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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/11/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claim 1 is amended. Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-5, 10-12 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deng (CN 110364644 A).
Regarding claims 1 & 10, Deng teaches a device such as an electric vehicle comprising a battery pack (Page 3) comprising: a plurality of battery modules (2) (Fig. 1; Page 3); a venting inducing frame (1) disposed along an edge of the battery modules and forming a venting passage (Figs. 1 & 8; Page 3); a venting gate extending outwardly in a first direction from an exterior wall of each of battery modules (i.e portion of gas flow channel 211 in fig. 6 extending outwardly from the exterior wall 202 of each of the plurality of battery modules 2 to the valve 13 as illustrated in figs. 1 & 6) for connecting an inside of the plurality of battery modules and the venting inducing frame (Figs. 1, 3 & 5-6; Pages 4-6); a rupture portion (111) formed on an outside of the venting inducing frame (Fig. 8; Page 3); a unidirectional valve (13) extending in the first direction across a portion of the venting passage of the venting inducing frame extending in the first direction and intercepting a passage in a direction connected to a venting gate connected to a second battery module from the venting gate connected to one battery module from among the battery modules, and opens a passage in a direction connected to the rupture portion from the venting gate connected to one battery module from among the battery modules (Figs. 1 & 6; Pages 4-6). While Deng does not explicitly teach the unidirectional valve (13) extending in the first direction across a portion of the venting passage of the venting inducing frame extending in a second direction (as opposed to the first direction in the Deng’s embodiment shown in fig. 6), it is noted that when Deng’s unidirectional valve is positioned at an intersection of the venting gate and the frame (1) (i.e as opposed to a midway point of the venting gate as shown in fig. 6 of Deng), the resulting structure would read on the presently claimed limitation. In this case, the unidirectional valve can be interpreted as extending both in the first direction and the second direction since the unidirectional valve is provided at the intersection. Therefore, the presently claimed configuration is found to result from a mere rearrangement of Deng’s unidirectional valve from a portion of the venting gate to an entrance of the frame 1 from the venting gate. “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device)”. See MPEP 2144.04 VI (C). Notwithstanding, Deng’s unmodified structure would also read broadly on the presently claimed structure since the venting passage in which the unidirectional valve of Deng is formed extends in the first direction (i.e left/right in fig. 6 of Deng) but also in a second direction (i.e up/down direction or inside/outside of plane of fig. 6 of Deng).
Regarding claim 2, Deng teaches the unidirectional valve being opened or closed according to a direction in which a pressure is applied (Pages 1 & 6).
Regarding claim 3, Deng teaches the venting inducing frame including a pair of vertical beams (1) (i.e beam 1 including 111 and one of the other parallel beams 1) and formed in parallel to a first direction and a pair of horizontal beams (1 as well as portion of channels 211 connecting valve 13 to vertical beams 1) formed in parallel to a second direction traversing the first direction, the vertical beams and horizontal beams respectively include a cover (i.e material used for top and bottom portion of the beams) formed in a length direction of the vertical beams and the horizontal beams, and a passage surrounded by the cover and formed to allow gas to pass through, wherein the at least one unidirectional valve is formed on the passage (Figs. 1 & 6).
Regarding claim 4, Deng teaches a first-1 passage and a first-2 passage being formed on the pair of vertical beams, respectively; a second-1a passage and a second-1b passage being separately formed in one of the pair of horizontal beams; and a second-2a passage and a second-2b passage being separately formed in the other of the pair of horizontal beams (see annotated fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
366
712
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding 5, Deng teaches the unidirectional valve being formed on one of the first-1 passage, the second-1a passage, and the second-2a passage connected to each other, and on one of the first-2 passage, the second-1b passage and the second-2b passage connected to each other (see annotated fig. 1 above).
Regarding claims 11-12, Deng teaches the venting gate of a first battery module of the plurality of battery modules and the venting gate of the second battery module of the plurality of battery modules communicating with a first section of the venting passage, and wherein the unidirectional valve is in the first section of the venting passage between the venting gate of the first battery module and the venting gate of the second battery module; and the venting gate of a third battery module of the plurality of battery modules and the venting fate of a fourth battery module of the plurality of battery modules communicating with a second section of the venting passage, and wherein the unidirectional valve is in the second section of the venting passage between the venting gate of the third battery modules and the venting gate of the fourth battery module (see annotated fig. 1 below). It is noted that in fig. 1 below, the first battery module can correspond to the middle battery module in the first row and the second battery module can correspond to the left or right battery module in the first row. Similarly, the third battery module can correspond to the middle battery of the second row and the fourth battery module can correspond to the left or right battery module in the second row.
PNG
media_image2.png
428
756
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Deng teaches the rupture poriton being formed in each of the first section of the venting pasage from the second section of the venting passage via gas flow through horizontal beams connecting the second section to the first section (see annotated fig. 1 above).
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN 110364644 A) in view of Herman (US 2010/0273034 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Deng teaches the battery pack of claim 1 but is silent as to a housing for receiving the battery modules and the venting inducing frame, wherein the housing includes an upper cover and a lower housing, and a pack gasket is formed between the upper cover and the lower housing. Herman teaches an electric vehicle comprising a battery pack comprising a housing for receiving a plurality of battery modules, wherein the housing includes an upper cover and a lower housing, and a pack gasket is formed between the upper cover and the lower housing (Fig. 3; [0034]-[0041]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to provide a pack housing for Deng’s battery pack in order to ensure that the gas or smoke released from the batteries does not escape from the battery pack along an undesirable (ie into the passenger compartment of the vehicle) as taught by Herman ([0008] & [0039]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8, 13 & 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record Deng, as cited above, does not fairly teach or suggest: 1) a notch being formed in a middle of the pair of horizontal beams, and the second-1a passage and the second-1b passage, and the second-2a passage and the second-2b passage being formed on respective sides of the notch (claim 6); 2) a rupture portion being formed on respective sides of one of the pair of horizontal beams, and the rupture portion being respective connected to the second-1a passage and the second-1b passage (claim 8); 3) notches in the venting passage to separate the first section of the venting passage from the second section of the venting passage (claim 13) and 4) a pair of notches in the venting passage to separate the venting passage into a first section and a second section which do not communicated with one another (claim 15).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Applicant’s arguments that Deng does not fairly teach or suggest the unidirectional valve (13) extending in the first direction across a portion of the venting passage of the venting inducing frame extending in a second direction, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in the above updated rejection of claim 1, the newly added limitation is found to be an obvious modification of Deng’s invention by a mere rearrangement of parts. Specifically, as illustrated in figs. 1 & 6, the unidirectional valve in Deng is formed in a portion of the passage 211 extending from an outer wall of the battery module 202 to the frame (1/11) and which is equated to the presently claimed venting gate. However, the rearrangement of the unidirectional valve from a midway point of the venting gate (see fig. 6) to an entrance of the frame 1 of Deng from the venting gate (or equivalently an intersection of the venting gate and the frame 1) is found to be an obvious case of rearrangement of parts since the operation of the battery module would not be changed by rearranging the placement of the valve. “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device)”. See MPEP 2144.04 VI (C). Furthermore, since the unidirectional valve is a three-dimensional object, it can be fairly interpreted as extending in the first direction (as well as the second direction). Therefore, the presently claimed subject matter is rendered obvious as an obvious modification of Deng’s configuration.
Thus, in view of the foregoing, claims 1-5, 9-12 & 14 stand rejected with claims 6-8, 13 & 15 being objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (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, BARBARA GILLIAM can be reached on (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.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights