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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. As of the date of this communication, no Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) has been filed with this application.
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) 1-2 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CN219421423U to Zhang.
A) As per Claims 1 & 20, Zhang teaches an energy storage system, comprising a power conversion system (Zhang: Figure 1), comprising:
a tank comprising a body (Zhang: Figure 1, Item 10) and a partition wall (Zhang: Figure 1, Item 31) arranged in the body, the partition wall dividing an interior of the body into a first cavity (Zhang: Figure 3, Item 13) and a second cavity (Zhang: Figure 3, Item 11), the partition wall being provided with a plurality of vents, the plurality of vents being communicated between the first cavity and the second cavity (Zhang: Figure 3, at least one vent at Item 15 and at least one vent at opposite end to allow airflow from Item 13 to Item 11);
a liquid cooling member (Zhang: fully shown in Figure 2 with Item 33 in Item 11) located in the second cavity and at least attached to the partition wall; and
an airflow generator (Zhang: Figure 1, Item 50) arranged in the first cavity, the airflow generator being configured to input gas located in the second cavity into the first cavity via at least one vent and output gas located in the first cavity into the second cavity via at least another vent.
B) As per Claim 2, Zhang teaches that the partition wall has two first sides oppositely arranged along a first direction, the first direction intersecting with a direction in which the first cavity points to the second cavity; wherein all the vents are arranged adjacent to the two first sides, respectively, and all the vents are configured to cooperate with the airflow generator to form an annular airflow that circulates from the first cavity to the second cavity (Zhang: Figure 3, at least one vent at Item 15 and at least one vent at opposite end to allow airflow from Item 13 to Item 11 shown with airflow arrows).
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of US Patent Number 5,644,248 to Fujimoto.
A) As per Claim 19, Zhang teaches all the limitations except explicitly that the second cavity is located on a bottom side of the first cavity, and the direction in which the first cavity points to the second cavity is a direction of gravity.
However, Fujimoto teaches a second cavity is located on a bottom side of the first cavity, and the direction in which the first cavity points to the second cavity is a direction of gravity (Fujimoto: Figure 4, Item 54 in second cavity below 11 with first cavity above Item 11).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Zhang by having the cooling member on the bottom, as taught by Fujimoto, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Zhang with these aforementioned teachings of Fujimoto since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the first and second cavity of Fujimoto for the first and second cavity location of Zhang.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN SCHULT whose telephone number is (571)272-8511. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
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, HELENA KOSANOVIC can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/Allen R. B. Schult/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
