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 .
MARINE BATTERY SAFETY SYSTEM AND METHOD
Examiner: Adam Arciero S.N. 17/716,732 Art Unit: 1727 January 24, 2026
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 16, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-13, 15-22 and 24-27 are currently pending. Claims 12-13, 15-22 and 24-27 remain withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1, 8, 12, 16, 21, 24 and 27 have been amended.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites an intended use for a battery pack. The courts have held that “if the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction.” Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See also Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478, 42 USPQ2d 1550, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation"). See MPEP 2111.02.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejections under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Thamm and Eckardt on claims 1-3, 5-6, 8 and 10 are maintained.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thamm et al. (DE 102018101213 A1; as found in IDS dated April 03, 2025 and using machine translation for citation purposes) in view of Eckardt (EP 2543534; as found in IDS dated April 03, 2025 and using machine translation for citation purposes).
As to Claims 1, 8 and 10, Thamm discloses a battery 1, comprising: an enclosure 6 configured to protect the battery against water ingress into said enclosure; a plurality of cell modules 7 inside said enclosure; at least one external water sensor 27 and temperature sensor 20 on the battery enclosure configured to detect the presence of water; and a controller 8 configured to detect the signal from the sensor and generate a water exposure response (Fig. 2-3 and paragraphs [0041, 0044-0046 0055, 0076]). Thamm does not specifically disclose a disconnect switch configured to control connection of the cell modules together in series and to disconnect at least a portion of the cell modules from each other to reduce voltage levels during the water exposure response.
However, Eckardt teaches of at least one disconnect switch configured to control connection of the battery blocks BB1-BBn in series, wherein in the event of an accident (water exposure response for example), the battery block can be divided into a number of smaller blocks (Fig. 1 and paragraph [0024 and 0029]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Thamm to comprise the claimed disconnect switch because Eckardt teaches that the electrical safety of the battery can be ensured in the event of an accident (fault) (paragraph [0029]).
As to Claims 2-3, Thamm discloses wherein the user is notified of an error (water exposure alert) on an LED display (paragraph [0054]).
As to Claims 5-6, Thamm discloses operating a high voltage contactor 7 inside the battery enclosure to control connection of the cell modules to an output terminal of the battery pack and to disconnect the cell modules from the output terminal of the battery pack in a water exposure response (paragraph [0055]).
The claim rejections under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Thamm, Eckardt and Ekchian on claim 9 is maintained.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thamm et al. (DE 102018101213 A1; as found in IDS dated April 03, 2025 and using machine translation for citation purposes) in view of Eckardt (EP 2543534; as found in IDS dated April 03, 2025 and using machine translation for citation purposes) as applied to claims 1-3, 5-6, 8 and 10 above and in further view of Ekchian (US 2011/0135984 A1).
As to Claim 9, modified Thamm does not specifically disclose the claimed pressure sensor.
However, Ekchian teaches of a battery pack comprising water detectors, pressure sensors, and temperature sensors for detecting the immersion in water (paragraph [0009]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Thamm to comprise the claimed pressure sensor because Ekchian teaches that a battery can be automatically disconnected in the event of being immersed in water (paragraph [0009]).
The claim rejection under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Thamm, Eckardt and Lian on claim 11 is maintained.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thamm et al. (DE 102018101213 A1; as found in IDS dated April 03, 2025 and using machine translation for citation purposes) in view of Eckardt (EP 2543534; as found in IDS dated April 03, 2025 and using machine translation for citation purposes) as applied to claims 1-3, 5-6, 8 and 10 above and in further view of Lian et al. (US 2019/0168038 A1).
As to Claim 11, modified Thamm does not specifically disclose the claimed gas cartridge.
However, Lian teaches of using an inert gas cartridge that functions by a foaming agent mixing with water for use in an event of a failure of a battery (paragraph [0111]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Thamm to comprise the claimed gas cartridge because Lian teaches that an inert gas can be created to combat battery failures (paragraph [0001]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 16, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s principle arguments are:
a) The temperature sensor 20 of Thamm is not configured to detect the presence of water and instead discloses detecting the temperature “in or at the power contacts” (claims 1 and 11).
b) Ekchian does not teach of a pressure sensor configured to detect the presence of water (claim 9).
In response to Applicant’s arguments, please consider the following comments:
a) Thamm specifically discloses wherein the temperature sensor can measure temperature on a battery cell pack, which reads on being configured to detect the presence of water (paragraph [0014 and 0052]). The claims do not structurally differentiate the claimed sensor from the prior art sensor.
b) Ekchian teaches of a battery pack comprising water detectors, pressure sensors, and temperature sensors for detecting the immersion in water (paragraph [0009]).
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ARCIERO whose telephone number is (571)270-5116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5 ET.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/ADAM A ARCIERO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727