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 § 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) 1-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2020-507891 A (hereinafter referred to as “JP ‘891,” references made herein are with respect to the English translation, submitted herewith).
Regarding claim 1, JP ‘891 teaches a pouch cell battery, wherein the case includes a heat dissipation layer 122 between a first metal layer 121 and a second metal layer 123, which are stacked as shown in Figure 1. The first and second metal layers may be aluminum (par. 22), and the heat dissipation layer is a mesh structure (par. 49) of one metal or an alloy of two or more metals (par. 27).
Regarding claim 2, while the product-by-process limitation regarding the formation of the stacked layers is not necessarily considered to impart a further structural distinction over the prior art, the layers of JP ‘891 are considered to be necessarily pressed together during assembly.
Regarding claim 3, the portions at which the layers are fastened to each other are considered to thus constitute the claimed fastening portion(s).
Regarding claim 5, JP ‘891 teaches that the heat dissipation layer is preferably made of a material with excellent thermal conductivity, and that considering that aluminum is generally used for the metal layer of laminate sheets, it is preferable that the heat dissipation layer is made of a metal material having a higher thermal conductivity than aluminum (par. 51), specific examples including Be, Cu, Ag, and Au, all of which have melting points higher than aluminum.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2020-507891 A (hereinafter referred to as “JP ‘891,” references made herein are with respect to the English translation, submitted herewith) as applied to claim 3 above.
JP ‘891 teaches a battery module frame according to claim 3, as shown above.
Regarding claim 4, welding and bolting are conventionally means of fastening and thus their use is considered prima facie obvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13 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: JP ‘891 is considered to represent the closest related prior art to the claimed invention, as shown above. Regarding claim 6, JP ‘891 clearly teaches that the heat dissipation layer must have excellent thermal conductivity, and preferably having a thermal conductivity higher than the aluminum metal layers. As stainless steel exhibits a thermal conductivity that is significantly lower than that of aluminum, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to utilize stainless steel as the material selected for a heat dissipation layer. Regarding claim 7, JP ‘891 fails to teach or suggest that the battery module frame is formed with a ventilation portion exposing the second layer, as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLIN W SLIFKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM-5:30 PM.
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, Ching-Yiu (Coris) Fung can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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.
/Colin W. Slifka/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732
Prosecution Insights