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 .
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s specification (“spec”) are to the published application US 2024/0154209-A1, unless stated otherwise. Further, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed 06SEP2023 and 26DEC2024 are in compliance with 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takuro (JP-2019216005-A; “Takuro”).
Regarding Claims 1-2, Takuro teaches an electrode plate (first paragraph of Page 4) (structure) including a power storage module (or laminate) with a plurality of power storage units (or modules) arranged in one direction (Abstract). Moreover, Takuro states that the conductive cooling plate 56 is arranged between the power storage units 57 (the power storage modules are stacked via a cooling structure) (Abstract). Takuro teaches that a restraining force (a restraining jig) is applied (applying pressure) from the bottom plate 30 and the top plate 31 (an inner side in a stacking direction) (eighth full paragraph of Page 7), which are at both ends of the power storage stack 25 (fourth full paragraph of Page 6). Moreover, Takuro states that the power storage stack 25 is compressed in the H direction by a restraining force (fourth full paragraph of Page 6). Takuro teaches that the concave portion 66 and the concave portion 67 of the current collectors for adjacent battery modules face each other in the height direction H (last paragraph of Page 4). Takuro states that the cooling structure electrically connects the power storage units 57 adjacent to each other (Abstract). Takuro states that a plurality of cooling passages 88 arranged in the longitudinal direction L are formed in the conductive plate 58 through which a refrigerant – air – flows (fifth full paragraph of Page 5). Finally, Takuro teaches that the conductive cooling plate (the cooling structure) is elastically deformable in the one (stacking) direction (Abstract).
Takuro teaches two end plates, the top plate 91 and the bottom plate 92, (plate-shaped members) that are disposed on both ends in the direction of alignment of power storage cells (third and fourth full paragraphs of Page 5) (in the stacking direction). Moreover, Takuro states that there are supporting walls (or columns) that extend upward from the bottom plate towards the top plate (third and fourth full paragraph of Page 5) – these function as the nondeformable support columns that connect the two plate-shaped members. Specifically, the top plate 91 includes a plate portion 95 and side walls 96 and 97. The side wall 96 is formed to extend downward from the side of the top plate 91 located on the end side surface 63 side, and the side wall 97 is formed to extend downward from the side of the top plate 91 located on the end side surface 62 side (eighth full paragraph of Page 5). The bottom plate 92 includes a plate portion 110 and side walls 111 and 112. The side wall 111 is formed so as to extend upward from the side of the plate portion 110 on the end side surface 63 side, and the side wall 112 is formed to extend upward from the side of the plate portion 110 on the end side surface 62 side (ninth full paragraph of Page 5). Because the side walls of the top plate 91 and bottom plate 92 are formed on the same end surfaces 62 and 63, the side walls must connect the two plate-shaped members.
In addition, Takuro states that upon compression, the plates contract (eleventh full paragraph of Page 6), which would further ensure contact. Specifically, each conductive plate 58 is compressed and contracted, causing movement in the height direction H followed by being fixed (eleventh full paragraph of Page 6). A depiction of this arrangement is shown below in a reproduction of Figure 8 on Page 20 of Takuro.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (End Walls Make Contact)]
PNG
media_image1.png
456
980
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval]
Figure 8 of Takuro on Page 20 of Takuro
Additionally, Takuro teaches a plurality of coil springs that are arranged between the top and bottom plate – these function as deformable support columns that are deformable in the stacking direction (fourth and fifth full paragraph of Page 7).
Furthermore, Takuro teaches a plurality of cooling passages arranged in the longitudinal direction formed in the cooling plate (or structure) (fifth paragraph of Page 5) (these are disposed between the two plate-shaped members). Refer to Fig. 1 and 2 below, a reproduction of Fig. 9 on Page 20 of Takuro.
[AltContent: textbox (Cooling Passage)][AltContent: textbox (Plate)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
282
427
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (End Column)]
[AltContent: textbox (Plate)][AltContent: arrow]
Fig. 1 – Top and Bottom Cooling Plate Sandwiched Between Metal Coil Columns (Deformable) with Air as Refrigerant and the Ends of Top and Bottom Plate (Support Columns)
PNG
media_image3.png
233
324
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 – Cooling Structure with Elastic Deformable Plate (93) with Irregularities to Form Cooling Passages (Air Acts as the Refrigerant – eighth paragraph of Page 5 of Takuro) (please see Fig. 9 on Page 20 of Takuro)
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takuro (JP-2019216005-A; “Takuro”) in view of Yasuhiro (JP-2017084464-A; “Yasuhiro”).
Regarding claims 3-5, Takuro teaches the limitations of claim 1-2 as discussed above.
Regarding Claims 3-4, Takuro teaches a restraining force (in a restraining jig, or apparatus) is applied from the bottom plate 30 and the top plate 31 (eighth full paragraph of Page 7) (these are restraining plates), which are at both ends of the power storage stack 25 (fourth full paragraph of Page 6). The bottom and top plates are arranged in the height direction H (the stacking direction) (second full paragraph of Page 5), and the restraining force includes a restraining member (eighth full paragraph of Page 7). Moreover, because the restraining force is applied at both ends of the stack against the top and bottom plate, the restraining member is disposed at both end portions in a width direction of the restraining plate (second paragraph of Page 8). Finally, Takuro teaches the support columns disposed between the two plate-shaped members (third and fourth full paragraphs of Page 5). Takuro also teaches that the support columns are disposed at a region other than both end portions in the width direction of the region sandwiched between the two plate-shaped members, as seen in Fig. 1 above. Takuro teaches, furthermore, that the deformable support columns are disposed at both end portions in the width direction of the region, as demonstrated in Fig. 1 above. Takuro further teaches that a restraining force is applied from the bottom plate 30 and the top plate 31 (eighth full paragraph of Page 70), which are at both ends of the power storage stack 25 (fourth full paragraph of Page 6) The bottom and top plates are arranged in the height direction H (the stacking direction) (second full paragraph of Page 5), with support columns disposed between the two plate-shaped members (third and fourth full paragraphs of Page 5), wherein a cooling passage is disposed between the two-plate shaped members (fifth full paragraph of Page 5) (both end faces in the stacking direction of the power storage module laminate and disposed at both end portions in a width direction of the restraining plate). Moreover, Takuro states that the power storage stack 25 is compressed in the H direction by a restraining force (fourth full paragraph of Page 6).
Takuro is silent on support columns that do not elastically deform in the lamination direction and that are also present at a portion other than both end portions.
Yasuhiro teaches a pair of support columns that are located near the center of the first spacer in the longitudinal direction extended along the stacking direction Z (fifth paragraph of Page 6). These columns may be electrically connected to the remainder of the module through the bus bar (fifth paragraph of Page 6). These columns contribute to a structure having electrical passage or rigidity (Abstract). The following figure, a reproduction of Figure 4 from Page 44 of Yasuhiro, depicts this arrangement:
PNG
media_image4.png
374
457
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 – Shows auxiliary support columns 132b with anode side terminal 133 and cathode side terminal 134
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the design features of Takuro and Yasuhiro, specifically by forming a battery with deformable springs located at the ends of the top and bottom plate (Takuro, third and fourth full paragraph of Page 5) and non-deformable columns (an element in Yasuhiro’s design – first full paragraph of Page 7) dispersed in the middle of the cooling structure. Takuro and Yasuhiro each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). Although the support columns that are not elastically deformable are not present in a region that is not the end portion in Takuro, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to design these support columns given their presence in other parts of the battery pack in Yasuhiro as a common element in battery design. Specifically, Yasuhiro emphasizes the importance of rigidity and maintaining electrical contact (fourth full paragraph of Page 17) in the bus bar and the bus bar holder which are arranged in the stacking direction Z (last full paragraph of Page 6). This provides adequate motivation for incorporating columns in the stacking direction.
Regarding claim 5, Takuro teaches that the cooling structure is composed of a conductive material such as copper (second full paragraph of Page 5). Moreover, in Fig. 4, reproduced from Figure 16, Page 21 of Takuro, the protrusions above and below the conductive plate form a mesh-shaped metal (a conductive material) member (last paragraph of Page 7). Takuro teaches that a conductive plate with a plurality of elastically deformable protrusions is formed between a top and bottom plate (sixth full paragraph of Page 9). These protrusions are also present at the ends of the plate, as they are depicted throughout in Fig. 4 below (a reproduction of Fig. 16 on Page 21 of Takuro):
PNG
media_image5.png
501
504
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4 – Shows cooling structure with convex protrusions in the elastic plate – these convex protrusions effectively form a mesh-shaped member (please see Fig. 16 on Page 21 of Takuro and second paragraph of Page 8 of Takuro)
Takuro is silent on support columns that do not elastically deform in the lamination direction and that are also present at a portion other than both end portions.
Yasuhiro teaches a pair of support columns that are located near the center of the first spacer in the longitudinal direction extended along the stacking direction Z (fifth paragraph of Page 6). These columns may be electrically connected to the remainder of the module through the bus bar (fifth paragraph of Page 6). These columns contribute to a structure having electrical passage or rigidity (Abstract). Fig. 3 above, a reproduction of Figure 4 from Page 22 of Yasuhiro, depicts this arrangement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the cooling structure to minimize the surface pressure distribution by combining the design features of Takuro and Yasuhiro to form a cooling structure with a mesh-shaped metal interspersed between a top and bottom plate. Takuro and Yasuhiro each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). The combination would result in Takuro’s mesh structure located at the ends of the top and bottom plate and non-deformable columns (an element in Yasuhiro’s design) dispersed in the middle of the cooling structure. Although the support columns that are not elastically deformable are not present in a region that is not the end portion in Takuro, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to design these support columns given their presence in other parts of the battery pack in Yasuhiro with specific rigidity and contact properties (fourth full paragraph of Page 17). Incorporating the mesh would allow for the elasticity with dimensional variation (sixth paragraph of Page 8 of Takuro), building off Yasuhiro’s concept of rigidity (fourth full paragraph of Page 17).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takuro (JP-2019216005-A; “Takuro”) in view of Kazuki (JP-2020027788-A; “Kazuki”).
Regarding claim 6, Takuro teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Takuro further teaches that an elastic force can be maintained on the power storage stack because of the plurality of elastic conductive plates and restraining force F (sixth and tenth paragraphs of Page 6).
Takuro is silent on values for a surface pressure distribution.
Kazuki teaches that the lower limit of the pressing force of the pressing unit (which generates the surface pressure) is 30 kPa or more, preferably 80 kPa or more (fourth full paragraph of Page 5). Kazuki further delineates a maximum surface pressure of 200 kPa or less, preferably (fifth full paragraph of Page 5). This generates a surface pressure distribution of 120 kPa, which falls in the range of the claim. Please see MPEP 2131.03 Anticipation of Ranges (II). Kazuki further teaches a deformation inhibition part that prevents the deformation of the electrode (Abstract), a design consideration that led to the pressure distribution range specified in the claim. Kazuki also teaches multiple cooling structures that are arranged in various configurations (sixth paragraph of Page 3) with a coolant (Abstract), elastic member and a pressing (restraining) force in the stacking direction Z (third paragraph of Page 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the cooling structure to minimize the surface pressure distribution by combining the design features of Takuro and Kazuki to form a battery stack with cooling structures interspersed between modules in a stacking direction. Takuro and Kazuki each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). By combining the elements of claim 1 identified in Takuro with a surface pressure distribution that is readily apparent in the literature with a similar configuration in Kazuki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generate the battery stack outlined in claim 6. Kazuki highlights the importance of having a reasonable pressure distribution due to the expansion of the cooling fluid and the application of a larger pressure force on the unit (first paragraph of Page 6). This prevents the deformation of the electrode (Abstract) which causes a reduction in battery performance (last paragraph of Page 4).
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the surface pressure distribution for the intended application, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
A particular parameter can be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, and the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05.II.B.).
It has been held that the discovery of the optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill in the art. In re Boesch and Slaney, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
WO-2020110447-A1 to Takuya E – teaches battery stack with cooling plate, refrigerant that runs through the cooling plate, end plates that are held in place by restraining member (bind bar) in the stacking direction, and inter-cell separators
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/02/26 are considered moot in light of the new grounds of rejection, which were necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. Arguments that are relevant to the current rejections are addressed below:
The claim interpretation in light of Applicant’s Amendments regarding deformable and nondeformable support columns has been withdrawn.
Fig. 8 of Takuro shows the side walls make contact. Specifically, the top plate 91 includes a plate portion 95 and side walls 96 and 97. The side wall 96 is formed to extend downward from the side of the top plate 91 located on the end side surface 63 side, and the side wall 97 is formed to extend downward from the side of the top plate 91 located on the end side surface 62 side (eighth full paragraph of Page 5). The bottom plate 92 includes a plate portion 110 and side walls 111 and 112. The side wall 111 is formed so as to extend upward from the side of the plate portion 110 on the end side surface 63 side, and the side wall 112 is formed to extend upward from the side of the plate portion 110 on the end side surface 62 side (ninth full paragraph of Page 5). Because the side walls of the top plate 91 and bottom plate 92 are formed on the same end surfaces 62 and 63, the side walls must connect the two plate-shaped members.
In addition, Takuro states that upon compression, the plates contract (eleventh full paragraph of Page 6), which would further ensure contact. Specifically, each conductive plate 58 is compressed and contracted, causing movement in the height direction H followed by being fixed (eleventh full paragraph of Page 6). A depiction of this arrangement is shown below in a reproduction of Figure 8 on Page 20 of Takuro.
PNG
media_image1.png
456
980
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (End Walls Make Contact)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval]
Figure 8 of Takuro on Page 20 of Takuro
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM FADDOUL SAVAGE whose telephone number is (571)270-0315. The examiner can normally be reached 8a.m.-5p.m..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aaron Austin, can be reached on 571-272-8935. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIAM FADDOUL SAVAGE/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/ANTHONY J FROST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights