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 § 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 20 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 20 invokes 112(f) with the recitation of “a device for manufacture” without substantially more modification to the device. Instant specification [0084-0085] do not provide adequate disclosure of the term; one having ordinary skill in the art would not know the scope of the claim based on the description provided in the specification. MPEP 2191 II requires a description necessary to support a claim limitation which invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f). One having ordinary skill in the art would not know the full scope and bounds of the “a provision module”.
No rejection for claim 20 is presented below because “a device…characterized by comprising a provision module” is indefinite what the device is and what the provision module is. The material of the energy storage container is immaterial to the scope of the claim because it is directed to the article worked upon, the device that is doing the working.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6-9, 13-14, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087).
Claim 1, 19: Kim teaches an energy storage system including a battery cell, tray for receiving the battery cell, and a rack for receiving the tray with a connector unit [Abstract]. Kim teaches the scope of applicant’s energy storage container (10: Energy storage system, 500: rack), multiple battery compartments (columns of battery receiving portions of Fig 3), battery compartments (openings between shelves 532), sidewall (523: middle frame), bracket (536: support plate), wherein more than three compartments are within one multiple battery compartment column and share a sidewall [Fig 1, 3-4]. Applicant’s main control box is taught by Kim’s switch box 300, which is electrically connected to the battery cells, which performs the function of protecting the battery cells [0043-0045] and is located in a second direction perpendicular to a first direction wherein the first direction is defined by the a direction that comprises the plurality of multiple battery compartments [Fig 1]. Each tray that is inserted into a battery compartment comprises a plurality of batteries (100) and therefore the multiple battery compartments are configured to accommodate multiple batteries [Fig 2]. Kim’s switch box (300) and battery management box (400) read on applicant’s control box as the features of Kim are electrically connected to the boxes [0040-0045].
Claim 6: Kim teaches batteries (100) to be in a third direction as they are inserted into the cavity of the system [Fig 1-3].
Claim 7: Kim teaches applicant’s main control box compartments (300, 400) [Fig 1] arranged consecutively in the first direction.
Claim 8: Kim teaches a support beam provided between two adjacent ones of the columns of the main control box compartments [Fig 1, 3].
Claim 9: Kim teaches the support beam to comprise applicant’s upper wing plate, web plate, lower wing plate [Fig 4; 0050-0054]. The wall is shared by multiple battery compartments and the main control box compartment [Fig 1, 3]. Applicant utilizes “attached” whereby indirect attachment reads on the instant claim language, applicant can utilize ‘directly attached’ where appropriate; the feature interpreted to be the upper wing plate is attached to the wall since they are in the same system. In at least one interpretation, since the applicant has failed to positively recite the structurally limiting features of the terms used for objects within a system, applicant’s upper wing plate is taught by a first plate 532, the web plate is the sidewall as required by the claim, and a second plate 532 in the same column is the lower wing plate. The terms “wing” and “web” do not specifically define the structural limitation of the instant claim as the sidewalls form a web the batteries are trapped within and the plates extending between walls act as a wing of the wall reaching out to an adjacent wall.
Claim 13: Kim teaches a battery management box (400) – applicant’s main control box – and a switch box (300) – applicant’s electrical compartment – to be side by side in the first direction [Fig 1].
Claim 14: Kim teaches the switch box – applicant’s electrical compartment – to comprise a general control box that can protect the battery cells [0043].
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(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bailey (PGPUB 2015/0093982).
Claim 2: Kim teaches a middle wall, but is silent to teach it being corrugated.
Bailey teaches a side by side battery compartment that is stackable [Fig 1-2] where the vertical plenum (40) between two columns of battery compartments is made of a corrugated wall [0038]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the side wall of Kim to be a corrugated wall as taught by Bailey in order to improve structural stability, reduce weight, and increase air flow cooling potential within the system [0036-0040].
Claim(s) 3, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zimbru et al (PGPUB 2017/0294633).
Claim 3: Kim teaches an outermost wall [Fig 1-3], but is silent to teach a door.
Zimbru teaches an energy storage cabinet (10) with multiple battery compartments in a first direction with multiple battery compartments housing multiple batteries with a sidewall therebetween [Abstract; Fig 1, 4, 7, 12]. Panels (72) include seals [Fig 7, 11; 0034]. The panels, applicant’s doors, and the walls of the cabinet are sealed [0034]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include doors and a seal as taught by Zimbru in order to seal the air space in the internal volume of the module from the exterior environment [0034].
Claim 10: Kim teaches an outermost wall [Fig 1-3], but is silent to teach a door.
Zimbru teaches an energy storage cabinet (10) with multiple battery compartments in a first direction with multiple battery compartments housing multiple batteries with a sidewall therebetween [Abstract; Fig 1, 4, 7, 12]. Panels (72) include seals [Fig 7, 11; 0034]. The panels, applicant’s doors, and the walls of the cabinet are sealed [0034]. A second door is shown in the assembly [Fig 7]. The dimension and selection of number of doors is obvious to optimize as each door increases cost and complexity, but improves access to the battery cells therein. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include doors and a seal as taught by Zimbru in order to seal the air space in the internal volume of the module from the exterior environment [0034].
Claim 11: Kim is silent to teach a heat management component compartment. Kim teaches columns and rows of battery compartments and a control box portion in each column so therefore the ‘first direction’ of the instant claim is capable of being vertical or horizontal.
Zimbru teaches a roof (64) to comprise a thermal management system therein [0031]. The heat management system would be obvious to add to the top of the system of Kim such that the heat management component compartment is arranged in the first direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include a heat management component compartment as taught by Zimbru in order to improve the building capabilities and utility of the assembled system [0031].
Claim(s) 4, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) as applied to claim 1, 13 above, and further in view of CN 108054460.
Claim 4: Kim is silent to teach a wall material made of a cotton sandwich.
‘460 teaches a battery module with material between two adjacent cells (1) [Abstract]. The package material (10) comprises an inner contents (30) which are a porous fiber heat insulator material such as cotton:
PNG
media_image1.png
267
913
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include a cotton sandwich as taught by ‘460 in order improve the fire safety and thermal management of the battery container.
Claim 15: Instant claim depends on claim 13, whereby no ‘first sandwich structure’ is present. This is not indefinite, but applicant is to be made aware that claim 13 does not depend on claim 4.
Kim is silent to teach a wall material made of a cotton sandwich.
‘460 teaches a battery module with material between two adjacent cells (1) [Abstract]. The package material (10) comprises an inner contents (30) which are a porous fiber heat insulator material such as cotton:
PNG
media_image1.png
267
913
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include a cotton sandwich as taught by ‘460 in order improve the fire safety and thermal management of the battery container.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang (PGPUB 2020/0161728).
Claim 5: Kim is silent to teach a fluid management system.
Wang teaches a compartment for housing a plurality of battery modules therein (100) [Abstract]. The assembly comprises an inlet (140) of liquid coolant [0037] and outlet with valve [0038]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include a water thermal system and management thereof as taught by Wang in order to increase the thermal management capabilities of the system. The specifics of plumbing to be added to the wall is an obvious engineering choice in order to provide efficient routing of thermal management inlet and outlet material to specific cells. Optimizing plumbing is routine and obvious.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) and Zimbru et al (PGPUB 2017/0294633) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of ROH (PGPUB 2022/0223965).
Claim 12: Kim is silent to teach a water pipe and clamp for coolant and thermal management capabilities within the system.
Roh teaches a battery pack with stacked batteries therein with a tube mounted thereon [Abstract]. The battery pack comprises a cooling water pipe for supplying cooling water to heat sinks [0021]. The pipe is fixed through tong parts [0022], applicant’s pipe clamp. Roh teaches the heat exchange plates can be throughout the system and have thermal management with the cooling water. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the battery container of Kim by including the cooling pipe, clamping mechanism, and corresponding heat plates as taught by Roh in order to improve the thermal management of the system [0012-0016]. Providing a heat sink to the main control box components would improve the operation of the components and allow them to remain in operation zones regardless of outside, external temperatures. It is well known to adapt refrigerators for garages whereby the control functions need to be protected from extremely high heat, adding cooling mechanisms for controller type features is well known.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) and CN 108054460 as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Zimbru et al (PGPUB 2017/0294633).
Claim 16: Kim teaches an outermost wall [Fig 1-3], but is silent to teach a door.
Zimbru teaches an energy storage cabinet (10) with multiple battery compartments in a first direction with multiple battery compartments housing multiple batteries with a sidewall therebetween [Abstract; Fig 1, 4, 7, 12]. Panels (72) include seals [Fig 7, 11; 0034]. The panels, applicant’s doors, and the walls of the cabinet are sealed [0034]. In one embodiment, there are four doors [Fig 8]; this is mere duplication of parts whereby different unit features having their own door is obvious MPEP 2144.04 Duplication of Parts. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the energy storage cabinet of Kim to include doors and a seal as taught by Zimbru in order to seal the air space in the internal volume of the module from the exterior environment [0034].
Claim(s) 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (PGPUB 2013/0065087) as applies to claim 1 above, further in view of Bende (PGPUB 2020/0014008)
Claim 17: Kim teaches a container with electrical connection of batteries through high current wires (11) [0045], but is silent to teach busbars.
One having ordinary skill in the art would have known that busbars and wires are art recognized equivalents usable for the same purpose of managing the electrical connection of batteries. Wires are light weight, but can become disconnected or cut; busbars are heavy, and need channels, applicant’s compartment, carved in casing or walls to accommodate the bulk of the busbar. Bende teaches a housing assembly for a plurality of battery modules [Abstract] whereby the battery modules (16) are electrically connected to each other and the external via a busbar and corresponding busbar accommodation of the system [0019-0027]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the high current wires of Kim to include busbars as a replacement for as taught by Bende in order to provide rigid and stable electrical connection.
Claim 18: Kim teaches the compartments to be open and therefore a transparent panel. The transparent panel extend the entire front of the assembly. Kim is silent to teach the busbar.
Bende teaches the busbar to be fixed to the battery which is interpreted to read on applicant’s sealing panel assembly [Fig 2]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of the invention to modify the high current wires of Kim to include busbars as a replacement for as taught by Bende in order to provide rigid and stable electrical connection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shelnutt et al (USPAT 11036265) The battery container is stored in a truck and adapted to utilize velocity cooling from air obtained while the vehicle is traveling [Abstract]. The application was filed in 2018 and incorporates batteries, controllers, cooling, and stabilization of the system for the purpose of utilizing the air flow that is unique to the specific embodiment on a motor vehicle. Shelnutt is incorporated herein to not only show a battery container with multiple batteries and controller, but to show the level of one having ordinary skill in the art. One having ordinary skill in the art is capable of doing routine optimization of cooling, powering, and arranging battery cells within modules within cabinets. Clear nexus of feature between typical battery housing and newly defined improvements can lead to patentability as shown in ‘265, but routine adjustment of locations of batteries, duplication of parts, and the such would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as falls under MPEP 2144.04. Merely being different is not patentably distinguishing. Having a different configuration of known elements is routine, absent a clear improvement. When addressing remarks and future amendments, keeping in mind the level of one having ordinary skill in the art to be an engineer will predictably lead to compact prosecution; underselling the capabilities and knowledge of one having ordinary skill in the art by arguing ‘novel improvement’ for mere rearrangement of parts may not be found persuasive.
Li et al (CN 112803099) Li teaches an energy storage cabinet and energy storage system comprising a rectangular box body, cabinet body with an open structure that is capable of being operated on both sides to improve installation and maintenance [Abstract]. A plurality of battery modules (2) are placed within each of the battery compartments [Fig 4; Pg 5 Ln 20-Pg 6 Ln 17]. Battery modules within the casing (2) comprise a plurality of batteries therein; instant claim is silent to limit the scope to a plurality of battery modules and therefore a plurality of battery cells within a common battery module is sufficient to meet the claim scope as presented [Fig 5; Pg 6 LN 30-Pg 7 LN 41]. The cabinet comprises a plurality of columns of batteries that are interpreted to read on applicant’s sidewall and a plurality of rows of the columns having a bracket type support (12) with sliding groove (112) [Pg 6 Ln 38-Pg 7 Ln 15].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J YANCHUK whose telephone number is (571)270-7343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-8p.
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, Nick 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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights