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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/10/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1-6, 12, and 14 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "pair of module holes formed in a first surface of the module housing…each of the pair of venting hole terminals comprising a terminal hole communicating with the module hole, the pair of venting hole terminals being electrically connected to the cell stack and a first surface contacting the first surface of the module housing." The use of the first surface to refer to both a surface on the module housing and venting hole terminals causes antecedent basis issues that render the claim indefinite.
Claims 2-6, 12, and 14 are rejected due to their dependence on Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 4-5, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US-20130065100-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses:
A battery module comprising (battery module, see [0081] and Fig. 6):
a cell stack comprising a plurality of battery cells that are electrically connected to one another (a plurality of electrically connected rechargeable batteries 100, see [0081]);
a module housing accommodating the cell stack (Kim discloses a battery module which includes a housing 200, see [0081] and Fig. 6. The exhaust pipe 71 includes a plurality of sub exhaust pipes 711 which interpreted to be a constituent part of the claimed module housing, see [0082] and Fig. 6.)
and having a pair of module holes formed in a first surface of the module housing (see annotated Fig. 6 and 7 below);
and a pair of venting hole terminals (vent holes 32, see annotated Fig. 6 below),
each of the pair of venting hole terminals comprising a terminal hole communicating with the module hole (exhaust pipe 71 which includes a plurality of sub-exhaust pipes 711 are respectively connected to the vent holes 32 of at least the negative electrode terminals 41, see [0082] and Figs. 3 and 7),
and electrically connected to the cell stack (the vent hole 32 is formed to penetrate the negative electrode terminal 41 which are electrically connected to the negative electrodes 11 of the electrode assembly 10, see [0040]-[0043]).
and a first surface contacting the first surface of the module housing,
wherein the first surface of each of the pair of venting hole terminals is larger than a respective one of the pair of module holes (see annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
875
1108
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
867
1365
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
883
1390
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Kim’s annotated Fig. 6 below discloses:
wherein a first venting hole terminal of the pair of venting hole terminals is connected to a first electrode of the cell stack,
and a second venting hole terminal of the pair of venting hole terminals is connected to a second electrode of the cell stack.
PNG
media_image4.png
640
833
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Kim discloses:
wherein each of the pair of venting hole terminals comprises a conductive elastic member fixed to an inner circumferential surface of the terminal hole (The sub-exhaust pipe 711 which is shown in Fig. 3 to be “fixed to an inner circumferential surface” of the vent hole 32. Kim further teaches the sub-exhaust pipe 711 is made of a material that has elasticity that can suitably metal, see [0084]).
Regarding Claim 5, Kim discloses:
further comprising a bus bar frame configured to connect the plurality of battery cells of the cell stack in series, in parallel, or in a combination of the two (disposing bus bars to connect to the terminals of the neighboring rechargeable batteries so that a parallel or serial connection through the bur bars may be obtained, see [0053])
Regarding Claim 12, Kim discloses the battery module of his invention is suitable for use in a vehicle, see [0004].
Regarding Claim 14, Kim discloses:
wherein each of the pair of venting hole terminals is a cylinder, and wherein the terminal hole extends through the cylinder (the vent hole 32 is cylindrical in shape, see Fig. 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US-20130065100-A1) as applied to Claim 1 above/
Regarding Claim 3, the indicated first and second vent hole terminals in annotated Kim’s Fig. 6 above are both negative terminals and therefore does not teach:
wherein the first electrode and the second electrode have different polarities.
However, Kim teaches the positive electrode terminal 42 can also suitably have the vent hole 32 and vent plate 34, see [0063].
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have the second vent hole terminal be disposed at a positive electrode terminal because Kim teaches this is a suitable embodiment for his invention.
Response to Arguments
Claim rejections under 35 USC § 103
Applicant argues on pages 5-7 of the response, dated 02/10/2026, that Kim does not disclose that the venting hole terminals are larger than the module holes. The Examiner finds this argument to be unpersuasive because an alternate interpretation of Kim as given above is found to meet the structural limitations of amended Claim 1.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yasui et al. (US-20110195284-A1)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kayla E Clary whose telephone number is (571)272-2854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00 (PT).
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684. 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.
/K.E.C./
Kayla E. ClaryExaminer, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721