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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/20/25 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 2 are currently pending. The amended claim 1 does overcome the previously stated 103 rejections based upon Lee et al. However, the amended claim 1 does not overcome the previously stated 103 rejection based upon Tadanai et al and Guichard et al. Therefore, upon further consideration, claims 1 and 2 are rejected under the following 103 rejections.
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadanai et al (JP 201509990 A) in view of Guichard et al (US 2023/0295428).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Tadanai et al discloses a battery pack “10” (storage battery) comprising: an exterior case “11” (container); a plurality of battery modules “13” (cells) housed in the exterior case; a heat sink “15” (heat insulating plate) that separates the battery modules from each other; and a member such as silicone resin which seals a gap between the exterior case and the heat sink ([0019]-[0021],[0046] and Fig. 8).
However, Tadanai et al does not expressly teach a storage battery sealing member comprising a vulcanized rubber composition, wherein the rubber composition contains a silicone rubber and a vulcanizing agent, a content of the silicone rubber in the rubber composition that is 50% by mass or more, the vulcanizing agent contains organic peroxide, a hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by a durometer type A at 23°C and a relative humidity of 50%, is 54 points or more and 74 points or less, a compression set of the sealing member, measured after 25% compression followed by aging at 150°C for 70 hours in accordance with HS K6262, is 80% or less, a difference between the hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% and a hardness Hb of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% after heated at 400°C for 10 minutes is within 15 points, and a mass of a residue after heating the sealing member at 800°C for 5 minutes, relative to the sealing member before heating, is 70 to 100% by mass (claim 1).
Guichard et al discloses a crosslinkable silicone elastomer composition (rubber composition) that contains a polyorganosiloxane (silicone rubber) and a crosslinking catalyst C that is an organic peroxide that acts as a vulcanizing agent, wherein the silicone elastomer composition has a Hardness Shore A that is 55-59 points ([0054]-[0059]-[0039],[0145]-[0148] and Table 1, Ex. 1-6); wherein the crosslinkable silicone elastomer composition comprises 60 and 80 wt% of at least one polyorganosiloxane (silicone rubber) ([0159]). Examiner’s note: Guichard et al is analogous art because it solves the same problem of improving the heat resistance of the silicone elastomer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Tadanai silicone resin member to include a vulcanized rubber composition, wherein the rubber composition contains a silicone rubber and a vulcanizing agent, a content of the silicone rubber in the rubber composition that is 60% to 80% by mass, the vulcanizing agent contains organic peroxide and a hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by a durometer type A at 23°C and a relative humidity of 50%, that is 55-59 points in order to make it possible to obtain a silicone elastomer having good mechanical properties and heat resistance, whose crosslinking kinetics is not slowed down ([0016]). In addition, the limitations “a compression set of the sealing member, measured after 25% compression followed by aging at 150°C for 70 hours in accordance with JIS K6262, is 80% or less, and a difference between the hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% and a hardness Hb of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% after heated at 400 C for 10 minutes is within 15 points, and a mass of a residue after heating the sealing member at 800°C for 5 minutes, relative to the sealing member before heating, is 70 to 100% by mass” are inherent characteristics of the Guichard silicone elastomer composition based on a silicone rubber composition having the same content of the silicone rubber, the same vulcanizing agent, and the same hardness of the silicone elastomer as the present invention.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadanai et al (JP 201509990 A) in view of Guichard et al (US 2023/0295428), and further in view of Hasegawa et al (US 2010/0280163).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Tadanai et al discloses a battery pack “10” (storage battery) comprising: an exterior case “11” (container); a plurality of battery modules “13” (cells) housed in the exterior case; a heat sink “15” (heat insulating plate) that separates the battery modules from each other; and a member such as silicone resin which seals a gap between the exterior case and the heat sink ([0019]-[0021],[0046] and Fig. 8).
However, Tadanai et al does not expressly teach a storage battery sealing member comprising a vulcanized rubber composition, wherein the rubber composition contains a silicone rubber and a vulcanizing agent, a content of the silicone rubber in the rubber composition that is 50% by mass or more, the vulcanizing agent contains organic peroxide, a hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by a durometer type A at 23°C and a relative humidity of 50%, is 54 points or more and 74 points or less, and a mass of a residue after heating the sealing member at 800°C for 5 minutes, relative to the sealing member before heating, is 70 to 100% by mass (claim 1).
Guichard et al discloses a crosslinkable silicone elastomer composition (rubber composition) that contains a polyorganosiloxane (silicone rubber) and a crosslinking catalyst C that is an organic peroxide that acts as a vulcanizing agent, wherein the silicone elastomer composition has a Hardness Shore A that is 55-59 points ([0054]-[0059]-[0039],[0145]-[0148] and Table 1, Ex. 1-6); wherein the crosslinkable silicone elastomer composition comprises 60 and 80 wt% of at least one polyorganosiloxane (silicone rubber) ([0159]). Examiner’s note: Guichard et al is analogous art because it solves the same problem of improving the heat resistance of the silicone elastomer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Tadanai silicone resin member to include a vulcanized rubber composition, wherein the rubber composition contains a silicone rubber and a vulcanizing agent, a content of the silicone rubber in the rubber composition that is 60% to 80% by mass, the vulcanizing agent contains organic peroxide and a hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by a durometer type A at 23°C and a relative humidity of 50%, that is 55-59 points in order to make it possible to obtain a silicone elastomer having good mechanical properties and heat resistance, whose crosslinking kinetics is not slowed down ([0016]).
However, Tadanai et al as modified by Guichard et al does not expressly teach a compression set of the sealing member, measured after 25% compression followed by aging at 150°C for 70 hours in accordance with HS K6262, that is 80% or less, a difference between the hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% and a hardness Hb of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% after heated at 400°C for 10 minutes that is within 15 points (claim 1).
Hasegawa et al discloses a silicone rubber composition having a change of hardness = hardness after ageing – hardness prior to ageing that is 15 or less, and a compression set, measured after 25% compression at 180°C for 22 hours, that is 7% or 8% ([0046],[0047] and Tables 2 and 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Tadanai/Guichard silicone resin member to include a compression set of the sealing member, measured after 25% compression followed by aging at 150°C for 70 hours in accordance with HS K6262, that is 80% or less, a difference between the hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% and a hardness Hb of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% after heated at 400°C for 10 minutes that is within 15 points in order to form molded silicone rubber products that demonstrate excellent resistance to heat, low compression set, and low deterioration after exposure to high temperatures that exceed 200°C ([0051]). In addition, the limitations “a mass of a residue after heating the sealing member at 800°C for 5 minutes, relative to the sealing member before heating, is 70 to 100% by mass” is an inherent characteristic of the Guichard/Hasegawa silicone elastomer composition based on a silicone rubber composition having the same content of the silicone rubber, the same vulcanizing agent, and the same hardness of the silicone elastomer as the present invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that “Comparative Example 1 is the rubber composition having similarities in the composition of the silicone elastomer, the same
vulcanizing agent, and the same hardness of the silicone elastomer, which is the rationale the Office action relies on to assert that the claimed features of the difference between the hardness before and after heating and the mass of the residue after heating are inherent characteristics of the Guichard silicone elastomer composition. However, as shown in Table 1 of the originally filed application, in Comparative Example 1, a difference between the hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% and a hardness Hb of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% after heated at 400°C for 10 minutes was unmeasurable, and a mass of a residue after heating the sealing member at 800°C for 5 minutes, relative to the sealing member
before heating, was 47% by mass. As such, Comparative Example 1 in Table 1 in the originally filed application proves that the rubber composition having similarities in the composition of the silicone elastomer, the same vulcanizing agent, and the same hardness of the silicone elastomer does NOT necessarily have "a difference between the hardness Ha of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A
at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% and a hardness Hb of the sealing member measured by the durometer type A at 23°C and the relative humidity of 50% after heated at 400°C for 10 minutes is within 15 points, and a mass of a residue after heating the sealing member at 800°C for 5 minutes, relative to the sealing member before heating, is 70 to 100% by mass" as claimed”.
In response, the Office takes the position that Comparative Example 1 is insufficient to show that the Hardness change and the Mass of residue after heating are not inherent properties of the Guichard silicone elastomer composition. The Office first points out that Comparative Example 1 is based on “KE-961-U” silicone rubber and “C-8” vulcanizing agent. However, Examples 1-7 are all based on different silicone rubbers and different vulcanizing agents as shown in Table 1. Also, it is unclear what “Unmeasurable” is referring to and can be construed as being no Hardness change which would read on less than 15 points. Therefore, without knowing the specifics of “KE-961-U” silicone rubber and “C-8” vulcanizing agent and how they differ from the ones used in Examples 1-7, it would not be possible to determine whether the difference in properties such as Hardness change and Mass of residue are due to the different materials or the different silicone rubber composition.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY S CHUO whose telephone number is (571)272-0717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:30pm.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached on 571-270-1292. 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.
/T.S.C/Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 1/22/2026