DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 30-32, 34-40, 43-58 have been considered but are moot due to amendment. Prior art elements previously applied will be commented on below.
Previously applied 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections of office action 05/07/26 are overcome by amendment. Amendment to claim 30 introduces a new 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection that is found below.
Applicant argues “outlet opening” narrowly to mean the outlet that transfers through the case, but the instant claim does not recite such limitation. Other outlets exist within the battery module, between each individual cell, whereby fluid is capable of flowing into the region out of the region thereby having interpretation to an ‘outlet’ under broadest reasonable interpretation. Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate in scope with the claims as recited.
Examiner notes that the instant claim refers to inlets and outlets without substantially more. In the instant specification Figure 11, we can see an inlet/outlets that exist through the casing, inlet/outlets between each individual cells, and inlet/outlet of the pathway from the vertical direction to the horizontal direction within the cell. As argued, it appears applicant has a narrower interpretation of which inlets and outlets they intend to claim, however the claims do not have such specificity to be commensurate. Argued scope may not have been specifically searched or presented as rejection due to the claim language presented. Applicant is encouraged to contact examiner for an interview with proposed claims if they believe this would help advance prosecution.
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 30-32, 34-40, 43-58 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.
Claim 30 recites the limitation "the module housing". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is indefinite if the recitation of “the module housing” is a typo and should have antecedent basis to the “at least one module casing”, is a second module casing of the directly cooled battery module, or refer to an assembly of sub-contained cell packets between an individual cell packet and the module casing. For the purposes of examination, any of these interpretations of “module housing” will be permitted as they are as likely as the other to be the applicant’s intended claimed scope. A module housing for a module casing could be interpreted as the vehicle frame which holds the battery module and all its features there within.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 30-32, 34-40, 43-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thomas (DE 10-2018-133004).
Claim 30: Thomas teaches an electrical storage device (2) with housing (6) and a plurality of cells (8) having a spacer (10) arranged on a cell wall (12) and a dielectric heating medium for controlling the temperature of the cell, spacer, and wall via a flow channel (16) to flow a heat medium that contacts the cells [Abstract]. A directly cooled battery module (2) includes a module casing that has cells therein [Fig 2]. The cells (8) have a first and second end face in opposite sides of the battery in the vertical direction [Fig 3]. In a transverse direction to the vertical direction, the stacking direction “S” comprises successively arranged battery cells into applicant’s cell packet [Fig 3-4]. An inlet (18) and outlet (20) are capable of receiving a cooling liquid and discharging the cooling liquid from the interior of the module and therefore meet the structural limitations of the applicant’s fluid supply device.
PNG
media_image1.png
633
765
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Thomas teaches a flow and fluid channels on the top, bottom, and between cells [Fig 4] and therefore meets the claimed limitations; the fluid supply device includes its pluming and has a portion on the side of the cell pack comprising either the first end faces or second end faces, depending on what portion of the flow and fluid channel is being considered. Tomas teaches flow channels to have outlets and these locations have a height relative to the vertical axis [Fig 4]; under a first interpretation, outlets exist between the cells that outlet into channels for all cells to feed into whereby the individual outlets are within a projection of the faces, alternatively, the outlet nozzle (20) comprises a location that is within the projection of the faces if the ‘module housing’ is interpreted to be an external casing for the larger system such as a vehicle frame.
Claim 31-32: Thomas an outermost frame to comprise an in flow (18) and outlet (20) whereby the in flow is located near the underside of the battery module casing as depicted [Fig 3] whereby fluid channels run along the first end face and second end face and between the cells, and thus faces, whereby these fluid channels are within the battery module [Fig 4]. The flow extends through an end plate of the module casing and extends along the vertical axis parallel with the battery cells [Modified Fig 3-4]. An outlet opening of pathways between cells is located between the inlet opening and connecting elements of the battery cells, additionally, the outlet (20) is positioned, when viewed along the vertical axis, between the inlet opening and the connecting element of the batteries [Modified Fig 3-4].
Claim 34: Thomas teaches the system to have a distribution line relative to the plurality of cells and therefore an inlet opening capable of supplying fluid at the at least one opening per electrical connection element of the battery cells [Fig 4]. The electrical connecting element is connected, even if additional features are present, to the first or second face and is in communication with inlets to have contact with fluid and electrical connection elements [Modified Fig 3-4].
Alternatively, Thomas teaches each cell to have an outlet in the distribution line per battery cell whereby the fluid supply device would comprise a plurality of outlet openings [Fig 4].
Claim 35: Instant claim recited “configured for” which is interpreted to be functional language – MPEP 2114. There is no recitation of specifics pertaining to HOW the targeted distribution is to be performed and therefore a simple on/off with direct or indirect thermal influencing medium onto the recited location of the system is sufficient to read on the functional limitation presented.
Thomas teaches a fluid supply device that provides a thermal management fluid cooling liquid at the battery cell two faces of the cell packet and over electrical connection elements of the cells of the packet [Fig 3, 9, 13, 20, 23].
Claim 36: Thomas teaches a nozzle (28) and assembly CONFIGURED TO distribute a cooling liquid to the cell [Fig 5; Pg 17 Paragraph 2]. Instant claim includes “configured to” language, prior art teaches all positively recited structural features and is therefore capable of operating in the same manner as claimed.
Claim 37: Thomas teaches at least one fluid channel disposed within the module casing and positioned between cells of the battery such that a first end face and second end face of the battery cells of the cell packet are in fluid and thermal communication thereto [Fig 3, 5, 12-13, 20].
Claim 38: Thomas teaches a channel structure that extend from one face to the other whereby the channels are interpreted to be continuous blind channels in at least some regions [Fig 12, 38]. The flow and channels exists between battery cells.
Alternatively, a porous material (120) is used to be in contact with the cells [Fig 42].
Claim 39-40: Instant claim 30 and dependent claims lay weight to a first and second side but do not tie these features to other attributes of the cell – it is possible to interpret the top surface comprising electrical components to a first or second face whereby the claim language is met by merely changing the term utilized to refer to it. Additionally, the claims are to functional limitations as they attempt to define the structural scope of the instant claim through an intended use. The prior art teaches all positively recited structural features and therefore meets the limitations of the instant claimed invention.
Thomas teaches inlet openings which allow cooling liquid to be directed toward the first end faces such that cooling liquid can escape from the inlet opening onto the first end faces and the outlet openings are disposed on the opposite side of the cell with respect to the vertical axis [Fig 4].
Claim 43: Thomas teaches the module casing to comprise a wall extending around the vertical axis of the cell packet and interpreted to be a frame of the module [Fig 2-3].
Claim 44: Thomas teaches a module casing to have a wall extending around the vertical axis of the cell packet with at least one substantially closed upper side on a side of the cell packet comprising a first end faces of the battery cells and a fluid supply device on a side of the cell packet in communication with the second end faces and an outlet opening (20) on the upper side of the case [Fig 2-4].
Claim 45: Thomas teaches an outlet (20) which has an inherent cross-section. The system of Thomas is capable of being operated in a manner to meet the functional limitations of the instant claim. Thomas teaches the drain to be configured to point down toward gravity [Fig 2] whereby pressure of the fluid would drop in conditions where it is draining versus filling. The instant claim is being claimed by intended use – pumps and suctions are capable of being applied in various locations of the system to meet the claimed intended use as would be known in the art, the specific limitations of the claim do not positively recite structural features which differentiate the structure of the instant claim from that of the prior art.
Claim 46: Thomas teaches the cells to be filling bodies in the interior of the module casing as heat medium is capable of accumulating between the cells up to a certain level [Pg 5 Para 4].
Claim 47: Thomas teaches the battery module to comprise a cell connector unit (96) and integrally attached to features of the fluid supply device [Fig 2-3].
Claim 48: Thomas teaches electrical connecting elements of the battery and distribution lines having an inlet that are capable of distributing over the battery cells in the stacking direction [Fig 3].
Claim 49: Thomas teaches a module casing having an end face with elements of fluid supply thereon and a plurality of inlet openings over the batter cells in the stacking direction [Fig 3].
Claim 50: Thomas teaches fluid supplying features in contact with the module casing on the first end face side having a height of electrical connection elements of the battery cells that engage the thermal management system and baffles [Fig 7-10].
Alternatively, Thomas teaches distribution lines having a plurality of inlet openings wherein the inlet openings are distributed in the stacking direction of the cell [Fig 3].
Claim 51: Thomas teaches the cells to utilize immersion temperature control with a liquid heat medium via the flow channels [Pg 16-17]. The battery housing having a fluid-tight lower part would be needed to enable this feature of immersion – leaking water out of the system would not be commensurate in scope with the teaching of the prior art.
The prior art teaches a collecting chamber [Pg 16 Para 2] that is fluidly connected to the fluid inlet and at least one fluid outlet of the fluid supply device [Fig 3-4].
Claim 52: Thomas teaches the lower part of the housing to comprise integrated fluid channels (24) [Fig 6]. It is envisioned that operation and intended use of the system could have these channels interpreted to meet a label of “suction channels” as claimed; the instant claim does not provide structural weight to the limitation of suction channels that would differentiate the structural features of the prior art teaching channels in the lower housing portion.
Claim 53: Thomas teaches a battery housing to comprise fluid conducting elements disposed along the vertical axis [Fig 3, 5-6, 12].
Claim 54: Thomas teaches the cells to utilize immersion temperature control with liquid heat medium via flow channels [Fig 3; Pg 16-17] whereby the filling bodies of the cell are disposed in an interior of the batter housing between adjacent cells [Fig 3, 5, 23].
Claim 55: Thomas teaches a fluid inlet and outlet connected via a closed fluid circuit [Fig 3] that comprises at least a heat exchanger – the fluid.
Claim 56: Thomas teaches a battery for use in a vehicle [Fig 1] whereby at least one switching component is integrated with the battery housing to start and stop the operation of the cooling thermal function of the element. This is an inherent structural element required to operate the invention of Thomas.
Claim 57, 58: Thomas teaches a nozzle embodiment whereby the module casing has a lower part for collecting cooling fluid that has freely escaped from the battery, wherein the lower part of the housing comprises openings for the cooling liquid to enter [Fig 5; Pg 17 Para 2].
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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights