DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
Claims 1-20 are pending and are examined herein. This is the first action on the merits.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 11, 12, 17, and 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“one or more the battery cells” (claims 11 and 12) is ungrammatical
Additionally, the term “flowpath” in the claims should be amended to “flow path” wherever it appears. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 15 and 18 lack proper antecedent basis for “the battery cell.”
Regarding Claims 1, 19, and 20, the term “main body” is indefinite because it is unclear how to interpret “main”: the largest part? an arbitrarily identified part, synonymous with being labeled “a first body”? It is also unclear whether it actually implies an integrated “body.” Claim 4, for instance, requires “the main body is formed of a first body […] and a second body […] wherein the first body is separate from the second body.” Is the main body really two bodies? Then what significance does “main body” have, as opposed to a claim limitation that does not refer to a body at all, such as, “wherein the cooling structure comprises at least one cooling fluid flow path”? That is, how does “main body” further delimit the claim by its presence? The claims have been interpreted so that “main body” broadly refers to some arbitrary structure, separable or integrated.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, it is not clear what “adjacency” means (i.e. carried over from claim 2, on which 3 is dependent) when there is a “barrier” interposed between the supposedly adjacent structures. The term “adjacent” therefore appears to be a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “adjacent” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term has been interpreted relatively, as meaning, “nearer than some other component of the assembly.”
Claim 18 also requires “cooling plates dispose don sides of the battery cell(s?) along the second axis.” It is unclear whether this requires multiples cooling plates arranged along the second axis, or cooling plates with a main axis extending along the second axis. It is further unclear what distinguishes a cooling plates from a flow path. The claim has been interpreted broadly to refer to any of the above.
Note on Claim Interpretation
While the claims are directed towards “an integrated circuit board (ICB) assembly,” which seems to be some sort of body or substrate with various parts, including cooling parts and bus bar holding parts, the claims do not actually to require any circuit board, per se, let alone a specific type of circuit board. The specification itself does not appear to discuss the circuit board, apart from mere implication in the term “integrated circuit board (ICB) assembly.” Circuit boards were conventional in the art for integrating and controlling batteries hooked up to a controller. The term integrated circuit board (ICB) assembly has been interpreted to require a body, substrate, or holder that is capable of positioning, supporting, or holding a circuit board, rather than explicitly requiring a circuit board, as its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification as filed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jung (US 2023/0111495 to Jung et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Jung teaches:
a battery for a vehicle with a housing assembly having three dimensions, including a stacking dimension along which a plurality of cells is stacked (i.e. y-axis), the housing supporting bus bars and cooling elements, and capable of supporting a circuit board and/or controller (¶ 0003, 0077, etc., Figs. 1-41)
the assembly broadly being disposed adjacent to the battery cells along the x- and z-axis and electrically coupled to the plurality of battery cells via bus bar assembly 200 (¶ 0076, 0107-0111, Fig. 9)
wherein the assembly comprises a cooling structure 300 thermally coupled to the battery cells and having a main body defining at least one cooling fluid flow path which removes heat from the battery cells (¶ 0186-0197, 0219-0220, Figs. 21-23)
PNG
media_image1.png
738
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
544
732
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
702
858
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Jung teaches:
the flow path comprises first and second portions extending along the y-axis that are adjacent to each other in the x- and z-axis
The word “portion” does not appear to provide any positive structure that would distinguish it from arbitrarily dividing up even a single flow stream. Any part of a flow stream can be arbitrarily designated a first, second, third, or nth “portion” of that stream without further positive structure.
Regarding Claim 3, Jung teaches:
a plurality of flow portions 300 distributed across the module along the x-axis and separated by holders 410, which read on a “thermal barrier” as claimed insofar as they absorb and/or prevent heat from flowing without resistance along the x-axis of the module
Regarding Claim 4, Jung teaches:
wherein the main body is formed of two or more bodies 300 with separate portions, and a thermal barrier 410 interposed between them along the x-axis (Fig. 21, etc.)
Regarding Claim 6, Jung teaches:
the first portion extending from a first flow path inlet 374 disposed at one end along the y-axis to a bend portion 356, and a second portion extending along the y-axis extending from the bend portion 356 to an outlet 376 disposed at the same end of the main (¶ 0147-0156, Figs. 13-14)
PNG
media_image4.png
511
614
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
332
614
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Jung teaches:
a cap 356 that defines the flow path bend portion (Fig. 14)
Regarding Claim 8, Jung teaches:
first and second flow paths extending along the y-axis, with inlet and outlet at the same end, and a flow path bend portion at the opposite end connecting the first and second flow paths (Fig. 14)
Regarding Claim 9, Jung teaches:
cylindrical battery cells with an electrode stack therein, and a thermal interface material 500 disposed between the cells and the cooling structure to transfer heat (¶0233-0236)
Regarding Claim 10, Jung teaches:
conventional cylindrical batteries, having electrode tabs, that are thermally conductive, and are disposed between the electrode stack and an inner surface of housing, in virtue of being connected to the outer terminals
Claim 10 does not appear to require anything more than what is already conventional in a cylindrical battery, since thermally conductive, electrically conductive material is disposed between the electrode stack and the housing as a way of conducting electricity.
Regarding Claims 11 and 12, Jung teaches:
first and second bus bars 250 connecting the battery cells, on opposite sides of the module, with one or more cooling structures 300 disposed between bus bars along the x-axis (Figs. 1, 9, 13, 21, 41, etc.)
Regarding Claim 15, Jung teaches:
a filling material, that can be divided into “first and second” TIMs disposed on opposite sides of the cooling structure(s) 300 and facing different groups of battery cells, wherein the first and second TIMs can be, e.g., different sections of silicone resin filling different gaps between the cells and the cooling plate(s) 300 (Figs. 18-20)
first and second thermal bridge plates 240 extending along the x-axis and facing the cells in the z-axis, wherein the extension along the x-axis overlaps first and second bus bars on opposite sides of the module, as well as extending over thermal interface material 500 filling the assembly (¶ 0111-0113, Figs. 9-41)
Regarding Claim 16, Jung teaches:
the assembly comprising a plurality of cooling structures 300 along the x-axis (Figs.)
Regarding Claim 17, Jung teaches:
at least implicitly a pump to circulate the material, and the cooling plates 300 themselves read on “a heat exchanger” coupled to the inlets and outlets
Regarding Claim 18, Jung teaches:
cooling plates 300 that are on the sides of the batteries, and are distributed along the x-axis
Regarding Claim 19, Jung teaches:
a battery for a vehicle with a housing assembly having three dimensions, including a stacking dimension along which a plurality of cells is stacked (i.e. y-axis), the housing supporting bus bars and cooling elements, and capable of supporting a circuit board and/or controller (¶ 0003, 0077, etc., Figs. 1-41)
the assembly broadly being disposed adjacent to the battery cells along the x- and z-axis and electrically coupled to the plurality of battery cells via bus bar assembly 200 (¶ 0076, 0107-0111, Fig. 9)
wherein the assembly comprises a cooling structure 300 thermally coupled to the battery cells and having a main body defining at least one cooling fluid flow path which removes heat from the battery cells (¶ 0186-0197, 0219-0220, Figs. 21-23)
Regarding Claim 20, Jung teaches:
a battery for a vehicle with a housing assembly having three dimensions, including a stacking dimension along which a plurality of cells is stacked (i.e. y-axis), the housing supporting bus bars and cooling elements, and capable of supporting a circuit board and/or controller (¶ 0003, 0077, etc., Figs. 1-41)
the assembly broadly being disposed adjacent to the battery cells along the x- and z-axis and electrically coupled to the plurality of battery cells via bus bar assembly 200 (¶ 0076, 0107-0111, Fig. 9)
wherein the assembly comprises a cooling structure 300 thermally coupled to the battery cells and having a main body defining at least one cooling fluid flow path which removes heat from the battery cells (¶ 0186-0197, 0219-0220, Figs. 21-23)
the flow path comprises first and second portions extending along the y-axis that are adjacent to each other in the x- and z-axis (Figs. 13-14)
first and second bus bars 250 connecting the battery cells, on opposite sides of the module, with one or more cooling structures 300 disposed between bus bars along the x-axis (Figs. 1, 9, 13, 21, 41, etc.)
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 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (US 2023/0111495 to Jung et al.) in view of Choi (US 2019/0379093 to Choi et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Jung teaches:
the first portion extending from a first flow path inlet 374 disposed at one end along the y-axis to a bend portion 356, and a second portion extending along the y-axis extending from the bend portion 356 to an outlet 376 disposed at the same end of the main (¶ 0147-0156, Figs. 13-14)
Jung teaches both inlet and outlet at one end. It was conventional in the art to provide inlet and outlet at opposite ends, as an alternative solution. Choi, for example teaches such a configuration. Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results has been found to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). A structure or method step that is obvious to try—such as one that is chosen from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, has been found to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Claim 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (US 2023/0111495 to Jung et al.) in view of Yokell (US 2023/0291028 to Yokell).
Regarding Claims 13 and 14, Jung teaches:
first and second thermal bridge plates 240 extending along the x-axis and facing the cells in the z-axis, wherein the extension along the x-axis overlaps first and second bus bars as well as extending over thermal interface material 500 filling the assembly (¶ 0111-0113)
the bridge plates being an insulating material like polyimide (¶ 0111-0113)
Jung does not explicitly teach:
the bridge plates comprising ceramic that is thermally conductive
Yokell, however, from the same field of invention, regarding a connection assembly for a stack of battery cells having a cooling conduit in contact with bus bar connections, teaches providing an AlN interface material to improve heat conductivity between the bus bars and the conduit, and to better dissipate heat (¶ 0044). It would have been obvious to use such a material in the bus bar assembly of Jung to electrically insulate the bus bars while improving heat dissipation. Use of a known technique to improve similar devices, methods, or products in the same way, and applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results has been found to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Dignan, whose telephone number is (571) 272-6425. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 10 AM and 6:30 PM. If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tiffany Legette, can be reached at (571)270-7078. Another resource that is available to applicants is the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR). Information regarding the status of an application can be obtained from the (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAX. 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, please feel free to contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Applicants are invited to contact the Office to schedule an in-person interview to discuss and resolve the issues set forth in this Office Action. Although an interview is not required, the Office believes that an interview can be of use to resolve any issues related to a patent application in an efficient and prompt manner.
/MICHAEL L DIGNAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights