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 Status
Claims 1-14 are pending.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (US12218331B2) in view of Enomoto et al. (US20150188203A1), further in view of Jeon et al. (US20200365844A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kang discloses an immersion-cooled (abstract) battery module (abstract) comprising: a battery assembly (abstract) including a plurality of battery units (100 – see annotated Figure 4 below); a module case (“frame” as the case - col. 2, lines 43-45) extending in a first direction (see annotated Figure 4), the module case having an opening at least at one end of the module case in the first direction (col. 2, lines 52-55; 410 – see annotated Figure 4), and the module case accommodating the battery assembly and a cooling liquid in an internal space of the module case connected to the opening (abstract, col. 3, lines 4-6); and a sealing cover covering the opening (310 – see annotated Figure 4; col. 5, lines 31-35).
PNG
media_image1.png
850
1429
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 4 from Kang et al. (US12218331B2)
While Kang discloses a sealing cover covering the opening (310 – see annotated Figure 4; col. 5, lines 31-35), they do not explicitly disclose that the sealing cover is airtightly covering the opening, nor that each of the plurality of battery units comprises a plurality of battery cells disposed side by side along the first direction, an insulating block disposed between adjacent battery cells among the plurality of battery cells; and a connection member coupled to the insulating block and electrically connected to electrode leads of the adjacent battery cells.
Enomoto discloses an immersion-cooled battery module (abstract) comprising a module case (“outer case” – [0032]). Enomoto further discloses wherein the module case is airtightly sealed via an adhesive (29 – [0023]) and optionally a sealing member ([0024]) to create an airtight battery chamber ([0025]). Kang and Enomoto are both analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely immersion-cooled battery modules comprising a module case. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have modified the battery of Kang such that it is airtight and immersible as taught by Enomoto because the combination of known elements (airtight seals) to arrive at the predictable result (immersible battery) is well within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Jeon discloses a battery module (abstract) comprising a battery assembly (“cell assembly” - [0042]) including a plurality of battery units (abstract). Jeon further discloses wherein each of the plurality of battery units comprises: a plurality of battery cells disposed side by side along the first direction ([0042]; see annotated Figure 4), an insulating block disposed between adjacent battery cells among the plurality of battery cells ([0009-0010]); and a connection member ([0009]) coupled to the insulating block ([0009]) and electrically connected to electrode leads of the adjacent battery cells ([0066]), teaching that the battery assembly facilitates customizability and ease of manufacture ([0151, 0154]). Jeon is analogous to the current invention because both are related to the same field of endeavor, namely battery modules comprising a battery assembly including a plurality of battery units. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have modified the battery module of Kang such that it has the structure disclosed above of Jeon for the purposes of making manufacturing easier and more flexible.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1. Kang further discloses wherein each of the adjacent battery cells (120) at is provided with electrode leads at both ends of the battery cell (120 - see annotated Figure 4) along the first direction (col. 6, lines 6-9).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the plurality of battery units are stacked on each other in a second direction with plate-shaped cooling fins or insulating pads interposed between. Jeon further discloses wherein the plurality of battery units are stacked on each other in a second direction (see annotated Figure 2 below of Jeon) with insulated pads interposed therebetween ([0104]), teaching that the insulating pads interposed therebetween can prevent direct contact between cells, increase insulation, and absorb assembly tolerance ([0105]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have further modified the immersion-cooled battery module of modified Kang such that includes the structure disclosed above as taught by Jeon both because said person would recognize that stacking the battery units on each other in a second direction amounts to no more than rearrangement of parts and is consequently an obvious matter of design choice (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(c)), and for the purposes of preventing direct cell contact, increasing insulation, and absorbing assembly tolerance.
PNG
media_image2.png
1127
1430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2 from Jeon et al. (US20200365844A1)
Regarding Claim 8, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1. Jeon further discloses wherein the battery assembly comprises a circuit board configured to sense electrical signals related to the plurality of battery cells in the plurality of battery units ([0084] – note that the connection member of Jeon includes the circuit board).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 8. Jeon further discloses wherein the insulating block comprises a support portion (26b – see annotated Figures 4 and 5 of Jeon below to support and position the circuit board away from the battery cells, the support position configured to allow the cooling liquid to move between the circuit board and the battery cells (see annotated Figures 4 and 5 of Jeon).
PNG
media_image3.png
736
1429
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figures 4 and 5 from Jeon et al. (US20200365844A1)
Regarding Claim 10, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 8. Jeon further discloses wherein the connection member comprises a body portion (see annotated Figures 4 and 5 of Jeon) and an extension portion (see annotated Figures 4 and 5 of Jeon), the body portion electrically connected to electrode leads of the adjacent battery cells ([0066], see annotated Figures 4 and 5 of Jeon), the extension portion extending from one end of the body portion and in contact with the circuit board to be electrically connected ([0084], see annotated Figures 4 and 5 of Jeon). Jeon does not specifically disclose the extension portion being inserted into the circuit board to be electrically connected to the circuit board via a hole. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have recognized the design need of electrically connecting the extension portion of the connection member to the circuit board. Moreover, said person would have recognized the finite number of ways in which the extension portion could be in contact with the circuit board to electrically connect: the extension portion inserted into the circuit board (with insertion necessitating the presence of a receiving hole), the circuit board inserted into the extension portion, and/or surfaces of the two components overlapping at an interface. This consequently renders inserting the extension portion into the circuit board via a hole as a solution that would be obvious to try with a reasonable expectation of success (see MPEP 2143(I)(E)).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1. Modified Kang does not however disclose wherein the assembly comprises a pair of side plates, each side plate in close contact with both ends of the battery units in a second direction, the plurality of battery units being stacked in the second direction, each side plate including a first opening portion at one end of the side plate in contact with an inner surface of the module case to provide a cooling liquid conduit.
Jeon further discloses side plates ([0108, 113-114]; 50a – annotated Figure 2 of Jeon), each side plate in close contact with both ends of the battery units in a second direction (annotated Figure 2 of Jeon), the plurality of battery units being stacked in the second direction (annotated Figure 2 of Jeon), including a first opening portion at one end of the side plate (52 – annotated Figure 2 of Jeon) in contact with an inner surface of the module case (50b – annotated Figure 2 of Jeon) to provide a cooling liquid conduit ([0116, 0118]; annotated Figure 2 of Jeon), teaching that the side plate both protects a side surface of the cell assembly and cools the battery cell ([0112]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have further modified the immersion-cooled battery module of modified Kang such that it includes the structure disclosed above as taught by Jeon in order to protect the cell assembly and cool the battery cell, as taught by Jeon.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 11. Jeon further discloses wherein at least one of the pair of side plates (50 – see annotated Figure 2 of Jeon) further comprises a second opening (54 – see annotated Figure 2 of Jeon) that exposes a surface of a battery cell in an adjacent battery unit to contact a cooling liquid ([0118]; 54 - see annotated Figure 2 of Jeon)
Regarding Claim 13, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1. Kang further discloses that a battery pack can comprise the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1 (col. 7, lines 26-30).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1. Kang further discloses that a vehicle can comprise the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1 (col. 7, lines 32-34).
__
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (US12218331B2) in view of Jeon et al. (US20200365844A1), further in view of Buck (US20070259258A1) .
Regarding Claim 4, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 3, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the battery assembly includes a plurality of unit stacks, each unit stack including two or more battery units stacked on each other with the cooling fins interposed therebetween with the cooling fins interposed therebetween, the plurality of unit stacks stacked on each other with the insulating pads interposed therebetween. Jeon further discloses wherein the battery assembly incudes a plurality of unit stacks, each unit stack including two or more battery units stacked on each other ([0018]), the plurality of unit stacks being stacked on each other with insulating pads interposed therebetween ([0104]), but does not disclose wherein the two or more battery units stacked on each other feature cooling fins interposed therebetween. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have further modified the immersion-cooled battery module of modified Kang such that includes the structure disclosed above as taught by Jeon because said person would recognize that stacking the plurality of unit stacks with the insulating pads interposed therebetween, each unit stack including two or more battery units stacked on each other, amounts to no more than rearrangement of parts and is consequently an obvious matter of design choice (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(c)).
Buck discloses a battery assembly (abstract) including a plurality of battery units (abstract). Buck further discloses wherein the battery assembly includes a plurality of unit stacks ([0028]), each unit stack including two or more battery units (212 – see annotated Figure 5 of Buck) stacked on each other (see annotated Figure 5 of Buck) with the cooling fins (214) interposed therebetween (see annotated Figure 5 of Buck), the plurality of unit stacks stacked on each other ([0028]) with the insulating pads (18 – see annotated Figure 5 of Buck) interposed therebetween ([0028]) for the purposes of improving heat absorption characteristics by eliminating air gaps formed between the battery units to promote the absorption of heat generated within the assembly to be transferred outside of the assembly ([0041]). Buck is analogous to the current invention because both are related to the same field of endeavor, namely the cooling of cells within a battery assembly. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the immersion-cooled battery module of modified Kang with the battery assembly of Buck to have the two or more battery units stacked on each other feature cooling fins interposed therebetween, in order to promote the absorption of heat generated within the battery assembly to then be transferred outside of the assembly towards the cooling medium, as taught by Buck.
PNG
media_image4.png
875
1518
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5 from Buck (US20070259258A1)
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 8, 11, 13, and 14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of copending Application No. 18/708,141 (Lee et al., corresponding to US20260066391A1).
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of copending Application No. 18/708,141 (Lee et al., corresponding to US20260066391A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant Claim 1 and claims 1-2 of Lee disclose an immersion-cooled battery module comprising: a battery assembly; a module case extending in a first direction, the module case having an opening at least at one end of the module case in the first direction, the module case accommodating the battery assembly and a cooling liquid in an internal space of the module case connected to the opening; and a sealing cover airtightly covering the opening, wherein each of the plurality of battery units comprises: a plurality of battery cells side by side along the first direction; an insulating block disposed between adjacent battery cells among the plurality of battery cells; and a connection member coupled to the insulating block and electrically connected to electrode leads of the adjacent cells.
Claim 8 is provisionally rejected as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 and 7 of Lee. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant Claim 8 and claims 1 and 2 of Lee disclose the immersion-cooled battery module according to the instant Claim 1, while the instant Claim 8 and claim 7 of Lee both further disclose wherein the battery assembly further comprises a circuit board configured to sense electrical signals related to the plurality of battery cells in the plurality of battery units.
Claim 11 is provisionally rejected as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 and 10 of Lee. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant Claim 11 and claims 1 and 2 of Lee disclose the immersion-cooled battery module according to the instant Claim 1, while the instant Claim 11 and claim 10 of Lee both disclose wherein the battery assembly comprises a pair of side plates, each side plate in contact with both ends of the battery units in a second direction, the plurality of battery units being stacked in the second direction, each side plate including a first opening portion at one end of the side plate in contact with an inner surface of the module case to provide a cooling liquid conduit.
Claim 13 is provisionally rejected as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 and 13 of Lee. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant Claim 13 and claims 1 and 2 of Lee disclose the immersion-cooled battery module according to the instant Claim 1, while the instant Claim 13 and claim 13 of Lee both disclose wherein a battery pack comprises the immersion-cooled battery module according to the instant Claim 1.
Claim 14 is provisionally rejected as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 and 14 of Lee. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant Claim 14 and claims 1 and 2 of Lee disclose the immersion-cooled battery module according to the instant Claim 1, while the instant Claim 14 and claim 14 of Lee both disclose wherein a vehicle comprises the immersion-cooled battery module according to the instant Claim 1.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base Claim 1, 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:
Regarding Claim 5, modified Kang (Kang in view of Enomoto and Jeon) discloses the immersion-cooled battery according to Claim 1 as discussed above. Jeon further discloses wherein the insulating block includes a coupling groove (see annotated Figure 5 from Jeon). Jeon does not however disclose wherein the insulating block includes a plurality of slots, nor where the coupling groove is configured to receive the connection member and couple the connection member to the insulating block, and consequently does not disclose wherein a plurality of slots communicating with an internal space of the coupling groove are configured to receive electrode leads of the adjacent battery cells. The prior art at best discloses a coupling groove included in the insulating block, but does not disclose the cumulative limitations of Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 depends on Claim 5 and would be allowable for the same reasons above.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Kang discloses the immersion-cooled battery module according to Claim 1. Regarding the additional limitations, Jeon discloses an insulating block, but does not disclose wherein the insulating block has a cooling liquid channel on a surface of the insulating block, nor an insulating block surface in contact with an inner surface of the module case. Stuetz et al. (US20200266403A1) discloses an immersion-cooled battery module (abstract). Stuetz further discloses cooling liquid channels on an inner surface of the module case to provide a conduit for the cooling liquid ([0105]), but does not disclose an insulating block disposed between adjacent battery cells. The prior art at best discloses cooling liquid channels formed between the battery assembly and the inner surface of the module case, but does not disclose the cumulative limitations of Claim 7
References cited but not relied upon
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure:
Roe et al. (“Immersion cooling for lithium-ion batteries – A review” – copy furnished with Office Action) discloses wherein immersion cooling of batteries is defined as submerging batteries in a dielectric fluid and/or where battery cells are directly in contact with an electrically insulating working fluid.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kent G. Mendoza whose telephone number is (571)482-9953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00 EST.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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.
/K.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights