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 § 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.
Claims 23 – 32, 35-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sur, et. al. (US2019274354A1), in view of Kuzushima, et. al. (US2018151880A1), Chen (CN206727144U), and Yamazaki, et. al. (US 20160293916 A1).
Regarding Claim 23, Sur teaches a battery unit (battery – PV 59) for an aerosol generation device (aerosol delivery 100) comprising: a housing (control body 102) comprising a vent hole (“[0085] In various implementations, the control body 102 may include one or more openings or apertures 122 therein for allowing entrance of ambient air into the interior of the receiving chamber 136 . In such a manner, in some implementations the receiving base 134 may also include apertures.”). Sur at [0085], Fig. 1 – 3. Sur teaches a power source 124. Id. at [0079].
PNG
media_image1.png
632
515
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
372
603
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 – 3 of Sur.
Kuzushima teaches a battery 30 wherein the battery case 11 “[0096] may be a . . . laminated film pouch . . . . [and] may be provided with a safety valve that is opened when the internal pressure of the battery rises . . . so that the explosion of the battery may be prevented.” Kuzushima at [0096 – 98].This is a “pouch battery within [a] housing,” an outer surface of the battery comprising a possible vent point where a fluid may be released during degassing of the battery. While Kuzushima does not directly teach a plurality of vent points, Kuzushima at least suggests an expected benefit to improved venting during pressure increase provided by having multiple safety valves.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the battery unit for an aerosol generation device of Sur to comprise the pouch battery of Kuzushima, such that the pouch battery comprises a plurality of the safety valves of Kuzushima, because Kuzushima teaches a benefit to explosion prevention that would be expected to be furthered by multiple valves, and because mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (B).
However, while modified Sur at least suggests that, given the presence of the vents within the midsection of Sur and the safety valves of Kuzushima, that this gas must exit the aerosol generation device, the exact means of directing the fluid and the path are not disclosed by either reference or modified Sur as a combination. Thus, modified Sur is silent as to a fluid directing arrangement within the housing, the fluid directing arrangement being configured to define a fluid flow path from each of the plurality of possible vent points of the battery to the vent hole of the housing.
Chen teaches e-cigarette having an “emergency venting structure,” which is designed to timely discharge the gas generated in the main body. Chen at p.1., Fig. 1. Chen teaches a fluid directing arrangement (“[p.1] “a plurality of grooves”) within the housing, the fluid directing arrangement being configured to define a fluid flow path from each of the plurality of possible vent points of the battery to the vent hole of the housing. Chen at p. 1.; (“[p.1] The sealed cavity accommodates a battery, which may cause flatulence during use. The gas generated by the battery fills the sealed cavity, increasing the pressure in the cavity. . . [a] groove communicates with the cavity, and the gas with increased pressure enters the groove from the cavity, so as to impact the respective groove walls . . . [w]hen the battery produces gas too fast, the gas inside the chamber will be quickly pushed out the bottom cover . . . to avoid causing the battery explosion.”).
Chen differs from Sur in that its’ venting pathway is via forcing open the bottom cover 30 with the help of the grooves 34, and notes that while through-holes for gas venting due to faults are found in “most of the electronic cigarettes on the market,” that this is aesthetically displeasing (“can greatly affect the appearance of the product and increase the dissatisfaction of the users”). However, this appears to be distinguishable from holes formed to introduce air for the purposes of suction of gas by the users, as two of said holes appear in Fig. 1 shown below, just above numeral 10.
PNG
media_image3.png
681
464
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Chen at Fig. 1; the boxed area as annotated shows the likely intake valves, utilized for introducing oxygen for allowing the user to pull aerosol out through the drip nozzle 60 (“the user sucks the electronic cigarette 200 from the drip nozzle 60”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to utilize the fluid directing arrangement of Chen, such that the safety valves of Kuzushima direct fluid out through the existing apertures 122 of Sur, because Chen teaches a benefit to preventing a battery explosion, and because the existing apparatus of modified Sur presents a plurality of openings that do not compromise the aesthetic value of the aerosol generation device (evidenced by the fact that Chen has similar intake valves). As modified, modified Sur teaches a fluid directing arrangement within the housing, the fluid directing arrangement being configured to define a fluid flow path from each of the plurality of possible vent points of the battery to the vent hole of the housing.
Sur teaches a battery having a portion in contact with the inner surface of the housing, but Modified Sur is silent as to “a battery within the housing, an outer surface of the battery comprises . . . a second portion comprising a plurality of possible vent points.” Yamazaki teaches an alkaline battery 100, having “[0058] one or more vent holes 32c” and “[0060] three vent holes 50d (second vent hole),” wherein “[0057] As illustrated in FIG. 2, an annular thin-walled portion 35 b is formed near the outer periphery of the gasket boss portion 35 a of the sealing gasket 35 , for the purpose of explosion proof for the alkaline battery 1 . When the internal pressure of the alkaline battery 1 is increased for some reason, the thin-walled portion 35 b is broken prior to other parts, so that gas in the interior is released. [0058] One or more vent holes 32 c (first vent hole) are provided at predetermined locations of a portion facing the aforementioned gap 201 of the peripheral side surface 32 b of the anode terminal plate 32 (for example, four of the vent holes 32 c are provided every 90 degrees around the cylindrical axis of the alkaline battery 1 ). . . As illustrated in FIGS. 3 to 5A, 5B, three vent holes 50 d (second vent hole) in a substantially rectangular shape in cross section, which extend with a predetermined length along an outer peripheral surface 50 b of the washer boss portion 50 a are provided in the flange portion 50 c of the washer 50 at predetermined intervals (at every 120 degrees around the cylindrical axis of the alkaline battery 1 ). [0060] Here, as indicated by arrows in FIG. 2, the gas blowing out to a space 181 between the anode terminal plate 32 and the sealing gasket 35 when the thin-walled portion 35 b of the sealing gasket 35 is broken, passes through a vent hole 32 c of the anode terminal plate 32 to the outside of the anode terminal plate 32 , and thereafter a part of the gas passes through a narrow gap between the anode terminal plate 32 and the washer 50 , to be released to the outside.” Yamazaki at [0057 – 63]. This provides the benefit of allowing venting while preventing the washer 50 from detaching. Id. at [009].
PNG
media_image4.png
585
428
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
605
420
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1, 3-4 of Yamazaki.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify the battery of modified Sur, such that the outer surface of the battery (cathode can 11) comprises first and second portions, the first portion being in contact with an inner surface of the housing, the second portion comprising a plurality of possible vent points where fluid may be released during degassing as in Yamazaki (vent holes 50d formed in the washer 50), because Yamazaki teaches a benefit to preventing the battery washer breaking away from the battery housing.
Claim 23 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 24, Claim 24 relies upon Claim 23. Claim 23 is obvious over modified Sur.
Kuzushima teaches a safety valve that is “opened when the internal pressure of the battery rises.” Kuzushima at [0098]. A safety valve functions by sealing a hole, such that it opens under certain conditions. This reads on “a seal.”
Fig. 1 and 2 of Sur disclose a series of apertures, a series of three shown which at least suggest that they form a ring around the aerosol generation device. Sur at Fig. 1 – 2.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to designate at least one of these apertures as the “vent hole,” such that the grooves direct fluid towards a sealed vent hole, because Kuzushima teaches a benefit to the use of a safety valve, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would anticipate a benefit to preventing mixed flow of air intake and fluid leaking from the battery.
Claim 24 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 25, Claim 25 relies upon Claim 23. Claim 23 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches e-cigarette having an “emergency venting structure,” which is designed to timely discharge the gas generated in the main body. Chen at p.1. Chen teaches a fluid directing arrangement (“[p.1] “a plurality of grooves”) within the housing, the fluid directing arrangement being configured to define a fluid flow path from each of the plurality of possible vent points of the battery to the vent hole of the housing. Chen at p. 1.; (“[p.1] The sealed cavity accommodates a battery, which may cause flatulence during use. The gas generated by the battery fills the sealed cavity, increasing the pressure in the cavity. . . [a] groove communicates with the cavity, and the gas with increased pressure enters the groove from the cavity, so as to impact the respective groove walls . . . [w]hen the battery produces gas too fast, the gas inside the chamber will be quickly pushed out the bottom cover . . . to avoid causing the battery explosion.”). While these grooves are formed by the walls of the interior, the materials which form them are not disclosed. Id. Chen teaches the grooves are disposed at the bottom of the device, opposite from the inlet holes shown in Fig. 1.
Sur teaches an embodiment wherein the housing 218, comprising an outer cylinder 230, may comprise a nonconductive insulating material. Sur at [0108]. This is a “heat shielding” material.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the fluid directing arrangement such that its groove 34 comprises a first heat shield wall (composed of the material of the housing 218 of Sur) which is positioned closer to a first end of the battery and the vent hole of the housing is positioned closer to a second end of the battery which is opposite to the first end, because Chen discloses this arrangement, and because the rearrangement of parts (i.e. the grooves 34) is obvious where the position of the component would not have modified the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04 (IV) (C).
Claim 25 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 26, Claim 26 relies upon Claim 25. Claim 25 is obvious over modified Sur.
As previously modified, modified Sur comprises a heat shield wall in the form of the grooves 34 utilizing the material of Sur. Chen teaches there are multiple grooves 34 which are adjacent to the side of the bottom cover of the battery. Chen at p.1. As such, as modified, modified Sur discloses the fluid directing arrangement further comprises a second heat shield wall which is positioned adjacent a side of the battery.
Claim 26 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 27, Claim 27 relies upon Claim 26. Claim 26 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches “the groove has an opening opposite to the groove bottom wall and communicates with the cavity [which holds the battery].” This indicates that because modified Sur incorporates the groove of Chen, modified Sur teaches the fluid directing arrangement further comprises an opening which is positioned adjacent a side of the battery for leaving the battery exposed; the opening extending along the second heat shield wall.
Claim 27 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 28, Claim 28 relies upon Claim 26. Claim 26 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches “the groove has an opening opposite to the groove bottom wall and communicates with the cavity [which holds the battery].” This indicates that because modified Sur incorporates the groove of Chen, modified Sur teaches wherein the second heat shield wall is separated from the housing such as to leave a cavity therebetween.
Claim 28 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 29, Claim 29 relies upon Claim 24. Claim 24 is obvious over modified Sur.
Fukushima teaches a safety valve, and that the battery case 11 may be a laminated film pouch, which may comprise “aluminum, aluminum alloy, iron, iron alloy, or stainless, a rigid plastic, [or] a metal material plated by nickel, tin, chromium, or zinc, for example.” Fukushima at [0096 – 98]. While Fukushima does not directly disclose the breakable material of the seal, it is at least suggested that this material of the case 11 is not intended to break at the same temperature and pressure of the seal, indicating it is formed of a different material.
Modified Sur teaches the housing comprises a first material and the seal is a housing portion comprising a second material, the second material being weaker than the first material
Claim 29 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 30, Claim 30 relies upon Claim 24. Claim 24 is obvious over modified Sur.
Fukushima teaches a safety valve, and that the battery case 11 may be a laminated film pouch, which may comprise “aluminum, aluminum alloy, iron, iron alloy, or stainless, a rigid plastic, [or] a metal material plated by nickel, tin, chromium, or zinc, for example.” Fukushima at [0096 – 98]. While Fukushima does not directly disclose the breakable material of the seal, it is at least suggested that this material of the case 11 is not intended to break at the same temperature and pressure of the seal, indicating it is formed of a different material.
Modified Sur teaches the housing comprises a first material and the seal is a housing portion comprising a second material, the second material having a lower melting point than the first material.
Claim 30 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 30, Claim 30 relies upon Claim 24. Claim 24 is obvious over modified Sur.
Fukushima teaches a safety valve, and that the battery case 11 may be a laminated film pouch, which may comprise “aluminum, aluminum alloy, iron, iron alloy, or stainless, a rigid plastic, [or] a metal material plated by nickel, tin, chromium, or zinc, for example.” Fukushima at [0096 – 98]. While Fukushima does not directly disclose the breakable material of the seal, it is at least suggested that this material of the case 11 is not intended to break at the same temperature and pressure of the seal, indicating it is formed of a different material.
Modified Sur teaches the housing comprises a first material and the seal is a housing portion comprising a second material, the second material having a lower melting point than the first material.
Claim 30 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 31, Claim 31 relies upon Claim 30. Claim 30 is obvious over modified Sur.
Sur teaches the outer cylinder 30, as well as the heating assembly 128, may comprised of “metals . . . metal alloys, and metal foils.” Sur at [0082-83].
While Fukushima does not explicitly disclose that the safety valve is composed of plastic, it does disclose the material of the battery case 11 may be composed of plastic. This at least suggests the valve may be composed of plastic.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the valve of modified Sur, such that it specifically comprises a seal portion composed of the plastic of Fukushima, because Fukushima at least suggests the safety valve would be composed of the same material of the case 11 or lid member.
Claim 31 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 32, Claim 32 relies upon Claim 29. Claim 29 is obvious over modified Sur.
Sur teaches the outer cylinder 30, as well as the heating assembly 128, may comprised of “metals . . . metal alloys, and metal foils.” Sur at [0082-83].
While Fukushima does not explicitly disclose that the safety valve is composed of plastic, it does disclose the material of the battery case 11 may be composed of plastic. This at least suggests the valve may be composed of plastic. A safety valve, by virtue of consisting of an opening and a seal, comprises a “cover.”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the valve of modified Sur, such that the seal is a plug comprising a plastic material or a cover comprising a plastic or foil, because Fukushima at least suggests the safety valve would be composed of the same material of the case 11 or lid member.
Claim 32 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 35, Claim 35 relies upon Claim 23. Claim 23 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches the battery is situated within a “cavity” which “accommodates” the battery; Chen teaches The gas generated by the battery fills the sealed cavity, increasing the pressure in the cavity” Chen at p.1.
As modified, the cavity of Chen is situated adjacent to the openings of Sur; thus, modified Sur teaches a cavity within the housing adjacent to at least one of the plurality of possible vent points of the battery, the cavity being configured to receive fluid released during degassing of the battery.
Claim 35 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 36, Claim 36 relies upon Claim 23. Claim 23 is obvious over modified Sur.
Sur discloses an aerosol generation device, having an aerosol source member, 104, which may be covered by a filter 114 composed of a polypropylene material which may provide filtering material, as well as an overwrap material which may comprise a filler material having water-insoluble particles, which “affect flow characteristics of the vapor or aerosol.” Sur at [0047]. This at least suggests an “absorbent material arranged in the housing,” but this filter is not, as previously modified, placed such that it would absorb excess fluid in the event of a degassing event. However, it does at least suggest a benefit to using an absorbent material to absorb excess fluid and manage “flow characteristics” of a gas within the aerosol generation device.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify the aerosol generation device of modified Sur, such that an absorbent material (i.e. a filter of Sur) an absorbent material is arranged within the housing to absorb fluid released during degassing of the battery, because Sur teaches a benefit to using an absorbent material to absorb excess fluid and manage “flow characteristics” of a gas within the aerosol generation device.
Claim 36 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 37, Claim 37 relies upon Claim 23. Claim 23 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches a “cavity is formed in the main body, a battery is accommodated in the cavity”, and Fig. 1 of Chen depicts the mounting seat 113 and battery box 13 which comprise this cavity; this “battery box” is a battery frame, meaning modified Sur reads upon the fluid directing arrangement comprises a battery frame supporting the battery within the housing.
Claim 37 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 38, Claim 38 relies upon Claim 37. Claim 37 is obvious over modified Sur.
Sur teaches “the aerosol delivery device 100 has terminals including a positive terminal 414 to which the power source 124 is connected or connectable.” Sur at [0079]. This means that the battery must comprise the battery comprises a first end having a first electrical contact, a second end having a second electrical contact, and Fig. 3 indicates from the rectangular shape of the power source that there is a second end opposing the first end a side wall extending between the first end and the second end.
Chen teaches a “cavity is formed in the main body, a battery is accommodated in the cavity”, and Fig. 1 of Chen depicts the mounting seat 113 and battery box 13 which comprise this cavity; this “battery box” is a battery frame. Chen at Fig. 1. As shown, this frame receives a rectangular battery having a cavity, with a side cutout for fitting the battery into the mounting seat. Id. at Chen, Fig. 1. This reads upon “the battery frame is configured to support at least one of the first end and the second end, and to leave at least a part of the side wall of the battery exposed within the housing.”
Claim 38 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 39, Claim 39 relies upon Claim 37. Claim 37 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches a “cavity is formed in the main body, a battery is accommodated in the cavity”, and Fig. 1 of Chen depicts the mounting seat 113 and battery box 13 which comprise this cavity; this “battery box” is a battery frame. This frame spans the internal volume of the housing, indicating it reads upon “the battery frame comprises a part extending across an internal volume of the housing and connected to the housing, to form a shield part between a first end of the battery and one portion of the internal volume of the housing.”
Claim 39 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 40, Claim 40 relies upon Claim 39. Claim 39 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches a “cavity is formed in the main body, a battery is accommodated in the cavity”, and Fig. 1 of Chen depicts the mounting seat 113 and battery box 13 which comprise this cavity; this “battery box” is a battery frame. This frame spans the internal volume of the housing, indicating it reads upon “the battery frame comprises a part extending across an internal volume of the housing and connected to the housing, to form a shield part between a first end of the battery and one portion of the internal volume of the housing.” Further, however, this cavity forms a part of the emergency exhaust structure, and resists the heat and fluid of the gas being generated to channel it towards the plurality of grooves. This makes this shield part a “heat shield.”
Claim 40 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 41, Claim 41 relies upon Claim 39. Claim 39 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches a “cavity is formed in the main body, a battery is accommodated in the cavity”, and Fig. 1 of Chen depicts the mounting seat 113 and battery box 13 which comprise this cavity; this “battery box” is a battery frame. This frame spans the internal volume of the housing, and reads upon “the battery frame further comprises one or more open regions (as shown, the battery fits into the mounting seat 113 from a side position, indicating an opening toward the “second end” being the side) extending along a side wall of the battery or a second end of the battery, the second end opposing the first end (wherein the first end opens toward and faces the bottom cover), the one or more open regions forming part of the fluid directing arrangement.”
Claim 41 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Regarding Claim 42, Claim 42 relies upon Claim 41. Claim 41 is obvious over modified Sur.
Chen teaches a “cavity is formed in the main body, a battery is accommodated in the cavity”, and Fig. 1 of Chen depicts the mounting seat 113 and battery box 13 which comprise this cavity; this “battery box” is a battery frame. This frame spans the internal volume of the housing, and reads upon “wherein the battery frame further comprises two supports (the mounting seat 113) arranged to extend along opposing side wall parts of the battery (flush with the interior portion of the interior wall 114 in Fig. 1).” Fig. 1 of Chen.
Claim 42 is obvious over Sur, in view of Kuzushima, Chen, and Yamazaki.
Claims 33 – 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sur, in view of Fukushima, Chen, and Yamazaki, as applied to claim 30 above, and further in view of Utaka, et. al. (WO2016203619A1).
Regarding Claim 33, Claim 33 relies upon Claim 30. Claim 30 is obvious over modified Sur.
Modified Sur is silent as to the inner components of the safety valve.
Utaka teaches a laminated exterior electric storage device (i.e., a pouch battery ; see p. 1 of Utaka), wherein “a safety mechanism having a configuration in which the weakly bonded portion and the stress concentrated portion function as a safety valve for degassing when the internal gas pressure rises.” Utaka at p.1. This is composed of a “weak junction portion 53,” wherein “Specifically, the weakly joined portion 53 has a lower sealing strength than the other portions of the joining portion 52. Then, when the internal pressure of the accommodation portion in which the electric storage device element (battery element or capacitor element) in the exterior body is accommodated reaches a predetermined value, the weak junction portion 53 preferentially peels off to form the exhaust port. Also, in the example of this figure, the exterior body has a rectangular contour shape.” Id. Utaka at least suggests a benefit to allowing a safety valve that opens up at a predetermined temperature. The “weakly joined portion,” reads upon the prior “seal is a housing portion comprising a second material,” and the “stress concentrated portion” reads upon “the seal comprises a resilient element configured to engage with the housing to snap the seal into place during assembly, but configured to inhibit external removal of the seal from the housing.” Id.
PNG
media_image6.png
415
466
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 8 and 9 of Utaka, showing the safety valve 27 and the seal portion 25.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the safety valve of modified Sur, such that it comprises a resilient element configured to engage with the housing to snap the seal into place during assembly, but configured to inhibit external removal of the seal from the housing, because Utaka teaches a benefit to safety when utilizing its seal and resilient element to ensure the valve opens at a predetermined temperature, improving safety.
Claim 33 is obvious over Sur, in view of Fukushima, Chen, and Yamazaki, and further in view of Utaka.
Regarding Claim 34, Claim 34 relies upon Claim 33. Claim 33 is obvious over Sur.
Utaka teaches the resilient element is a tab or a protrusion configured to engage with an interior of the housing around an edge of the vent hole. Utaka at Fig. 8-9. Here “engage with an interior” includes sealing, connecting to, or sealing off an interior.
PNG
media_image6.png
415
466
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 8 and 9 of Utaka, showing the safety valve 27 and the seal portion 25, wherein the protruding or extending portion formed by the around the hole 26 teaches a tab or protrusion.
Claim 34 is obvious over Sur, in view of Fukushima, Chen, and Yamazaki, and further in view of Utaka.
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 KRISHNA RAJAN HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-9997. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:30 PM M-F.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.R.H./ Examiner , Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights