein an English language machine translation of Jin is used and cited herein.
Regarding claim 1, Jin teaches a battery (corresponding to the claimed battery cell stack) (Jin, [0003]) which can be seen to include a plurality of battery units (corresponding to the plurality of battery cells) (Jin, Fig. 2-3) sitting on top of a heat exchanger having an upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom part of the housing) (Jin, Fig. 2-3);
the heat exchanger further includes a lower end plate (Jin, [0030]) where a plurality of flow paths are formed (where the two halves of the lower end plate having the depicted flow paths correspond to the claimed first and second heat sinks and will be referred to as “cooling portions” hereinafter) (Jin, [0033], Fig. 2, 5, and depicted in the examiner annotated figure below) and are depicted located under the upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom part of the housing) with each flow path (corresponding to the claimed first and second refrigerant flow paths) shown located between their respective lower end plate half and the upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom part of the housing) and wherein both flow paths are separated from each other as claimed (Jin, Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
894
990
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jin does not teach a complete battery module with a housing for the battery cell stack or the claimed alignment of battery cells wherein each of the plurality of battery cells include electrode leads protruding in mutually opposite directions.
However, Chung teaches a battery module (corresponding to the claimed battery module) including a case (corresponding to the claimed housing) configured to protect the battery cells (Chung, [0029]). Tanjou teaches a secondary cell module in which the positive electrode terminal and negative electrode terminal (corresponding to the claimed electrode leads) are placed so that they extend in the direction opposite to each other (corresponding to the claimed electrode leads protruding in mutually opposite directions) from the outer wrapper of the envelope in order to form a combination cell by efficiently connecting many secondary cells in series with each other (Tanjou, [0021]). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add the case of Chung to the battery and heat exchanger of Jin and to substitute the battery terminal alignment of Tanjou for the battery terminal alignment of Jin, thereby providing a sturdy battery module as taught by Chung (Chung, [0029]) with a more efficiently connected stack of battery cells as taught by Tanjou ([Tanjou, [0021]).
PNG
media_image2.png
706
971
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the battery module suggested by Jin modified by Chung and Tanjou would include the heat exchanger oriented such that each cooling portion (corresponding to the claimed first and second heat sinks) was located along a direction parallel to the direction in which the leads protrude as depicted in the examiner annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image3.png
894
1003
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 6 and 11, the cooling portions (corresponding to the claimed first heat sink) (as depicted in the examiner annotated figure below) can be seen as portions of Jin’s lower end plate (corresponding to the claimed first and second lower plates) (Jin, Fig. 2, depicted in the examiner annotated figure below), which is joined to the upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom part of the housing) with flow paths (corresponding to the claimed first and second recessed parts) formed by embossing (corresponding to the claimed first and second recessed parts being recessed in a lower direction from the first and second lower plates, respectively) (Jin, [0037]).
PNG
media_image4.png
558
991
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9 and 12, as interpreted based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issues identified above, Jin further depicts two parts of the upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom of the housing) extending out from under the battery (corresponding to claim 9’s one or more first housing protrusion parts and claim 12’s one or more second housing protrusion parts) such that they protrude from a portion of the bottom part of the housing (depicted in the examiner annotated figure below);
an inflow pipe (corresponding to the claimed refrigerant injection ports) connected to one of the parts extending from under the battery (corresponding to the claimed refrigerant injection port connected to one of the first or second housing protrusion parts) and an outflow pipe (corresponding to the claimed refrigerant discharge ports) connected to the other part extending from under the battery (corresponding to the claimed refrigerant discharge port connected to one of the first or second housing protrusion parts) (depicted in the examiner annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
706
971
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 10 and 13, as interpreted based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issues identified above, Jin further depicts both ends of the heat exchanger, including a portion of the first cooling portions as depicted in the examiner annotated figure below, extending out from under the battery (corresponding to the claimed one or more first and second heat sink protrusion parts) such that it protrudes from a first side of the first cooling portion (corresponding to the claimed first and second heat sink) toward the extending portion of Jin’s upper connecting plate (corresponding to the claimed first and second housing protrusion parts).
PNG
media_image6.png
894
990
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin, Chung, and Tanjou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mack et al. (US Patent No. 10,199,631), hereinafter “Mack”, and Asai et al. (US 2011206948 A1), hereinafter “Asai”.
Regarding claim 3, Jin modified by Chung and Tanjou suggests the battery module according to claim 1.
Modified Jin does not suggest a first and second thermal conductive resin layer located between a lower surface of the battery cell stack and the bottom part of the housing.
However, Mack teaches a first and second thermal transfer layer (corresponding to the claimed first and second thermal conductive layers) made of thermally conductive materials, which may be positioned between the bottoms of the battery cell stacks and an interior surface of the battery module housing (corresponding to the claimed positioning of the thermal conductive resin layers between a lower surface of the battery cell stack and the bottom part of the housing) (Mack, col. 7 P. 4 – col. 8 P. 1) such that they facilitate a transfer of thermal energy from the bottoms of the cells to thermal management features of the battery module such as a heat sink (Mack, col. 8 P. 1). Asai teaches battery cells thermally connected to a cooling plate through an electrically insulating layer (corresponding to the claimed thermal conductive resin layer) made of an electrically insulating and thermally conducting material such as silicon resin (resin composition of the thermal conductive resin layers ) in order to efficiently transfer heat between the battery cells and the cooling plate while preventing the battery cells from electrically connecting to the cooling plate resulting in a short circuit (Asai, [0066]). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add the first and second thermal transfer layers of Mack over the first and second cooling portions of Jin’s heat exchanger and to substitute the silicon resin material of Asai for Mack’s thermally conductive material, providing a first and second thermal transfer layer capable of transferring heat from the bottom of the battery cells to the cooling portions as taught by Mack (Mack, col. 8 P. 1) while electrically insulating the battery cells from the cooling portions as taught by Asai (Asai, [0066]).
PNG
media_image7.png
894
990
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, the thermal transfer layers (corresponding to the claimed first and second thermal conductive resin layer) in the battery module suggested by Jin modified by Chung, Tanjou, Mack, and Asai are oriented over Jin’s heat exchangers as discussed above, placing them separate from each other along a direction parallel to a direction in which the electrode leads protrude as depicted in the examiner annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image8.png
894
990
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, in the battery module suggested by Jin modified by Chung, Tanjou, Mack, and Asai, the first and second cooling portions (corresponding to the claimed first and second heat sinks) are located beneath (corresponding to their claimed location at a portion corresponding to the first and second thermal conductive resin layers) the first and second thermal layers (corresponding to the claimed first and second thermal conductive resin layers) and where being below the first and second thermal layers positions them in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the bottom part of Jin’s upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom part of the housing) as depicted in the examiner annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image9.png
894
991
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin, Chung, and Tanjou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jansen et al. (US 2019280265 A1), hereinafter “Jansen”.
Regarding claim 7, Jin modified by Chung and Tanjou suggests the battery module according to claim 1.
Modified Jin does not suggest a thermal conductive resin layer located between a lower surface of the battery cell stack and the bottom part of the housing.
However, Jansen teaches an epoxy layer (corresponding to the claimed thermal conductive resin layer) disposed between the bottom surface of the battery cell assembly and the lower housing (corresponding to the claimed thermal conductive resin layer’s location between a lower surface of the battery cell stack and the bottom part of the housing) (Jansen, [0048] – [0049], Fig. 6) in order to secure the cell assembly within the housing and to facilitate heat transfer (Jansen, [0049]). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add the epoxy layer of Jansen to the battery module suggested by modified Jin between Jin’s battery and heat exchanger, in order to secure the battery and facilitate heat transfer to the heat exchanger as taught by Jansen (Jansen, [0049]).
Regarding claim 8, the battery module suggested by Jin modified by Chung, Tanjou, and Jansen places Jansen’s epoxy layer (corresponding to the claimed thermal conductive resin layer) below Jin’s battery which is located above the two cooling portions (corresponding to the claimed heat sinks) of the heat exchanger. Thus, the epoxy layer according to the battery module suggested by modified Jin covers the regions over both of the cooling portions (corresponding to the claimed first and second regions where the first and second heat sinks are located, respectively) from on top of Jin’s upper end plate (corresponding to the claimed bottom of the housing) and thereby in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the upper end plate.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin, Chung, and Tanjou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Keon et al. (KR 20110130313 A), hereinafter “Keon”, wherein an English machine translation of Keon is used and cited herein.
Regarding claim 14, Jin modified by Chung and Tanjou suggest the battery module of claim 1 where the battery module corresponds to the claimed battery pack and Jin further teaches a cooled fluid (corresponding to the claimed refrigerant) (Jin, [0030]).
Modified Jin does not suggest first pack refrigerant supply or discharge tubes or second pack refrigerant supply or discharge tubes.
However, Keon teaches a coolant inlet tube (corresponding to the claimed first and second pack refrigerant supply tubes) for introducing coolant into the battery unit and a coolant outlet tube (corresponding to the claimed first and second pack refrigerant discharge tubes) through which coolant flows from the battery unit where the coolant inlet tube and the coolant outlet tube are connected to the battery cooling tube (corresponding to the claimed heat sinks) (Keon, [0019]) which cools the battery (Keon, [0021]). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add a coolant inlet tube and a coolant outlet tube taught by Keon to each of the cooling portions of the heat exchanger suggested by modified Jin, such that each of the heat exchanger’s inflow pipes was connected to a coolant inlet tube to introduce coolant into the battery cooling unit (Keon, [0019]) and each of the heat exchanger’s outlet pipes was connected to a coolant outlet tube which coolant from the battery cooling unit can flow from (Keon, [0019]) thereby providing a cycle for circulating the coolant (Keon, [0019]).
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 3-4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,525,664 in view of Yoon (US 2011262794 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Claim 7 of the 664 patent recites a battery module comprising a cell stack including a plurality of battery cells and a module frame (corresponding to the claimed housing) accommodating the cell stack (see claim 1 of the 664 patent);
a bottom part of the module frame (corresponding to the claimed bottom part of the housing) comprising a first area (corresponding to the claimed first thermal conductive resin layer), a second area (corresponding to the claimed second thermal conductive resin layer), and a third area in which thermally conductive resin layers are formed (corresponding to the claimed first and second thermal conductive resin layers being between a lower surface of the battery cell stack and the bottom part of the housing) (see claim 1 of the 664 patent);
electrode leads of the plurality of battery cells (corresponding to the claimed electrode leads) protrude toward the front surface and rear surface (corresponding to the claimed electrode leads protruding in mutually opposite directions).
The 664 patent does not claim the cooling structure of the instant claim 1 including a first and second heat sink.
However, Yoon teaches a pack cooling system including two refrigerant circulation pipes (whose lower portions corresponds to the claimed first and second heat sinks) which supply refrigerant from opposite sides of the battery pack (corresponding to the claimed first and second flow paths) so that the battery cells may be effectively cooled in a balanced state (Yoon, [0096]). The upper portions of the two pipes (corresponding to the claimed bottom of part of the housing) are shown to be flat surfaces extending the full width of the battery cells (corresponding to the claimed first and second refrigerant flow paths being located between the first heat sink and the bottom part of the housing) (Yoon, [0095], Fig. 5) and the lower portions of the refrigerant circulation pipes are located below the upper portion of the refrigerant circulation pipes (corresponding to the claimed first and second heat sinks being located under a bottom part of the housing). Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the refrigerant circulation pipes of Yoon for the bottom part of the module frame claimed by the 664 patent in order provide a cooling system which could cool the battery cells effectively in a balanced state as taught by Yoon (Yoon, [0096]).
Regarding claim 4, claim 7 of the 664 patent further claims the first area (corresponding to the claimed first thermal conductive resin layer) and the second area (corresponding to the claimed second thermal conductive resin layer) are located at opposite ends spaced apart from each other (corresponding to the claimed first and second thermal conductive resin layers being located separately) and the first area, the third area, and the second area are arranged sequentially along a direction parallel to a direction in which the electrode leads protrude (corresponding to the claimed first and second thermal conductive resin layers’ arrangement along a direction parallel to a direction in which the electrode leads protrude) (see claim 1 of the 664 patent).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Katayama et al. (US 2012121962 A1) teaches multiple cooling channels under opposite sides of a battery pack. Obasih et al. (US 20130273829 A1) teaches multiple cooling portions under a single battery array Berels et al. (US Patent No. 10,611,234) teaches multiple cooling channels. Pyzza et al. (US 20140377592 A1) teaches one or more thermal plates. Jiang (WO 2020177609 A1) teaches multiple thermally conductive gaskets and multiple liquid cooling components.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMRAN S SAUND whose telephone number is (571)270-0845. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1177. 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.
/SIMRAN S. SAUND/Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights