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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the subject matter of claims 4, 10, 14, and 20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Specifically, regarding claims 4 and 14, Fig. 3 is the only Figure which depicts the liner, 50; however, there is no illustration related to the subject matter being claimed, especially the specifically claimed configuration that permits the liner segments to be blown off the exhaust openings.
Additionally, while Fig. 7 shows the overlapping tapered portions of claims 10 and 20, the Figures do not depict the claimed configuration where the insulating members deform to contact the vent feature during gas expulsion.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PG Pub. 2024/0204342 to Groot et al. in view of DE 202022002863 (disclosed by Applicant in IDS - related WO 2023/279089, published in English, is relied upon for reference paragraphs, figure, and element reference numerals).
Regarding claim 1, Groot discloses a battery module comprising: a first battery cell (At least at Par. [0050]; plurality of battery cells, 702), a neighboring second battery cell (At least one of the plurality of battery cells, 702), and insulating members positioned on opposing sides of the first battery cell (At least at Fig. 6; Par. [0050]; thermal resistant material (such as mica or other thermal resistant material), 704); a battery module enclosure surrounded by an external environment and configured to house each of the first battery cell, the neighboring second battery cell, and the insulating members (At least at Fig. 6; Par. [0050]; battery module, 703); and a module cover mounted to the battery module enclosure and including a vent feature configured to expel high-temperature gases from the first battery cell into the external environment (At least at [Par. 0050]; non-corrugated lid/cover, 706 with ventilation holes, 718), to thereby minimize transfer of the high-temperature gases from the first battery cell to the neighboring second battery cell and control propagation of a thermal event in the battery module, wherein the insulating members include tapered portions disposed between the first battery cell and the vent feature (At least at Fig. 6; upper portions of thermal resistant material, 704), the tapered portions being configured to direct the high-temperature gases from the first battery cell away from the neighboring second battery cell and towards the vent feature (At least at Fig. 6; upper portions of thermal resistant material, 704).
Even though Groot does not expressly discuss tapered portions, tapered portions are clearly depicted in Fig. 6 and can be seen at the top of each of the thermal resistant material portions (704) which angle inwardly and away from neighboring batteries. While it is believed that Groot is sufficient in teaching the tapered portions as recited, the Examiner provides a secondary reference due to the poor quality of Groot’s Fig. 6. It should be noted that Groot also discusses that thermal material can be increased in thickness in Par. [0051], which supports the position that the tapered portions are depicted in Fig. 6.
Nevertheless, DE 2020 22002863 is relied upon to teach heat resistant material structurally arranged to have tapered portions (At least at WO 2023/279089 disclosure Par. [00327-00328]; Fig. 26D; 2623a/2623b which flip upwards in differing directions to prevent spread of heat between cells within the module).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of effective filing to have recognized that the module structure of Groot necessarily has tapered portions for the obvious purpose of directing air upward and angle and out of the module towards the disclosed vents for the expressly purpose of permitting gas to escape without reaching the other cells. In fact, Par. [0051] of Groot discusses increasing the thickness of the heat-resistant material (704) to provide “additional separation and thermal isolation between cells” which would decrease heat transfer between cells.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to have modified the module/thermal barrier of Groot to have leveraged the concept of including tapered portions at the top of the heat-resistant layer, as taught by DE 2020 22002863, in order to provide additional insulation/air direction capabilities to direct air towards the vents for increased thermal separation between battery cells to further protect battery cells from excessive heat.
Regarding claim 2, the primary reference, Groot, discloses that the vent feature includes exhaust openings configured to expel the high-temperature gases from the first battery cell (At least at Par. [0050]; ventilation holes, 718).
Regarding claim 4, the primary reference, Groot, discloses that the vent feature includes liner segments configured to cover the exhaust openings and be blown off the exhaust openings by the high-temperature gases to thereby expel the high-temperature gases from the first battery cell to the external environment (At least at Par. [0050]; protective sheet, 716).
Regarding claim 6, the primary reference, Groot, discloses that the liner segments are constructed from mica (At least at Par. [0040]; where the protective sheet used across each embodiment is first introduced as being composed of mica).
Regarding claim 7, the primary reference, Groot, discloses that the insulating members are constructed from mica (At least at Par. [0040]; where the insulation used across each embodiment is first introduced as being composed of mica).
Regarding claim 8, the primary reference, Groot discloses insulating members, but does not expressly discuss an additional thermal barrier.
Nevertheless, DE 2020 22002863 discloses an additional thermal barrier disclosed adjacent to the insulating members (At least the shape memory edge elements depicted in Fig. 26A-D).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of effective filing to have modified the battery cell of Groot to include additional heat protection elements, as taught by DE 2020 2200286, in order to provide extra heat protection elements for improved battery heat protection during thermal events.
Regarding claim 9, the primary reference, Groot discloses that the insulating members include a body portion that extends along a height of the first battery cell (At least at Fig. 6).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PG Pub. 2024/0204342 to Groot et al. in view of DE 202022002863 (related WO 2023/279089, published in English, is relied upon for reference paragraphs, figure, and element reference numerals) and in further view of U.S. PG Pub. 2022/0416359 to Feltham et al.
Regarding claim 3, the previous combination of Groot and DE 202022002863 discloses the claimed invention except that the exhaust opening has a reverse scoop shape.
Nevertheless, Feltham teaches that at least one of the exhaust openings has a reverse scoop shape (At least at Fig. 7-9) configured to direct the high-temperature gases away from the neighboring second battery cell.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of effective filing to have modified the vent of Groot/DE202022002863 to have a reverse scoop shape, as taught by Feltham, in order to direct the expelled heat away from the battery module and to direct heat upward and outward instead of directly upward to direct air away from the center of the vehicle for improved cooling and decreased direct heat exposure to a vehicle body.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PG Pub. 2024/0204342 to Groot et al. in view of DE 202022002863 (disclosed by Applicant in IDS - related WO 2023/279089, published in English, is relied upon for reference paragraphs, figure, and element reference numerals) and in further view of WO 2021/156095.
Regarding claim 5, the previous combination of Groot and DE 202022002863 discloses the claimed invention except that the liner segments are glued to the battery module cover.
Nevertheless, WO 2021/156095 teaches that the fire protection sheets are glued in place (At least where WO 2021/156095 discloses that, “as battery box lids are manufactured as sheet-molded compound base bodies (SMC base bodies) and the required fire protection is then achieved by subsequently gluing on a fire protection layer, for example mica or mica sheets”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of effective filing to have modified the vent of Groot/DE202022002863 to have a glued Groot’s mica liner sheets in place, as taught by WO 2021/156095, in order to ensure that the protection sheets are securely attached to ensure that they do not move/shift out of place during vehicle travel. Further, WO 2021/156095 expressly discusses that the practice of gluing mica sheets is well-known in the vehicle battery arts and, though not expressly disclosed by Groot, it is more than likely that Groot would leverage glue as the means for securing the protective sheet (716) since this method for attaching thermal protection sheets is known in the art.
Claims 11, 12, 14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PG Pub. 2024/0204342 to Groot et al. in view of DE 202022002863 (disclosed by Applicant in IDS - related WO 2023/279089, published in English, is relied upon for reference paragraphs, figure, and element reference numerals) in further view of U.S. PG Pub. 2015/0107914 to Zhao.
Claim 11 is rejected for reciting substantially the same limitations as those found in claim 1, with the addition of “a motor vehicle,” “a power-source configured to generate power-source torque,” and “a battery module configured to supply electrical energy to the power-source.”
The primary reference relied upon in the rejection of claim 1, Groot, discloses a motor vehicle, a power-source, and a battery module (At least at Par. [0002]). Groot does not explicitly use the word “torque” with reference to the power-source’s resultant generation; however, a PHOSITA would have readily recognized that Groot’s motor generates torque since Groot is used to power a vehicle and motors are invariably used to generate torque.
Nevertheless, for the sake of leveraging express disclosure that a motor can be used to generate torque for a vehicle, Zhao discloses an electric vehicle having a power-source configured to generate power-source torque; and a battery module configured to supply electrical energy to the power-source (At least at Par. [0058-0058, 0067]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHISTA at the time of effective filing to have modified the vehicle of Groot to have a torque producing motor, as taught by Zhao, in order to permit the vehicle to move. Further, it is more than likely that this arrangement exists in Groot since this arrangement is widely known in the electric vehicle arts.
Claim 12 is rejected as reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 2, and 11, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 14 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 2, 4, 11, and 12, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 16 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 11, 12, and 14, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 17 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 7, and 11, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 18 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 8, and 11, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 19 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 9, and 11, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 20 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 10, and 11, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PG Pub. 2024/0204342 to Groot et al. in view of DE 202022002863 (disclosed by Applicant in IDS - related WO 2023/279089, published in English, is relied upon for reference paragraphs, figure, and element reference numerals) in further view of U.S. PG Pub. 2015/0107914 to Zhao and in further view of U.S. PG Pub. 2022/0416359 to Feltham et al.
Claim 13 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1-3, 11, and 12, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PG Pub. 2024/0204342 to Groot et al. in view of DE 202022002863 (disclosed by Applicant in IDS - related WO 2023/279089, published in English, is relied upon for reference paragraphs, figure, and element reference numerals) in further view of U.S. PG Pub. 2015/0107914 to Zhao and in further view of and in further view of WO 2021/156095.
Claim 15 is rejected reciting substantially the same limitations as claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 11, 12, and 14, which have been rejected as discussed supra.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, either taken alone or in combination, does not fairly teach or suggest the specifically claimed arrangement of the tapered portions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brodie Follman whose telephone number is (571)270-1169. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm EST 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, Erin Piateski can be reached at (571)270-7429. 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.
/BRODIE J FOLLMAN/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669