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 .
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 7, 8, 14, 19, and 20 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 7 and 14 each recite “the third wall” without antecedent basis. It appears Applicant intended claim 7 to depend from claim 5 rather than claim 1, and this is how it will be construed for examination purposes. Claim 14 will be construed as depending from claim 2, and additionally requiring all the additional elements of claim 5.
Claim 8 recites “the second intermediate space” without antecedent basis. This claim will also be construed as if it depends from claim 5 for examination purposes. Like claim 8, claims 19 and 20 recite “the second intermediate space” without antecedent basis. For examination purposes, these claims will be considered to depend from claims 2 and 3 respectively, while also incorporating the limitations recited in claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-10, 12, 14, 17, 18, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0021270 to Kumar (“Kumar”).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 9 and 10, Kumar discloses a battery cell (104) with a cooling element (122). The batter cell is prismatic and the cooling unit abuts a second major face (118) of the prismatic battery cell. Kumar at paragraph [0026]. The cooling element (122) is bounded by a pair of spaced apart layers (124), one of which abuts the second major face (118) of the battery cell, the other of which is spaced apart from, but parallel to, that first of the spaced apart layers. Id. at paragraph and Fig. 3. A plurality of webs (126) that extend between the two spaced apart layers thereby forming cooling passages between the two spaced apart layers. Id. Each of the two spaced apart layers are formed of a first material that is a metal of relatively high thermal conductivity such as aluminum, and a second material that is an insulating plastic polymer of relatively low thermal conductivity. Id. at paragraph [0031]. Thus, the first wall of the two spaced apart layers is formed of a first material having a higher thermal conductivity than the second material of which the second wall is formed.
In assembling a battery module from this individual battery cell/cooling unit pair, a plurality of such units are stacked together in the thickness direction of the units such that a cooling unit associated with one cell is between the one cell and a second cell of the plurality of cells.
Further regarding claims 5-7, 12, 14, 17, and 18 Kumar further discloses providing a third spaced apart layer with associated webs such that cooling channels are formed between the innermost first spaced apart layer and the intermediate second spaced apart layer, and between the intermediate second spaced apart layer and the outermost third spaced apart layer. All of these spaced apart layers are made of the same first metal and second plastic/polymer material, such that the metal of the innermost first spaced apart layer is still considered to correspond to the recited first material and the material of the outermost third spaced apart layer is considered to correspond to the recited third material.
Further regarding claims 8 and 19, the cooling channels are open on a first side of the cooling cell, then extend across the battery cell and are open on the opposite second side of the cooling cell. Thus, one of the open sides allows coolant gas to supplied to the cooling channels and the opposed open side allows coolant to be discharged from the cooling channel. This is true for all groups of channels, including those between the first and second spaced apart layers and those between the second and third spaced apart layers. Accordingly, the inlet openings of the channels between the first and second spaced apart layer correspond to the recited first coolant supply connection, the inlet openings of the channels between the second and third spaced apart layers correspond to the recited second coolant supply connection, and the opposed respective coolant gas outlet openings correspond to the first coolant discharge and second coolant discharge.
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.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 11, 13, 15, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar. Kumar is applied as described above. Further regarding claims 3, 4, 11, 13, 15, 16, and 20, although Kumar doesn’t expressly state whether units are stacked such that cooling units and battery cells alternate, or instead, two cooling units are stacked abutting one another and two cells are stacked abutting one another, the Office finds that because the purpose of Kumar is to effectively remove heat form the battery cells, the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have chosen symmetrical alternating cell/cooling unit arrangement in order to most efficiently utilize the cooling units for cooling cells. Alternatively, given there are only two possible arrangements, the Office finds the person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reason to try the alternating arrangement. Such an alternating arrangement leads to the innermost first spaced apart layer of a first cooling cell abutting a first battery cell, and the outermost second or third of the spaced apart layers of the first cooling cell abutting an adjacent second battery cell.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT P MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (571)270-7531. The examiner can normally be reached 9am to 5pm 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/WYATT P MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1727