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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 07/31/2024 and 07/23/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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 13 and 16 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. Specifically, claim 13 requires the first and second layers to be present on the plate surface of the first heat transfer members. However, the only previous mention of a first and second layer is in claim 12, which requires the first and second layer to be a part of the second heat transfer part. It is unclear whether this means two different first and second layers, whether the first and second heat transfer parts are the same structure, or whether the first and second layers are on the first or second heat transfer member. Thus, the claim is rejected for being indefinite, and would need to be further amended in order to be properly examined. For examination purposes, it will be examined as though the requirement is for the first and second layer to be on a plate surface of the second heat transfer parts, rather than the first heat transfer parts. The same reasoning applies to claim 16, which also requires the first and second layer to be on the first heat transfer parts, wherein the only prior mention of a first and second layer is regarding the second heat transfer parts. Claim 16 will also be examined as if the limitation is in regard to the second heat transfer part.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama (US 20200365855 A1) in view of Ando (US 20220320626 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Murayama teaches the following limitations:
A battery pack comprising: (“Hence, it is an object of the present disclosure to provide a battery module that inhibits thermal damage to prismatic batteries other than a prismatic battery that has abnormally generated heat by inhibiting the conduction of heat from the abnormal prismatic battery in a battery stack direction. It is another object of the present disclosure to provide a battery pack that includes such a battery module.” Murayama [0005])
a plurality of battery cells; (“Battery stack 21 includes the plurality of prismatic batteries (cells) 31 each having a substantially rectangular-parallelepiped shape, and a plurality of inter-battery separators 32.” Murayama [0017])
a cooling plate on one side of the plurality of battery cells; (“With continuous reference to FIG. 1, the housing according to the present exemplary embodiment includes a bottom plate having heat transfer sheet 40 and cooling plate 41 made of a metal such as aluminum or an aluminum alloy.” Murayama [0027])
and an insulation member between adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells, (“ Prismatic batteries 31 adjacent to each other in the stack direction are thermally insulated from each other by first and second side members 51, 52 of inter-battery separator 32 and this reduces the amount of heat conducted between adjacent prismatic batteries 31.” Murayama [0038])
the insulation member comprising an insulation part, (in this case, the inter-battery separator 32 of Murayama comprises an insulation part, and thus meets this limitation. However, if substituted with the inter-battery separator of Ando, this would be irrelevant. See below for comparison between instant figure 4 and Murayama figure 2.)
PNG
media_image1.png
524
782
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
536
626
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Murayama is silent on the following limitations of claim 1. Specifically, the inter-battery separator of Murayama has layers in reverse order as are required by claim 1.
a pair of first heat transfer parts on both sides of the insulation part,
and a first layer on at least a portion of each of the pair of first heat transfer parts, the first layer having a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part.
However, Ando teaches an inter-battery separator that, if substituted with that of Murayama, would meet all of the limitations of claim 1. Specifically, Ando teaches an inter-battery separator that comprises a central insulation part, as well as both first and second heat transfer parts which surround the insulation part:
a pair of first heat transfer parts on both sides of the insulation part (As can be seen in Ando figure 6, the heat conductive sheets are on both sides of the insulation part, thus meeting the limitations of claim 1.)
and a first layer on at least a portion of each of the pair of first heat transfer parts, the first layer having a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part. (“first heat conductive sheets 11 laminated outside the heat insulating sheets 12 in a separated manner and having more excellent heat conductivity than the rubber sheet 13 and the heat insulating sheets 12.” Ando [0058]. In this case, the layer on the portion of the first heat transfer parts is their surface, as the entirety of the heat conductive sheet of Ando comprises a material with a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part. See below for comparison between Ando figure 6 and instant figure 4. )
PNG
media_image3.png
524
782
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
540
519
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Ando and Murayama are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of methods of managing heat generation within a battery device, particularly the heat generated in a cell. They both teach methods of separating cells within a greater pack, which use a multi-layered inter-battery separator to separate the cells. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery pack of Murayama to substitute the inter-battery separator of Murayama with the multilayer sheet of Ando as this would only be the simple substitution of one inter-cell separator/insulating member with another, and the simple substitution of one known limitation for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.). Additionally, Murayama is cited as a piece of relevant prior art in the US examination of Ando, and therefore they are considered to be extremely relevant pieces of prior art.
By modifying Murayama and substituting the inter-battery separator with the multilayer sheet of Ando, the additional limitations of claims 2-11, 18 are all met without requiring any further modification or motivation.
Regarding claim 2, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 1, wherein the insulation part comprises an insulating material. (Both rubber sheet 13 and heat insulating sheets 12 of Ando would meet the limitation of claim 2 regarding the requirement for the insulation part comprising an insulating material. Thus, by using the multilayer sheet of Ando to meet the limitations of claim 1, all of the additional limitations of claim 2 would also be met.)
Regarding claim 3, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 2, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 2, wherein the insulation part has a shape corresponding to long sides of the plurality of battery cells. (See above for comparison of figure. It can be seen that the insulation part of either Murayama or Ando has a shape corresponding to the long sides of the plurality of battery cells.)
Regarding claim 4, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 3, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 3, wherein a top end of the insulation part has substantially a same height as top ends of the plurality of battery cells or wherein the insulation part has a height that protrudes from the top ends of the plurality of battery cells. (As can be seen in Ando figure 10, shown below, and Murayama figure 2, shown above, the insulation part has a height that is substantially the same as the battery cells, thus meeting all of the additional limitations of claim 4.)
PNG
media_image5.png
518
484
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 4, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 4, wherein each of the pair of first heat transfer parts is between a long side of one of the adjacent battery cells and a long side of the insulation part. (See above figures, it is clearly known in both Ando and Murayama that the pair of first heat transfer parts is between a long side of the adjacent battery cells and a long side of the insulation part.)
Regarding claim 6, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 5, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 5, wherein each of the pair of first heat transfer parts has substantially a same height as a top end of the insulation part or wherein each of the pair of first heat transfer parts has a height lower than the top end of the insulation part. (As can be seen in Ando figure 6, shown above, the first heat transfer parts have substantially the same height as a top end of the insulation part, thus meeting the limitations of claim 6.)
Regarding claim 7, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 6, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 6, wherein each of the pair of first heat transfer parts is a metal plate having a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part. (“The first heat conductive sheets 11 can be sheets containing metal and/or ceramics instead of or in addition to the aforementioned carbon.” Ando [0061]. In the case where the conductive sheet of Ando is a metal sheet, it would meet the above limitations as it would both be a metal plate and would have a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part.)
Regarding claim 8, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 7, as shown above. Murayama teaches all of the additional limitations of claim 8:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 7, wherein the cooling plate is at bottom ends of the plurality of battery cells. (Murayama figure 2 clearly depicts cooling plate 41 being located at the bottom end of battery cells 31. “As illustrated in FIG. 2, lower end 70 of middle member 50 is in contact with heat transfer sheet 40, and lower surface 47 of heat transfer sheet 40 is in contact with upper surface 48 of cooling plate 41. In other words, middle member 50 is thermally coupled to cooling plate 41, a lower heat radiator, through heat transfer sheet 40.” Murayama [0033])
Regarding claim 9, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 8, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 8, wherein each of the pair of first heat transfer parts comprises a support part having a lower end facing the cooling plate that is bent at a preset angle, and a heat conducting layer on a plate surface facing the insulation part and having a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part. (Ando figure 8 depicts an embodiment of the multilayer sheet in which, at the bottom, the first heat conductive sheets are both bent to form a support part. There is already a heat conducting layer on a plate surface facing the insulation part, as that is the entire layer 11, and additionally the entire layer 11 has a higher thermal conductivity than the insulation part. Thus, by modifying Murayama with Ando to meet the limitations of claim 1, all of the additional limitations of claim 9 would also be met without any further modification.)
PNG
media_image6.png
705
438
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 9, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 9, wherein the support part is bent upward at an angle of less than 90 degrees relative to the cooling plate. (As can be seen in Ando figure 8, the bottom portion of the multilayer sheet can be bent down and then back up to form heat conductive member 20 including second sheet member 24 and hollow part 27. This structure, functioning as the support part, is bent upwards at an angle of less than 90 degrees relative to the cooling plate. Examiner acknowledges the differences between the claimed figures and Ando figure 8, but the claim would need to be further amended in order to account for these differences.)
Regarding claim 11, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. By using the multilayer sheet of Ando, the following limitations would be met:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 10, wherein the lower end of the support part that is bent upward supports a lower end of the insulation part. (Ando figure 8, shown above, depicts heat conductive member 20 being rounded under the rubber sheet 13 and heat insulating sheets 12, thus functioning to support the lower end of the insulation part.)
Regarding claim 18, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 11, as shown above. Murayama teaches all of the additional limitations of claim 18:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 11, further comprising a thermal interface material (TIM) between the support part, the plurality of battery cells, and the cooling plate. (“As illustrated in FIG. 2, lower end 70 of middle member 50 is in contact with heat transfer sheet 40, and lower surface 47 of heat transfer sheet 40 is in contact with upper surface 48 of cooling plate 41. In other words, middle member 50 is thermally coupled to cooling plate 41, a lower heat radiator, through heat transfer sheet 40.” Murayama [0033]. In this case, the heat transfer sheet 40 functions as a thermal interface material which thermally connects the inter-battery separator and the cooling plate.)
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama (US 20200365855 A1) in view of Ando (US 20220320626 A1) further in view of Woo (KR 20130136141 A), and further in view of Kim (US 20200388892 A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Murayama meets all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. Murayama and Ando are silent on the following limitations of claim 12:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 10, wherein the insulation member further comprises a second heat transfer part
[the second heat transfer part] including a first layer and a second layer in a region excluding the first layer.
Woo teaches the following limitations of claim 12 that are not found in Murayama or Ando. Specifically, Woo teaches the inclusion of a phase transition composite material layer, which, if included into the multilayer of structure of Ando, would meet the limitations of a second heat transfer part:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 10, wherein the insulation member further comprises a second heat transfer part (“In addition, the heat transferred through the high thermal conductivity sheet (14) and absorbed to the side of the phase transition composite material sheet (15) may cause a phase transition phenomenon, thereby obtaining a heat dissipation effect” Woo [0052]. By including the phase transition composite material layer in the multilayer structure of Ando, the limitations requiring a second heat transfer part would be met.)
Woo is considered to be analogous to Murayama and Ando because it is within the same field of multilayered separators/insulators places between cells in a battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the multilayer insulation member of Ando to specifically include the phase transition composite material layer of Woo, in order to gain additional heat dissipating effects (“In addition, the heat transferred through the high thermal conductivity sheet (14) and absorbed to the side of the phase transition composite material sheet (15) may cause a phase transition phenomenon, thereby obtaining a heat dissipation effect” Woo [0052].) By modifying Murayama and Ando with Woo, either the heat transfer sheet of Ando or the phase transition composite material sheet can be interchangeable as the first or second heat transfer parts, as there is no specification in the claims as to which is in a specific position in terms of layering around the insulation part. Thus, by making this modification, it could be considered that the phase transition composite material layer is the first heat transfer part, and the heat conductive sheet of Ando is the second.
Woo, Murayama, and Ando are silent on the following limitations of claim 12:
[the second heat transfer part] including a first layer and a second layer in a region excluding the first layer.
However, Kim teaches all of the remaining limitations of claim 12 that are not found in Woo, Murayama, or Ando. Specifically, Kim teaches a structure for a heat conductive sheet/heat transfer part containing a first and second layer, which are made of different materials:
[the second heat transfer part] including a first layer and a second layer in a region excluding the first layer. (“Referring to FIGS. 5 and 6, the heat pressure exchange member 300 may include a heat exchange unit 310 and a body unit 320.” Kim [0086]. In this case, the heat exchange unit 310 functions as one layer of the heat transfer part, and the body unit 320 functions as a second layer of the heat transfer part that is in a region excluding the first layer.)
PNG
media_image7.png
455
614
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kim is considered to be analogous to Murayama and Ando because it is within the same field of separation units between battery cells with a heat conductive/heat exchange member. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heat conductive sheet of Ando to have the two-layered structure of Kim in order to obtain the desirable effects cited by Kim, such as providing a portion which is particularly effective at absorbing and releasing heat depending on pressure, and additionally a portion which is effective at complementing and supporting the previous portion (“The heat exchange unit 310 may be made of a material that absorbs and releases heat depending on whether a pressure is applied. That is, the heat exchange unit 310 may be made of a material that absorbs and retains heat from the surroundings (for example, the secondary battery 100) and releases the heat to the surroundings (the secondary battery 100) when it is pressed due to the expansion of the secondary battery 100 or the like.” Kim [0087] and “The body unit 320 may be configured to support the heat exchange unit 310. In particular, the body unit 320 may be configured to complement the mechanical rigidity of the heat exchange unit 310 and allow the heat exchange unit 310 to be stably provided at an appropriate position inside the module case 200.” Kim [0088]). It would also only require the simple substitution of one heat transfer/conductive sheet for another, both used in the same context, and the simple substitution of one known limitation for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
By modifying the multilayer sheet of Ando to include the second heat transfer sheet/component of Woo, and modifying that component to have the two-layered structure of Kim, the additional limitations of claim 13 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.
Regarding claim 13, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 12, as shown above. Murayama and Ando are silent on the following limitations of claim 13:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 12, wherein the first layer and the second layer are on the plate surface of each of the pair ofsecond [see 112(b) rejection above] heat transfer parts facing one of the adjacent battery cells.
However, Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 13 that are not found in Murayama and Ando:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 12, wherein the first layer and the second layer are on the plate surface of each of the pair ofsecond [see 112(b) rejection above] heat transfer parts facing one of the adjacent battery cells. (As can be seen in Kim figure 5, shown above, the first layer and second layer are each on a plate surface of each of the pair of second heat transfer parts facing one of the adjacent battery cells. Specifically, each plate facing the adjacent battery cell has two layers on the surface, one comprising a heat exchange unit and once comprising a support unit.)
Claim(s) 14-17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama (US 20200365855 A1) in view of Ando (US 20220320626 A1), further in view of Woo (KR 20130136141 A), further in view of Kim (US 20200388892 A1), and further in view of Kim (US 20210075075 A1), hereinafter referred to as Kim ‘075 .
Regarding claim 14, modified Murayama teaches all of limitations of claim 13, as shown above. Murayama is silent on the following limitations of claim 14. Specifically, Murayama fails to teach individual casings for the battery cells, which comprise an electrode assembly, a cap plate, and electrode terminals connected to the electrode assembly and on the cap plate.
The battery pack as claimed in claim 13, wherein each of the plurality of battery cells includes a hexahedral case,
an electrode assembly accommodated in the hexahedral case,
a cap plate coupled to a top of the hexahedral case,
and a pair of electrode terminals electrically connected to the electrode assembly and on the cap plate.
However, Kim ‘075 teaches all of the limitations of claim 14 not found in Murayama, Ando, Kim, or Woo:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 13, wherein each of the plurality of battery cells includes a hexahedral case, (“Referring to FIGS. 23A and 23B, the battery cell 120 is configured such that an electrode assembly 125 is accommodated in a case 121, and a cap plate 124 covers a top portion of the case 121.” Kim ‘075 [0127]. It can clearly be seen in Kim ‘075 figure 23A that the case is a hexahedral case.)
an electrode assembly accommodated in the hexahedral case, (“The electrode assembly 125 may include a negative electrode 125a, a positive electrode 125b positioned to face the negative electrode 125a, and a separator 125c positioned between the negative electrode 125a and the positive electrode 125b, and the electrode assembly 125 may be accommodated in the case 121” Kim ‘075 [0129])
a cap plate coupled to a top of the hexahedral case, (“Referring to FIGS. 23A and 23B, the battery cell 120 is configured such that an electrode assembly 125 is accommodated in a case 121, and a cap plate 124 covers a top portion of the case 121.” Kim ‘075 [0127])
and a pair of electrode terminals electrically connected to the electrode assembly and on the cap plate. (“In addition, the electrode assembly 125 may be electrically connected to a first electrode terminal 122 and a second electrode terminal 123 located on the cap plate 124 through a pair of current collectors 126.” Kim ‘075 [0128])
PNG
media_image8.png
538
495
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
241
293
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Kim ‘075 is considered to be analogous to Murayama because they are both within the same field of secondary batteries comprising a plurality of battery cells in a battery pack which are separated/spaced from each other using an insulating member (“The battery cells 120 may be alternately arranged on a top surface of the bottom plate 111 of the cover member 110 with the insulation spacers 130 (e.g., with the insulation spacers 130 arranged between adjacent ones of the battery cells 120).” Kim ‘075 [0056]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of cells in Murayama to each include the casing including a cap plate and electrode terminals of Kim ‘075, as this is both a commonly known feature of individual battery cells in the art, specifically being separated by insulating members, and because the casing of Kim ‘075 allows for venting to occur from each individual cell, reducing risk of ignition and improving overall safety (“According to an aspect of embodiments of the present disclosure, an energy storage module is capable of improving safety. According to another aspect of embodiments of the present disclosure an energy storage module exhibits a reduced fire risk and increased safety by reducing or minimizing the chance of a fire spreading to adjacent battery cells when a fire occurs.” Kim ‘075 [0006]). Additionally, this would only require the simple substitution of the plurality of battery cells of Murayama to be replaced with the plurality of battery cells of Kim ‘075, and the simple substitution of one known limitation for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
By substituting the battery cells of Murayama with those of Kim ‘075, which include a casing having electrode terminals coupled to a cap plate on the top, the additional limitations of claims 15-17, 19 would all be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.
Regarding claim 15, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 14, as shown above. By modifying Murayama with the multilayer cell separator of Ando, and modifying the heat transfer sheet to have the two-layered structure of Kim, all of the additional limitations of claim 15 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 14, wherein the first layer is in a region adjacent to the pair of electrode terminals. (Kim figure 5 clearly depicts portion 310 being on the upper side of the heat transfer sheet. This would correspond to the upper half of the cell case of Kim ‘075, and therefore the first layer 310 would be adjacent to the pair of electrode terminals.)
Regarding claim 16, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 15, as shown above. By modifying Murayama to include a heat transfer sheet having the two-layer structure of Kim, the additional limitations of claim 16 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 15, wherein the second layer comprises a material having a lower thermal conductivity than the first layer. (For example, the heat exchange unit 310 may be made of a heat storage ceramic material such as trititanium-pentoxide.” Kim [0087] and “The body unit 320 may be made of a material different from that of the heat exchange unit 310. In particular, unlike the heat exchange unit 310, the body unit 320 may be configured not to have a heat storage performance according to the volume change of the secondary battery 100. Meanwhile, the body unit 320 may be made of a material having excellent strength or hardness, or excellent formability. For example, the body unit 320 may be made of a metal or plastic material that is advantageous for securing mechanical rigidity.” Kim [0089]. Kim teaches that the upper layer, which is considered the first layer and is adjacent to the pair of electrode terminals, is made of a material with a higher thermal conductivity than the lower layer, which is considered the second layer. Thus, all limitations of claim 16 are met.)
Regarding claim 17, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 16, as shown above. By modifying Murayama to include a heat transfer sheet having the two-layer structure of Kim, the additional limitations of claim 17 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 16, wherein each of the first layer and the second layer is a coating layer on each of the pair of second [see 112(b) rejection above] heat transfer parts. (“Referring to FIGS. 11 and 12, the heat exchange unit 310 may be configured to be coated on at least a portion of the surface of the body unit 320.” Kim [0115] and “Thus, according to the configuration, the body unit 320 having excellent mechanical rigidity may configure a basic skeleton of the heat pressure exchange member 300, and a material for exchanging heat according to pressure may be coated on the surface of the body unit 320, thereby securing the stable mechanical strength of the heat pressure exchange member 300.” Kim [0116]. Kim teaches that both the body unit 320 may be a coating on heat pressure exchange member 300, and that heat exchange unit 310 may be coated on at least a portion of body unit 320. Thus, both the first and second layers of Kim may be considered a coating on each of the pair of second heat transfer parts.)
Regarding claim 19, modified Murayama teaches all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. Murayama teaches all of the additional limitations of claim 19:
The battery pack as claimed in claim 17, further comprising a thermal interface material (TIM) between the support part, the plurality of battery cells, and the cooling plate. (“As illustrated in FIG. 2, lower end 70 of middle member 50 is in contact with heat transfer sheet 40, and lower surface 47 of heat transfer sheet 40 is in contact with upper surface 48 of cooling plate 41. In other words, middle member 50 is thermally coupled to cooling plate 41, a lower heat radiator, through heat transfer sheet 40.” Murayama [0033]. In this case, the heat transfer sheet 40 functions as a thermal interface material which thermally connects the inter-battery separator and the cooling plate.)
Conclusion
The following references were considered relevant during the search, but were not used in the above rejection:
Jang (US 20230318132 A1) teaches a heat transfer unit between cells in a battery module which comprises a center portion and a heat transfer portion surrounding it, that can arguably contain a first and second heat transfer member
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET whose telephone number is (571)272-0156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6pm except for the first Friday of bi-week.
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 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.
/BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
