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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 recites “wherein an entirety of the pair of venting hole terminals is in the module housing” and Claim 1 on which Claim 15 depends contains the limitation. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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) 1-5, 12, and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US-20130065100-A1).
Regarding Claim 1 and 15, Kim teaches:
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 are 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 wall of the module housing (exhaust pipes 71 is described as being routed to outside the housing 200 and is interpreted to be a component of the module housing, see [0085])
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 a respective one of the pair of module holes (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),
each pair of venting hole terminals being 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 having a first surface contacting the first wall of the module housing (see annotated Fig. 7 below, wherein the inner diameter of the exhaust pipe 711 is interpreted as the first wall which has some contact (with or without intervening structure) to the indicated first surface),
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, wherein the inner diameter of the exhaust pipe 711 is interpreted as the first wall).
Kim teaches a battery module which includes a housing 200, see [0081] and Fig. 6. However, Kim is silent towards:
and wherein the pair of venting hole terminals is completely within the module housing.
(per Claim 15) wherein an entirety of the pair of venting hole terminals is in the module housing.
The placement of the terminals of Kim with respect to the housing represents a problem with a finite number of predictable potential solutions, namely, to have the terminals 1) completely in the housing, 2) partially in the housing, or 3) completely outside the housing. It is the Examiners position that either of the presented predictable solutions are obvious.
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 have pursued the presented known potential solution of having the terminals of Kim completely within the housing with a reasonable expectation of success.
PNG
media_image1.png
744
944
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
826
1301
media_image2.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_image3.png
640
833
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, the indicated first and second vent hole terminals in annotated Kim’s Fig. 6 above are both negative terminals and therefore Kim 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.
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).
Regarding Claim 16, Kim discloses:
wherein the first wall of the module housing is a bottom wall, and wherein the first surface of the pair of venting hole terminals is a bottom surface.
It is the Examiner’s position that the rechargeable battery of Kim is structurally capable of being rotated such that the indicated first wall could be considered a “bottom surface,”
Regarding Claim 17, Kim discloses:
wherein the battery module has a top wall, a bottom wall, a pair of side walls and a pair of end walls.
Fig.6 of Kim shows a substantially rectangular prismatic shaped housing 200 around the battery and therefore inherently has at least some portions or which that are interpreted as “a top wall, a bottom wall, a pair of side walls and a pair of end walls.”
Regarding Claim 18, Kim discloses:
wherein the first wall of the module case is a bottom wall.
It is the Examiner’s position that the rechargeable battery of Kim is structurally capable of being rotated such that the indicated first wall could be considered a “bottom surface,”
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections Under 35 USC § 112b
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 5 of the response, dated 06/08/2026, with respect to claim rejections under 35 USC § 112b have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 1-5, 12, and 14 has been withdrawn.
Claim rejections under 35 USC § 103
Applicant argues on pages 5-7 of the response, dated 06/08/2026, that Kim does not disclose having the venting holes terminals disposed completely within the module housing as required by amended Claim 1. The Examiner finds this argument to be unpersuasive because an alternate interpretation of the amended structure of Claim 1 as being an obvious modification of Kim as given above.
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
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
Prosecution Insights