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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-16 in the reply filed on July 22, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would be no serious search burden. This is not found persuasive because the process claims comprise steps for manufacturing which would be classified in a different subclass.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 4, 5, 10, 12, 13, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 2, 4, 5, and 10, “furthermore” should be “further” for consistency.
In claim 12, line 2, “later” should be “layer”.
In claims 13 and 15, it is unclear what “by means of” adds to the claim. The Examiner suggests removing “by means of”.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 8-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiong et al. (“Xiong”, CN116544565B) in view of Zhu et al. (“Zhu”, US 12,603,359 B2).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Xiong discloses a thermal barrier component for a battery assembly including a stack of layers (bracket 50 and heat insulating member 30, Fig. 3), the stack comprising a core layer (bracket 50, Fig. 3), and at least one thermal insulation layer and/or an erosion barrier layer arranged on at least one side of the core layer (heat insulating member 30 with insulating films 33, 35, Figs. 3, 4), the core layer including an inlet comprising a rigid material (accommodating space 51 with thermal insulating member 30 located at least partially inside the accommodating space 51, Fig. 3), and a frame element circumferentially surrounding the inlet (bracket 50 forms an accommodation space 51, Fig. 6). Xiong also discloses a battery assembly comprising a housing and at least one battery stack accommodated within the house (stack of batteries called battery module 100 located in housing with side walls 80, Fig. 12), each battery stack comprising at least one thermal barrier component (battery module 100 of Fig. 5).
Further regarding claims 1 and 14, and with regard to claim 16, Xiong does not teach the rigid material is foam. However, Zhu teaches thermal barrier structures (abstract) and teaches the use of foam layers to absorb stress during expansion and contraction of battery cells (6:15-21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use a foam material as the inlet material in Xiong to absorb stress during expansion and contraction of battery cells.
As to claim 2, Xiong discloses frame elements with a plurality of studs partially embedded and partially protruding around the circumference of the frame (first and second positioning clamps 56 and 57, Fig. 6).
As to claim 3, Xiong does not expressly disclose one thermal insulation layer on each side. However, Zhu discloses battery thermal barrier systems (title) and multi-layer structures with one mor more thermal barrier structures that are positioned between neighboring groupings of battery cells of a cell bank and/or elsewhere within a battery array of the traction battery pack (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to place thermal insulation layers on both sides of a core layer to provide more thermal insulation.
As to claim 4, adding cover panels to the core layer is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Cover panels are well known to protect interior components.
As to claim 5, Xiong discloses the stack comprising at least one erosion barrier layer forming an outermost layer of the stack (first and second insulating films 33, 35 on top of the heat insulating body part 31, Fig. 4).
As to claim 6, Xiong discloses a symmetrically built stack with respect to the middle plane passing through the core layer (Fig. 7).
As to claim 8, Xiong discloses studs that are integrally formed with the frame. Retaining protrusions are considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 9 and 10, Xiong discloses a connector plate with an electrically insulating holder (wire harness isolation plate 70, Fig. 12), wherein the holder having a mounting surface for the connector plate on a first side and is connected to an edge on a second side (clamping parts 575 abutting the harness isolation plate 70, Fig. 12) via a mounting groove (harness isolation plate 70 located between the first clamping parts 575, Fig. 12).
As to claim 11, Zhu discloses foam, as discussed above. Polymethacrylimide foam is well known in the art for low density and high heat resistance as well as mechanical strength. Its use would be considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 12, Xiong teaches aerogel is employed as material for the thermal insulation body part 31.
As to claim 13, Xiong does not expressly teach co-curing adhesives to attach the cover panels. However, Zhu teaches thermal interface materials including epoxy resin (5:19-23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use any known adhesive to attach parts together. This is an obvious matter of design choice.
As to claim 15, Xiong discloses a thermal barrier component of the stack being attached to the housing by studs, inserts, which can be on or integrated in the thermal barrier component, or separate fasteners (clamping parts 56, 57 are connected with side plates 80 and cover 60, Fig. 12).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiong and Zhu as applied above, and further in view of Qin et al. (“Qin”, WO 2023155620A1).
Regarding claim 7, Xiong and Zhu do not disclose a frame with a closed border section and an inner bridge section. However, Qin discloses a frame with a closed border section and an inner bridge section (avoidance structure 301 and welded body portions 336, 337, [0988] and Figs. 105-109), and connecting the sides of the border section with two inlet portions in between (Figs. 107, 109).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use known structures for borders and bridge sections as these would simply be a matter of design choice.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL H. LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2548. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 5712705038. 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.
DANIEL H. LEE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1746
/DANIEL H LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights