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 .
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.
Claims 1-5, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by (US-20200338963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Suzuki’
Regarding Claim 1,
Suzuki teaches an electric vehicle (Suzuki, “The cooling device 1 according to the first embodiment illustrated in FIG. 1 adjusts the battery temperature of a battery pack 5 by cooling the battery pack 5 mounted in a vehicle as a cooling object.”, see [0031]) comprising: a battery housing including a first battery housing portion (Suzuki, battery pack, 5, Fig. 2); and an air cooling system (Suzuki, “The cooling device 1 includes a working fluid circuit 10 through which a working fluid circulates. A refrigerant (such as R134 a and R1234 yf) used in a vapor compression-type refrigeration cycle is adopted as the working fluid circulating through the working fluid circuit 10.”, see [0033]); wherein the air cooling system includes a first warm air path and a second warm air path (Suzuki, gas passage portion, 16 and 17, Fig. 1) ; the air cooling system includes a first evaporator and a second evaporator (Suzuki, evaporator, 12, Fig. 2); the first warm air path fluidly connects the first battery housing portion to the first evaporator to exhaust first warm air from the first battery housing portion (Suzuki, fluid outlet portion, 442, Fig.2) to the first evaporator (Suzuki, evaporator, 12, Fig. 2); and the second warm air path fluidly connects the first battery housing portion (Suzuki, fluid outlet portion, 442, Fig.2) to the second evaporator to exhaust second warm air from the first battery housing portion to the second evaporator(Suzuki, evaporator, 12, Fig. 2)(The examiner notes that each part of the stack connects to the cooling circuit which connects to the separate evaporators).
Suzuki does not explicitly teach a work vehicle, but the examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a hybrid or electric vehicle could be used for work.
Regarding Claim 2,
Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first evaporator is located forward of the second evaporator in a front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (Suzuki, evaporator, 12, Fig. 2)(see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
346
680
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3,
Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 2, wherein the first evaporator and the second evaporator are located on a same side of a centerline of the electric work vehicle that extends in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 4,
Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 2, wherein the air-cooling system includes a third evaporator; the air-cooling system includes a third warm air path that fluidly connects the first battery housing portion to the third evaporator to exhaust third warm air (Suzuki, gas passage portion, 16 and 17, Fig. 1)from the first battery housing portion to the third evaporator(Suzuki, evaporator, 12, Fig. 2); (see annotated figure below)
Suzuki does not teach the third evaporator is located between the first evaporator and the second evaporator in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the third evaporator between the first and second in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c))
PNG
media_image2.png
346
680
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5,
Suzuki does not teach wherein each of the first evaporator, the second evaporator, and the third evaporator are located on a same side of a centerline of the electric work vehicle that extends in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved each of the first evaporator, the second evaporator, and the third evaporator are located on a same side of a centerline of the electric work vehicle that extends in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c)).
Regarding Claim 15,
Suzuki does not teach wherein in a plan view, at least a portion of the first evaporator is forward of a front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved at least a portion of the first evaporator is forward of a front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle .
as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c))
Regarding Claim 16,
Suzuki does not teach the electric work vehicle according to claim 15, wherein in a plan view, the second evaporator is located rearward of the front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the second evaporator is located rearward of the front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle.
as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c))
Regarding Claim 17,
Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the air-cooling system includes a third evaporator (see annotated figure below); the air-cooling system includes a third warm air path that fluidly connects the first battery housing portion to the third evaporator to exhaust third warm air from the first battery housing portion to the third evaporator (Suzuki, gas passage portion, 16 and 17, Fig. 1);
PNG
media_image2.png
346
680
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Suzuki does not teach in a plan view, at least a portion of the first evaporator is forward of a front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle; and in a plan view, each of the second evaporator and the third evaporator is located rearward of the front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move at least a portion of the first evaporator forward of a front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle; and in a plan view, each of the second evaporator and the third evaporator is located rearward of the front axle of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c))
Regarding Claim 18,
Suzuki does not teach wherein in a side view, at least a portion of the first evaporator is higher than at least a portion of the second evaporator in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle; and in a side view, at least a portion of the second evaporator is higher than at least a portion of the third evaporator in the up-down direction of the electric work vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move at least a portion of the first evaporator is higher than at least a portion of the second evaporator in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle; and in a side view, at least a portion of the second evaporator is higher than at least a portion of the third evaporator in the up-down direction of the electric work vehicle as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c)).
Claim 6-9 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by (US-20200338963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Suzuki’ in view of (US-20170136864-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Ito’
Regarding Claim 6,
Suzuki does not teach wherein the battery housing includes a second battery housing portion; the first battery housing portion and the second battery housing portion are offset from each other; and the air-cooling system includes a fourth warm air path that fluidly connects the second battery housing portion to the third evaporator to exhaust fourth warm air from the second battery housing portion.
Ito teaches wherein the battery housing includes a second battery housing portion; the first battery housing portion (Ito, second space, S2, Fig. 1) and the second battery housing portion are offset from each other (Ito, third space, S3, Fig. 16) ; and the air cooling system includes a fourth warm air path that fluidly connects the second battery housing portion to the third evaporator to exhaust fourth warm air from the second battery housing portion (Ito, “A front end gap G1 that allows air flow between the first space S1 and the second space S2 is formed between a front end 63 a of the horizontal partitioning wall 63”, see [0052]) .
Ito teaches that this offset arrangement allows for the heating to be dispersed from the battery cells (Ito, “Also, because the interior of the battery case is divided vertically by the horizontal partitioning wall, the heat emitted from the multiple battery modules is prevented from being focused on the roof region of the battery case.”, see [0016]).
Suzuki and Ito are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery cases for vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery stacks to be offset with a fourth warm air flow path in order to allow for the battery module heat to be focused in one region, thereby improving cooling.
Regarding Claim 7,
Modified Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 6, wherein the battery housing includes a third battery housing portion (Ito, fourth space, S4, Fig. 16) and the air cooling system includes a fifth warm air path that fluidly connects the third battery housing portion to the third evaporator to exhaust fifth warm air from the third battery housing portion (Ito, “ that allows air flow between the third space S3 and the fourth place S4 is formed between a rear end 63 b of the horizontal partitioning wall 63”, see [0052])
Regarding Claim 8,
Modified Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 7, wherein the third battery housing portion is located below the first battery housing portion in an up- down direction of the electric work vehicle (Ito, fourth space, S4, Fig. 16).
Regarding Claim 9,
Modified Suzuki does not teach the electric work vehicle according to claim 7, wherein the third battery housing portion is located forward of the second battery housing portion in a front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have moved the third battery housing portion forward of the second battery housing portion in a front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle
as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c))
Regarding Claim 19,
Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the battery housing includes a first front surface ( Suzuki, upper end, 5d, Fig. 5) between the first front surface and the second front surface; and the first evaporator is mounted within the recess (see Fig. 5, the examiner notes that the evaporator is mounted within the recess between cells).
Suzuki does not teach a second front surface offset rearwardly from the first front surface to define a recess
Ito teaches a second front surface offset rearwardly from the first front surface to define a recess (Ito, third space, S3, Fig. 16)
Ito teaches that this offset arrangement allows for the heating to be dispersed from the battery cells (Ito, “Also, because the interior of the battery case is divided vertically by the horizontal partitioning wall, the heat emitted from the multiple battery modules is prevented from being focused on the roof region of the battery case.”, see [0016]).
Suzuki and Ito are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery cases for vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery stacks to be offset with a fourth warm air flow path in order to allow for the battery module heat to be focused in one region, thereby improving cooling.
Regarding Claim 20,
Suzuki teaches the electric vehicle according to claim 19, wherein the air-cooling system includes a condenser (Suzuki, “and the heat medium; a condenser, disposed above the evaporator, radiating a heat of the heat medium to an external fluid by condensing the heat medium in a gas phase by a heat exchange”, see Abstract);
Suzuki does not teach and the condenser is mounted to the first front surface of the battery housing .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move at least a portion of the first evaporator is higher than at least a portion of the second evaporator in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle; and in a side view, at least a portion of the second evaporator is higher than at least a portion of the third evaporator in the up-down direction of the electric work vehicle as an obvious matter of rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (C))
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by (US-20200338963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Suzuki’ in view of (US-20170136864-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Ito’ in further view of (US-20230109484-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Ueno’
Regarding Claim 10,
Suzuki does not teach wherein the first battery housing portion includes a first opening that connects the first battery housing portion to the first warm air path the first battery housing portion includes a second opening that connects the first battery housing portion to the second warm air path.
Ito teaches wherein the first battery housing portion includes a first opening that connects the first battery housing portion to the first warm air path (Ito, “A front end gap G1 that allows air flow between the first space S1 and the second space S2 is formed between a front end 63 a of the horizontal partitioning wall 63 ”, see [0052]); the first battery housing portion includes a second opening that connects the first battery housing portion to the second warm air path (Ito, “and a wall surface in front of the horizontal partitioning wall 63. A rear end gap G2 (FIG. 8) that allows air flow between the third space S3 and the fourth place S4”, see [0052]);
Ito teaches that this offset arrangement allows for the heating to be dispersed from the battery cells (Ito, “Also, because the interior of the battery case is divided vertically by the horizontal partitioning wall, the heat emitted from the multiple battery modules is prevented from being focused on the roof region of the battery case.”, see [0016]).
Suzuki and Ito are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery cases for vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery stacks to be offset with a fourth warm air flow path in order to allow for the battery module heat to be focused in one region, thereby improving cooling.
Suzuki does not teach the first opening is smaller than the second opening.
Ueno teaches the first opening is smaller than the second opening (Ueno, “the amount of air to be taken into the duct 60 can be increased. In addition, since the outlet 64 has the smaller opening area, the flow speed increases while the air flows through the duct 60. Increased flow speed can facilitate the air flow along the cooling fins 56 of the battery 52 to increase the cooling efficiency.”, see [0057]).
Ueno teaches that this can improve cooling efficiency (Ueno, “the amount of air to be taken into the duct 60 can be increased. In addition, since the outlet 64 has the smaller opening area, the flow speed increases while the air flows through the duct 60. Increased flow speed can facilitate the air flow along the cooling fins 56 of the battery 52 to increase the cooling efficiency.”, see [0057]).
Modified Suzuki and Ueno are analogous as they are both of the same field of vehicle batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the duct as taught in modified Suzuki to have a first opening smaller than a second opening in order to improve cooling efficiency.
Claims 11, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by (US-20200338963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Suzuki’ in view of (US-20190312320-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Uchiyama’
Regarding Claim 11,
Suzuki does not teach the electric work vehicle according to claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of ducts; wherein the battery housing includes a plurality of battery housing module compartments to house a plurality of battery modules ; each of the plurality of ducts is attached to a respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments each of the plurality of ducts includes a first end attached to the respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments and a second end opposite to the first end; one or more of the plurality of ducts includes the second end face a forward direction of the electric work vehicle; and one or more of the plurality of ducts includes the second end face a rearward direction of the electric work vehicle.
Uchiyama teaches the electric vehicle further comprising: a plurality of ducts (Uchiyama, first and second air ducts, 41 and 42, Fig. 3); wherein the battery housing includes a plurality of battery housing module compartments to house a plurality of battery modules (Uchiyama, first and second cell stack, 32, Fig. 2) ; each of the plurality of ducts is attached to a respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments (Uchiyama, see Fig. 3) each of the plurality of ducts includes a first end attached to the respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments and a second end opposite to the first end; one or more of the plurality of ducts includes the second end face a forward direction of the electric work vehicle; and one or more of the plurality of ducts includes the second end face a rearward direction of the electric work vehicle (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
666
630
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Uchiyama teaches that this structure allows for the suppression of water vapor in the housing (Uchiyama, “Therefore, storage of the condensation water in the housing space in the housing case and accumulation of the vapor generated from the condensation water in the housing space can be suppressed, and adhesion of the condensation water to the housed power storage module and the like can be suppressed”, see [0010])
Suzuki and Uchiyama are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cells as taught in Suzuki to have the duct and blower arrangement as taught in Uchiyama in reduce the adhesion of condensation inside the housing.
Regarding Claim 12,
Modified Suzuki teaches the electric work vehicle according to claim 11, further comprising: a plurality of blowers; wherein each of the plurality of blowers is attached to a respective one of the plurality of ducts (Uchiyama, “Battery pack 10 includes a housing case 20, a plurality of cell stacks 30, a first air duct 41, a second air duct 42, a first blower 61, a second blower 62”, see [0036]).
Regarding Claim 14,
Suzuki does not teach a plurality of ducts the battery housing includes a plurality of battery housing module compartments to house a plurality of battery modules; each of the plurality of ducts is attached to a respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments and the plurality of ducts are attached to a same side of the plurality of battery housing module compartments as terminal ends of the plurality of battery modules housed in the plurality of battery housing module compartments.
Uchiyama teaches a plurality of ducts (Uchiyama, first and second air ducts, 41 and 42, Fig. 3); the battery housing includes a plurality of battery housing module compartments to house a plurality of battery modules; each of the plurality of ducts is attached to a respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments (Uchiyama, first and second cell stack, 32, Fig. 2); and the plurality of ducts are attached to a same side of the plurality of battery housing module compartments as terminal ends of the plurality of battery modules housed in the plurality of battery housing module compartments (see Fig. 2).
Uchiyama teaches that this structure allows for the suppression of water vapor in the housing (Uchiyama, “Therefore, storage of the condensation water in the housing space in the housing case and accumulation of the vapor generated from the condensation water in the housing space can be suppressed, and adhesion of the condensation water to the housed power storage module and the like can be suppressed”, see [0010])
Suzuki and Uchiyama are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cells as taught in Suzuki to have the duct and blower arrangement as taught in Uchiyama in reduce the adhesion of condensation inside the housing.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by (US-20200338963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Suzuki’ in view of (US-20190312320-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Uchiyama’ in view of (US-20140072844-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Oh’
Regarding Claim 13,
Suzuki does not teach a plurality of ducts; and a plurality of blowers; wherein each of the plurality of blowers is attached to a respective one of the plurality of ducts; the battery housing includes a plurality of battery housing module compartments to house a plurality of battery modules ; each of the plurality of ducts is attached to a respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments
Uchiyama teaches a plurality of ducts; and a plurality of blowers; wherein each of the plurality of blowers is attached to a respective one of the plurality of ducts (Uchiyama, “Battery pack 10 includes a housing case 20, a plurality of cell stacks 30, a first air duct 41, a second air duct 42, a first blower 61, a second blower 62”, see [0036]) ; the battery housing includes a plurality of battery housing module compartments to house a plurality of battery modules (Uchiyama, cell stack, 31, Fig.2) ; each of the plurality of ducts is attached to a respective one of the plurality of battery housing module compartments (see Fig. 2) ;
Uchiyama teaches that this structure allows for the suppression of water vapor in the housing (Uchiyama, “Therefore, storage of the condensation water in the housing space in the housing case and accumulation of the vapor generated from the condensation water in the housing space can be suppressed, and adhesion of the condensation water to the housed power storage module and the like can be suppressed”, see [0010])
Suzuki and Uchiyama are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cells as taught in Suzuki to have the duct and blower arrangement as taught in Uchiyama in reduce the adhesion of condensation inside the housing.
Modified Suzuki does not teach the battery housing includes a gap located at a central portion of the battery housing; and the plurality of blowers direct air from the gap in a lateral direction and across the plurality of battery housing module compartments.
Oh teaches a gap located at a central portion of the battery housing; and the plurality of blowers direct air from the gap in a lateral direction and across the plurality of battery housing module compartments (Oh, mixing section, see Fig. 2).
Oh teaches that this allows for decreasing the space required for cooling (Oh, “An object of the present invention is to provide a battery system, capable of minimizing cooling air flow and decreasing the space required for heating and cooling the battery system components.”, see [0010])
Modified Suzuki and Oh are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery cooling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack as taught in modified Suzuki to have a central mixing area in order to decrease the space needed for cooling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm.
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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OLATUNJI A GODO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights