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 .
Summary
This is an initial Office Action in response to application 18/389,355 filed 11/14/2023. Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 4 recites “wherein the electrically insulating spacer has a thickness that results… in at least one of: an elastic and plastic deformation of the temperature-control plate.” Elastic deformation is reversible whereas plastic deformation is irreversible, therefore it is unclear as to what is meant by “in at least one of: an elastic and plastic deformation of the temperature-control plate” (emphasis added). To advance prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “wherein the electrically insulating spacer has a thickness that results… in at least one of: an elastic deformation or a plastic deformation of the temperature-control plate.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rauscher et al (DE 102018102957 A1, machine translation included).
Evidentiary support provided by Schmidt et al (DE 102014016471 B3, machine translation included).
Regarding claim 1, Rauscher teaches ([0033], Figs. 1-2) a battery 1 comprising a battery module 7 and a temperature-control plate (i.e., heat sink 5), wherein a thermally conductive paste (i.e., the thermal conductivity medium 15 excluding the support elements 16, wherein thermal conductivity medium 15 can be in the form of a thermal paste [0038]) is arranged between the battery module 7 and the temperature-control plate 5 (Fig. 2), wherein a spacer (i.e., any one of support elements 16, which has a shape adapted to the spaces 12 and maintains the space [0039], [0046]) is arranged between the battery module 7 and the temperature-control plate 5 (Fig. 2). The support element 16 can be made of a material such as glass which is an electrically insulating material as indicated by evidentiary reference Schmidt (Schmidt: [0018]).
Regarding claim 3, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1 and teaches in Fig. 3 and [0039]: “Advantageously, the support elements 16 have a shape adapted to the cross-sectional contour of the spaces 12,” and also discloses that they are made of a material that is difficult to deform [0029], indicating that they have a thickness (d) that ensures a predetermined clearance between the battery module 7 and the temperature-control plate 5.
Regarding claim 4, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1. The support element 16 is taught by Rauscher to be made of a material that is difficult to deform [0029] and that supports the battery modules by bridging the height of the spaces 12 between the elevated areas 11 formed by coolant channels [0042], indicating that the support element 16 maintains a minimum distance corresponding to its diameter or length d, as shown in Fig. 3. between the battery module and the heat sink 5. This is similar to the structure provided by the claimed electrically insulating spacer. As recited by the instant specification, “the thickness of the spacer 5 may be set such that a minimum distance between the battery module 2 and the temperature-control plate is maintained at all times” (p7 lines 22-23 of instant spec). Given that Rauscher’s support element 16 is taught as not very easy to deform compared to the thin walls of Rauscher’s temperature-control plate (i.e., heat sink 5) [0031], a skilled artisan would expect the assembly of Rauscher’s battery to result in a flexing, i.e. deformation, of the heat sink 5 (comprising of plates 8 and 9 [0034]) in the flat regions of plate 8 either reversibly (elastic) or irreversibly (plastic) where the support element 16 contacts the heat sink, as similar to that described for the claimed invention – “In the assembled state, the thickness of the electrically insulating spacer 5 may in this case result in the temperature-control plate 4 being elastically and/or plastically deformed. For example, the electrically insulating spacer 5 may virtually push the temperature-control plate 4 away, at least in the region in which the spacer 5 bears against the temperature-control plate 4, when the battery module 2 presses against the electrically insulating spacer 5 during assembly” (p7 lines 28-32 of instant spec). Consequently, the support element 16 of Rauscher’s battery is expected to read on the claimed limitation of the electrically insulating spacer having a thickness that results, when a battery module is arranged on the temperature-control plate, in at least one of: an elastic and plastic deformation of the temperature-control plate, at least in the region in which the electrically insulating spacer bears against the temperature-control plate.
Regarding claim 6, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1. Fig. 2 of Rauscher shows an electrically insulating spacer 16 located at a position where a line would bisect the battery module 7 as shown in annotated Fig. 2; thus, the electrically insulating spacer is arranged on a median plane of the battery module.
Annotated Fig. 2 of Rauscher:
PNG
media_image1.png
370
777
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1 and further teaches the electrically insulating spacer 16 has a length (a height of the spacer extending from its top surface to its bottom surface, as shown in another version of annotated Fig. 2 below) that is smaller than or equal to a length of the battery module that extends parallel thereto (as shown in annotated Fig. 2 below).
Annotated Fig. 2 of Rauscher, version 2:
PNG
media_image2.png
370
795
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1 and further teaches in Figs. 2-3 that the thermally conductive paste, i.e., the thermal conductivity medium 15 excluding the support elements 16, surrounds the electrically insulating spacer 16 to the left and right of each individual support element 16 and also to the leftmost and rightmost ends of the layer containing all the support elements 16, thus, it surrounds the electrically insulating spacer at least laterally.
Regarding claim 11, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1. Rauscher further teaches the temperature-control plate 5 has a recess that forms a receptacle for the electrically insulating spacer (Fig. 2 shows that the heat sink 5 has a hollow structure with coolant channels 6 which form protrusions 11 and spaces 12 [0033-0035], wherein a space 12 corresponds to a recess that receives and contains support element 16 as disclosed in [0036-0037]; that is, it functions as a receptacle; Figs. 2-3 depict the electrically insulating spacer 16 as arranged in the recess 12, and the electrically insulating spacer 16, protrudes beyond the plane (in the upward vertical direction) formed by the temperature-control plate 5, wherein the plane is labeled as shown below in another version of annotated Fig. 2.
Annotated Fig. 2 of Rauscher, version 3:
PNG
media_image3.png
370
777
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1, and Fig. 2 shows that there are at least two electrically insulating spacers 16 per battery module 7.
Claims 1, 3, 8-9, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schmidt et al (DE 102014016471 B3, machine translation included).
Regarding claim 1, Schmidt teaches (Figure) a battery 10 comprising a battery module (i.e., battery cells 12) and a temperature-control plate (i.e., cooling plate 18), wherein a thermally conductive paste (i.e., cooling element 14) is arranged between the battery module and the temperature-control plate, wherein an electrically insulating spacer (i.e., electrically non-conductive spacer element 16) is arranged between the battery module and the temperature-control plate (machine translation [0025-0027]).
Regarding claim 3, Schmidt teaches the battery of claim 1. They further teach the electrically insulating spacer, i.e. spacer element 16, has a shape that results in a defined distance between the battery cells (i.e., battery modules) and the cooling plate (i.e., temperature-control plate), thus teaching it has a thickness that ensures a predetermined clearance between the battery module and the temperature-control plate (Figure, [0014] lines 10-13, [0031]).
Regarding claim 8, Schmidt teaches the battery of claim 1. Schmidt further teaches in the Figure that wherein the electrically insulating spacer 16 has a diameter in the z-direction, i.e., a length, that is smaller than or equal to a length of the battery module (the entire length of the battery cell 12 in the z-direction) that extends parallel thereto.
Regarding claim 9, Schmidt teaches the battery of claim 1. Schmidt further teaches in the Figure that cooling element 14 surrounds spacer element 16 in the y-direction, that is, at least laterally.
Regarding claim 12, Schmidt teaches the battery of claim 1. Schmidt further teaches in the Figure that there are at least two electrically insulating spacers 16 per battery module 12.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Newnham et al (GB 2593187 A).
Support is provided by evidentiary reference “paste,” Dictionary.com.
Regarding claim 1, Newnham teaches (Fig. 13; p11 lines 6-9) a battery 10 comprising a battery module 12 and a temperature-control plate (i.e., cooling plate 14), wherein a thermally conductive paste (i.e., thermally conductive putty material 94 which can soften and deform at higher temperatures; see Fig. 15 and p21 lines 5-10 and p22 lines 10-14; thus, the material reads on a paste according to the entry for “paste” on Dictionary.com, which on p3 def 1 provides a definition of paste as “a mixture or material of a soft or malleable consistency, such as toothpaste”) is arranged between the battery module 12 and the temperature-control plate 14, wherein an electrically insulating spacer (i.e., electrically insulative film 92; see Fig. 15 and p21 lines 5-10) is arranged between the battery module 12 and the temperature-control plate 14.
Regarding claim 3, Newnham teaches the battery of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the electrically insulative layer 92, i.e. electrically insulating spacer 92, is thick enough to ensure that sufficient electrical isolation is provided to achieve the creepage/clearance requirements (p21 lines 31-34) and therefore reads on the limitation that it has a thickness to ensure a predetermined clearance between the battery module 12 and the temperature-control plate 14 on either side of the thermally conductive pad 54 comprising the electrically insulative layer 92, as shown in Figs. 13 and 17.
Regarding claim 7, Newnham teaches the battery of claim 1. Newnham further teaches (Figs. 13; p18 lines 34-35, p19 lines 1-5, p32 lines 6-8) a thermal conductive pad 54 (comprising electrically insulative film 92, i.e. electrically insulating spacer) is arranged at a position on the temperature-control plate (i.e., cooling plate 14) that is located within an area of the temperature-control plate formed by fastening devices (i.e., location pins 56 and support pin 76) for fastening the battery module (Figs. 10-11; p10 lines 20-24, p19 lines 7-8 teach “the battery module 12 is clamped on the location pins 56 and support pin 76”).
Regarding claim 13, Newnham teaches the battery of claim 7. Newnham shows in Fig. 13 that within their clamping system, the pad 54 (comprising electrically insulating spacer 92) and the temperature-control plate 14 are arranged centrally between the two location pins 56 in the x-direction. Therefore, within the combination of prior art, modified Rauscher’s electrically insulating spacer is arranged at the position on the temperature-control plate that is located in a central region of the area of the temperature-control plate formed by fastening devices for fastening the battery module.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Biskup et al (US2016/0093930A1).
Support is provided by evidentiary reference “paste,” Dictionary.com.
Regarding claim 1, Biskup teaches a battery (Fig. 7) comprising a battery module (battery cells 615, 617, 619, 621, 623) and a temperature-control plate (cold plate 713; [0050] teaches the cold plate 713 is used to transfer heat out of the battery pack, or into the battery pack when battery heating is required), wherein a thermally conductive paste 707 ([0049] describes layer 707 can be a thermally conductive material fabricated using an epoxy, and wherein the material can soften; thus, the material reads on a paste according to the entry for “paste” on Dictionary.com (p3 def 1 provides a definition of paste as “a mixture or material of a soft or malleable consistency, such as toothpaste”)) is arranged between the battery module and the temperature-control plate (Fig. 7 show regions of layer 707 that are located between the battery cells 615, 617, 619, 621, 623 and the cold plate 713), wherein an electrically insulating spacer 717 is arranged between the battery module and the temperature-control plate (Fig. 7, [0050] describes layer 717 as an electrically insulating, thermally conductive interface material; it reads on a “spacer” because it maintains a space between the battery cells and the cold plate).
Regarding claim 2, Biskup teaches the battery of claim 1 and further teaches that layer 717, i.e. the electrically insulating spacer, has a thermal conductivity preferably on the order of at least 0.75 Wm−1K−1, and that layer 707, i.e. the thermally conductive paste, has a thermal conductivity of preferably has a thermal conductivity of at least 0.75 Wm−1K−1 [0049-0050]; thus the two thermal conductivities correspond to each other as claimed.
Regarding claim 3, Biskup teaches the battery of claim 1. As seen in Fig. 7, Biskup further teaches the layer 717, i.e. the electrically insulating spacer, has a thickness that ensures a predetermined clearance between the battery module (615, 617, 619, 621, 623) and the temperature-control plate 713.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rauscher et al (DE 102018102957 A1) in view of Jin et al (KR 20210064934 A, machine translation included).
Regarding claim 5, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1. Rauscher teaches “The surfaces of the battery module and the heat sink facing each other form a heat-transferring interface. During the assembly process, the heat transfer medium is applied in the area of the heat transfer interface, and the battery module is positioned and then secured” [0013] but is silent regarding the electrically insulating spacer adhesively bonded to the temperature-control plate (emphasis added).
In the same field of endeavor, Jin teaches a thermally conductive resin 40 having adhesiveness and thermoplasticity such as thermally conductive epoxy adhesive or thermally conductive urethane adhesive, i.e. a thermally conductive paste, that can be coated between a thermally conductive plate (33), i.e. a temperature-control plate, and the lower surface of a cell stack (machine translation [0040], [0044], [0062]; Figs. 3 and 12), allowing the battery 11 and the thermally conductive plate 33 to be mutually bonded and fixed through the resin 40, and which has the advantages of simplifying the number of parts because the battery 11 can be simply fixed to the plate 33 [0041-0042] and also improving the heat dissipation performance of the battery through the bottom plate, thereby improving the cooling performance of the battery module [0045].
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have modified the battery of Rauscher to use a thermally conductive adhesive as the thermally conductive paste as taught by Jin for the advantages of fixing the battery module 7 to the heat sink 5 and for the improved cooling performance of the battery module.
Because the support elements 16, i.e. electrically insulating spacers, are embedded in the thermal conductivity medium as shown in Fig. 3 of Rauscher and are applied to the outer surface of the heat sinks together with the thermal conductivity medium [0015], the support elements in the combination of prior art would consequently be adhesively bonded via the surrounding thermally conductive paste to the heat sink 5, i.e. temperature-control plate.
Claims 10, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rauscher et al (DE 102018102957 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1. Although Rauscher is silent in Figs. 2-3 about a constant cross section over the length of the electrically insulating spacer, Rauscher teaches in [0024] that it is possible that the supporting elements (corresponding to the electrically insulating spacers) have a cubic shape. A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to have modified the supporting element of Rauscher to adopt a cylindrical or cubic shape given that he teaches they are suitable alternative configurations which are expected to work. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). Consequently, a cylindrical or cubic support element would each have a constant cross section, that is, a circle cross section for a cylindrical support element or a square cross section for a cubic support element, over its length.
Regarding claims 14-15, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 10. As pointed out previously in addressing the limitations of claim 10, the supporting elements (corresponding to the electrically insulating spacer) can have a cubic shape. Consequently, it would have a constant square cross section, which is a quadrilateral and a rectangular form.
Claims 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rauscher et al (DE 102018102957 A1) in view of Newnham et al (GB 2593187 A).
Regarding claim 7, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 1 but does not teach the electrically insulating spacer is arranged at a position on the temperature-control plate that is located within an area of the temperature-control plate formed by fastening devices for fastening the battery module.
In the same field of endeavor, Newnham teaches (Figs. 13; p18 lines 34-35, p19 lines 1-5, p32 lines 6-8) a thermal conductive pad 54 (comprising electrically insulative film 92 as shown in Fig. 17 which corresponds to an electrically insulating spacer) is arranged at a position on the temperature-control plate (i.e., cooling plate 14) that is located within an area of the temperature-control plate formed by fastening devices (i.e., location pins 56 and support pin 76) for fastening the battery module (Figs. 10-11; p10 lines 20-24, p19 lines 7-8 teach “the battery module 12 is clamped on the location pins 56 and support pin 76”). Newnham discloses that their invention provides an advantage for enabling the battery module to maintain thermal contact with the cooling system, while allowing the cooling system to be lighter than would otherwise by the case, thereby helping to reduce the weight of the battery pack, and that it also provides the advantage of avoiding deformation of the cooling system that could constrict flow of coolant and compromise the cooling of battery cells (p3 lines 1-10). Given that primary reference Rauscher discloses the need to reduce the weight and load placed on the coolant channels, which can improve the lifespan of the battery storage system [0010], a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have modified the battery of Rauscher with Newnham’s clamping system for fastening the battery modules for the advantages of maintaining thermal contact between the battery module and the cooling system while reducing the weight of the battery pack and avoiding deformation of the cooling system that could compromise cooling of battery cells.
Regarding claim 13, Rauscher teaches the battery of claim 7. Newnham shows in Fig. 13 that within their clamping system, the pad 54 (comprising electrically insulating spacer 92) and the temperature-control plate 14 are arranged centrally between the two location pins 56 in the x-direction. Therefore, within the combination of prior art, modified Rauscher’s electrically insulating spacer is arranged at the position on the temperature-control plate that is located in a central region of the area of the temperature-control plate formed by fastening devices for fastening the battery module.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIGI LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 - 6.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/G.L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 09/18/2026
Prosecution Insights