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 Status
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Drawings
Figures 3 and 5 are objected to for illegibility, as they are not legible at their current resolution in black and white renderings, and should be adjusted to improve clarity. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rich et al. (US 9673494B2) in view of Yamamoto (US 10967609B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Rich discloses a battery pack comprising: a battery cell (col. 4, lines 25-31); and an enclosure comprising: a first portion (26, see annotated Fig. 3) and a plurality of walls that extend perpendicularly from the first portion (28, see annotated Fig. 3); a second portion connected to the plurality of walls to form a body enclosing the battery cell (30, see annotated Fig. 3), with a layer of a second material covering at least a portion of at least one of the first portion, the second portion, and one of the plurality of walls (36, see annotated Fig. 4), the second material comprising aluminum, an aluminum alloy, copper, a copper alloy, graphite, graphene, or a combination thereof (36, see annotated Fig. 4), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first portion, the second portion, and the plurality of walls are a first material comprising stainless steel, nor that the second material has a greater thermal conductivity than that first material.
Yamamoto discloses clad materials suitable for a chassis that also serves as a conductive member for batteries (col. 2, lines 26-28), the clad material including a first material comprising stainless steel (col. 2, lines 18-21) and a layer of a second material comprising copper or a copper alloy (col. 2, lines 18-21) wherein the second material has a greater thermal conductivity than the first material (col. 7, lines 46-50). Yamamoto teaches use of this material for the combined mechanical strength and corrosion resistance of the stainless steel layer and the electrical and thermal conductivity of the copper or copper alloy (col. 2, lines 21-26). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have substituted the first and second materials of the battery enclosure disclosed by Rich for the clad material taught by Yamamoto to employ the combined mechanical and conductive properties of that clad material.
PNG
media_image1.png
1484
1431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A: Annotated Figures 3 and 4 from Rich et al. (US9673494B2)
Regarding Claim 2, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery pack of Claim 1. Rich further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is configured to capture and diffuse heat across a length of the layer of the second material (col. 5, lines 15-26).
Regarding Claim 3, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery pack of Claim 1. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the layer of second material is connected to the first portion, the second portion, or one of the plurality of walls via at least one of an adhesive, a weld, or a clad (abstract).
Regarding Claim 4, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery pack of Claim 1. Yamamoto further discloses wherein a layer of the first material covering the layer of second material. (col. 2, lines 36-39).
Regarding Claim 6, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery pack of Claim 1. Rich further discloses wherein the enclosure further comprises at least one additional portion that extends from the first portion or the second portion in a direction parallel to the first portion or the second portion (110, see Fig. 10), and the least one additional portion configured to capture heat generated by a source external to the battery pack. (col. 7, lines 37-44).
PNG
media_image2.png
881
1429
media_image2.png
Greyscale
B: Annotated Figures 10 from Rich et al. (US9673494B2)
Regarding Claim 7, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery pack of claim 6. Rich further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is configured to further capture the heat from the at least one additional portion (110 – see annotated Fig. 10) and diffuse the heat across a length of the layer of the second material (col. 5, lines 15-26; and col. 7, lines 37-44).
Regarding Claim 8, Rich discloses a portable electronic device (col. 2, lines 39-43), comprising: a plurality of components powered by a battery pack (col 2, lines 45-64); and a device enclosure enclosing the battery pack (col. 7, lines 33-37), the battery pack comprising a battery cell (col. 4, lines 25-31); and an enclosure comprising: a first portion (26, see annotated Fig. 3) and a plurality of walls that extend perpendicularly from the first portion (28, see annotated Fig. 3); a second portion connected to the plurality of walls to form a body enclosing the battery cell (30, Fig. 3); a layer of a second material covering at least a portion of the first portion, the second portion, and one of the plurality of walls (36, see annotated Fig. 4) where the second material comprises aluminum, an aluminum alloy, copper, a copper alloy, graphite, graphene, or a combination thereof (36, see annotated Fig. 4), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first portion, the second portion, and the plurality of walls are a first material comprising stainless steel, nor that the second material has a greater thermal conductivity than that first material.
Yamamoto discloses clad materials suitable for a chassis that also serves as a conductive member for batteries (col. 2, lines 26-28), the clad material including a first material comprising stainless steel (col. 2, lines 18-21) and a layer of a second material comprising copper or a copper alloy (col. 2, lines 18-21) wherein the second material has a greater thermal conductivity than the first material (col. 7, lines 46-50). Yamamoto teaches use of this material for the combined mechanical strength and corrosion resistance of the stainless steel layer and the electrical and thermal conductivity of the copper or copper alloy (col. 2, lines 21-26). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have substituted the first and second materials of the battery enclosure disclosed by Rich for the clad material taught by Yamamoto to employ the combined mechanical and conductive properties of that clad material.
Regarding Claim 9, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the portable electronic device of Claim 8. Rich further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is configured to capture and diffuse heat across a length of the layer of the second material (col. 5, lines 15-26).
Regarding Claim 10, Rich discloses in view of Yamamoto discloses the portable electronic device of Claim 9. Rich further discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of components generates heat (104, see annotated Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 11, Rich in view of Yamamoto disclose the portable electronic device of Claim 8. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is connected to the first portion, the second portion, or the plurality of walls via at least one of an adhesive, a weld, or a clad (abstract).
Regarding Claim 12, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the portable electronic device of Claim 8. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the enclosure further comprises a layer of the first material covering the layer of the second material (col. 2, lines 36-39).
Regarding Claim 14, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the portable electronic device of Claim 8. Rich further discloses wherein the enclosure further comprises at least one additional portion that extends from the first portion or the second portion in a direction parallel to the first portion or the second portion (110, see annotated Fig. 10), the at least one additional portion configured to capture heat generated by a source external to the battery pack (col. 7, lines 37-44).
Regarding Claim 15, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the portable electronic device of Claim 8. Rich further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is configured to further capture the heat from the at least one additional portion (110 – see annotated Fig. 10) and diffuse the heat across a length of the layer of the second material (col. 5, lines 15-26; and col. 7, lines 37-44).
Regarding Claim 16, Rich discloses a battery enclosure comprising: a first portion (26, see annotated Fig. 3) and a plurality of walls that extend perpendicularly from the first portion (28, see annotated Fig. 3); a second portion connected to the plurality of walls to form a body enclosing the battery cell (30, see annotated Fig. 3), with a layer of a second material covering at least a portion of at least one of the first portion, the second portion, and one of the plurality of walls (36, see annotated Fig. 4), the second material comprising aluminum, an aluminum alloy, copper, a copper alloy, graphite, graphene, or a combination thereof (36, see annotated Fig. 4), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first portion, the second portion, and the plurality of walls are a first material comprising stainless steel, nor that the second material has a greater thermal conductivity than that first material.
Yamamoto discloses clad materials suitable for a chassis that also serves as a conductive member for batteries (col. 2, lines 26-28), the clad material including a first material comprising stainless steel (col. 2, lines 18-21) and a layer of a second material comprising copper or a copper alloy (col. 2, lines 18-21) wherein the second material has a greater thermal conductivity than the first material (col. 7, lines 46-50). Yamamoto teaches use of this material for the combined mechanical strength and corrosion resistance of the stainless steel layer and the electrical and thermal conductivity of the copper or copper alloy (col. 2, lines 21-26). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have substituted the first and second materials of the battery enclosure disclosed by Rich for the clad material taught by Yamamoto to employ the combined mechanical and conductive properties of that clad material.
Regarding Claim 17, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery enclosure of Claim 16. Rich further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is configured to capture and diffuse heath across a length of the layer of the second material (col. 5, lines 15-26).
Regarding Claim 18, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery enclosure of Claim 16. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the layer of the second material is connected to the first portion, the second portion, or the plurality of walls via at least one of an adhesive, a weld, or a clad (abstract).
Regarding Claim 19, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery enclosure of Claim 16. Yamamoto further discloses wherein the enclosure further comprises a layer of the first material covering the layer of the second material (col. 2, lines 36-39).
Regarding Claim 20, Rich in view of Yamamoto discloses the battery enclosure of Claim 16. Rich further discloses another wherein the enclosure further comprises at least one additional portion that extends from the first portion or the second portion in a direction parallel to the first portion or the second portion (110, see Fig. 10), the least one additional portion configured to capture heat generated by a source external to the battery pack. (col. 7, lines 37-44), wherein the layer of the second material is configured to further capture the heat from the at least one additional portion and diffuse the heat across a length of the layer of the second material (col. 5, lines 15-26; and col. 7, lines 37-44).
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rich in view of Yamamoto as respectively applied to Claims 1 and 8 above, in further view of Kakinuma et al. (US 20140242448A1).
Regarding Claims 5 and 13, Rich in view of Yamamoto does not disclose wherein the battery cell comprises a set of layers immersed in electrolyte, the first material being resistant to corrosion by the electrolyte. Kakinuma teaches use of a battery cell in a portable electronic device ([0128]) wherein the battery cell comprises a set of layers ([0042]) immersed in an electrolyte ([0068]), and that the first material [of steel] is resistant to corrosion by the electrolyte ([0023]) to improve the long-term reliability and safety of the battery. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the portable electronic device of Rich such that the battery cell comprises a set of layers immersed in an electrolyte, the first material being resistant to corrosion by the electrolyte because the combination of known elements to achieve a known result (in this case a known portable electronic device) is well within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2143 (I)(A) .
References cited but not relied upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ribas et al. (US 20120140419A1) disclose a battery cell with an enclosure material that facilitates thermal transfer within a portable electronic device, where the enclosure material is layered and features a sandwiched conductive material such as copper or graphite.
Rhee (US 9609787B2) discloses a portable electronic device and battery pack wherein the battery pack includes a heat conductor that transfers heat generated from electronic components in the device.
Jiang et al. (CN108987614A, machine translation provided) disclose a battery with a layered case, where the exterior layer of the case has a higher thermal conductivity than the interior layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kent G. Mendoza whose telephone number is (571)482-9953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00 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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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.
/K.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights