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 .
Response to Amendment
In Applicant’s response dated December 5, 2025, Claims 1, 8, 9, and 12 are amended. Claims 1-19 are pending and examined.
Status of Application
The rejections below are modified as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. Applicant’s amendments are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections in the Office Action dated October 21, 2205; therefore, the rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-11, 13-14, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US20190097192A1, as provided on the IDS dated 6/5/2023 and the EPO, hereinafter Kim, in view of Meintschel et al. DE102014019075A1, machine translation relied upon provided, hereinafter Meintschel.
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a battery module [Kim throughout, Fig. 6, module 1] comprising:
a battery assembly [Kim Fig. 6, group of three sub-packing units 10] including a plurality of sub-packing units [Kim Figs. 1-6, sub-packing units 10], each of the plurality of sub-packing units includes a cell housing [Kim 0032-0068 and throughout, Fig. 2, housing 200], battery cells accommodated in an internal space of housing [Kim 0032-0068 and throughout, Fig. 2 cells 100 in housing 200], and at least one vent hole [Kim 0032-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, vent hole 325] disposed in the cell housing and connecting the internal space to an outside of the cell housing [Kim 0032-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, outside is as indicated by the arrow marked g];
and a flame blocking structure coupled to the battery assembly [Kim 0037-0073 and throughout, Figs. 4/5, structure 300, The broadest reasonable interpretation of Figs. 1-5 is the structure 300 is coupled to the battery cell 100 grouping through the support holding the cells shown in Fig. 2, which like structure 300 would be considered coupled to the housing 200.], and including an inlet hole connected to and corresponding to the at least one vent hole [Kim 0037-0073 and throughout, Figs. 4/5, hole 335 is in communication with vent hole 325, which reads on connected to and corresponding to], an inner chamber communicating with inlet hole [Kim 0032-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, internal space of 300 is the inner chamber], an outlet hole communicating with the inner chamber and the outside [Kim 0032-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, hole 250 or 350 reads on outlet hole], and at least one partition wall protruding in the inner chamber [Kim 0032-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, wall 340 and parts 370, 380],
wherein the at least one partition wall is disposed in a flow path between the inlet hole and the outlet hole [Kim 0032-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, wall 340 and parts 370, 380 are between inlet hole 335 and outlet hole 250/350], the at least one partition wall at least partially overlaps the outlet hole [Kim Fig. 5],
Kim is silent to wherein the support member includes a cell accommodating portion opened in both directions, and the case is coupled to the support member to cover the open region of the cell accommodating portion so as to surround the battery cells, and the case presses the battery cells inward as required in the new limitation.
Meintschel discloses a battery wherein the cell housing [Meintschel abstract and throughout, Fig. 2 and throughout, cell housing 12] includes a support member configured to accommodate the battery cells [Meintschel abstract, Fig. 2 and throughout, cell holders 25 on each side of the battery cells 10 as the support member], and a case coupled to the support member [Meintschel 0026, Fig. 2 and throughout, surfaces 22 on sides adjacent to each side of battery cells 10], and
wherein at least one vent hole is disposed in the support member [Meintschel 0040, Fig. 2, venting guides 21],
wherein the support member includes a cell accommodating portion opened in both directions [Meintschel 0026, Fig. 3 Meintschel discloses an embodiment where the cell holder 25 lacks the surface 22. As can be seen in Fig. 3, the cell holder 25 holds the battery cells 12 on both sides. The broadest reasonable interpretation of Meintschel is if cell holder 25 lacks the surface 22, then it is open in both directions.], and the case is coupled to the support member to cover the open region of the cell accommodating portion so as to surround the battery cells [Meintschel 0026-0027, Fig. 3 Meintschel discloses an embodiment where the cell holder 25 has a surface 22, which performs the function of a case for the battery cell within the cell holder 25. For Meintschel to meet the limitations merely requires separation of the case 22 from the holder 25, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04V, C, since the case 22 provides the same function of pressing against and isolating the battery cells from one another whether it is separated or integral.], and the case presses the battery cells inward [Meintschel 0027, Meintschel discloses the cover 22 fixes the battery cells by force-fitting through pressure on the surface of each battery cell.]. It would be within the ambit of the skilled artisan to combine Meintschel teachings about using a battery cell holder around each of the cells in Kim’s battery module. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the predictable result of a battery module where the batteries are securely held together by a cell holder structure which provides pressure on each of the battery cells, which would be expected to improve the safety and durability of the battery module [Meintschel0026-0027, 0016]. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; (C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1, wherein the at least one partition wall is configured such that gas or a flame ejected from the inlet hole bypasses the at least one partition wall and exits to the outlet hole [Kim 0066-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5, reads on both gas and flame].
Regarding Claim 3, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1, wherein the inlet hole is opened in a first direction toward the inner chamber, and the outlet hole is opened from the inner chamber in a second direction, intersecting the first direction [Kim 0066-0073 and throughout, Fig. 5 shows this configuration where inlet hole 335 is open in a left-right first direction towards the internal space of 300 and outlet hole 250/350 is open in an up/down second direction from the internal space of 300.].
Regarding Claim 4, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 3, wherein the at least one partition wall at least partially overlaps the outlet hole in the second direction [Kim Fig. 5, parts 370 and 380 overlap 250/350 in the second direction relative to the inlet hole 335.].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 3, wherein the at least one partition wall extends in the first direction [Kim Fig. 5, parts 370/380 extend in a first direction (left-right)].
Regarding Claim 6, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1, wherein the flame blocking structure is coupled to the battery assembly [Kim 0038-0039], and the at least one vent hole communicates with the inner chamber through the inlet hole [Kim 0032-0073, Figs. 2-5, vent hole 325 is in communication with the internal structure of flame blocking structure 300 through inlet hole 335]. Kim discloses the flame blocking structure and coupled to case 200, which reads on coupled to the battery assembly as claimed. Kim does not explicitly disclose it is sealingly coupled as claimed; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to seal the coupling to prevent gas from escaping through unsealed areas for the predictable result of controlling the flow path of gas and flames through the gas channel 360 [Kim 0067-0073 and throughout].
Regarding Claim 7, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1, wherein the flame blocking structure includes a flame guiding part coupled to one side of the battery assembly and including the inlet hole, and a flame blocking part coupled to the flame guiding part to define the inner chamber and including the outlet hole [See modified Fig. 5 below]. Kim disclose the flame guiding part is coupled to the one side of the battery assembly as shown below [Kim 0067-0073 and throughout, Figs. 2-5] but does not explicitly discloses sealing coupled as claimed. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to seal the coupling to prevent gas from escaping through unsealed areas for the predictable result of controlling the flow path of gas and flames through the gas channel 360 [Kim 0067-0073 and throughout].
PNG
media_image1.png
475
537
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 7, wherein the at least one vent hole is formed in a side surface of the battery assembly [Kim Fig. 5, vent hole 325 in a side surface 320 of the battery assembly as shown below], and the flame guiding part includes a first base plate covering the side surface [Kim Fig. 5, first base plate 330 covering a side surface 320], and the inlet hole penetrates through a portion of the first base plate corresponding to the at least one vent hole formed in the side surface of the battery assembly [Kim Fig. 5, Inlet hole 335 penetrates through the first base plate 330, which corresponds to the at least one vent hole 325 of side surface 320 since inlet hole 335 faces and communicates with vent hole 325. ].
PNG
media_image1.png
475
537
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 8, wherein the flame blocking part comprises a second base plate [Kim Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 5 in Claim 8 above shows this configuration.] spaced apart from the first base plate, and an extension portion extending from an end of the second base plate to the first base plate and defining the outlet hole [Kim Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 5 in Claim 8 above shows this configuration.].
Regarding Claim 11, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 10, wherein the at least one partition wall extends from the second base plate to the first base plate [Kim Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 5 in Claim 8 above shows this configuration where the at least one partition wall includes 340, 370, 380.], and includes a first partition wall disposed between the inlet hole and the outlet hole [Kim Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 5 in Claim 8 above shows this configuration where the first partition wall is wall 340.].
Regarding Claim 13, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 11, wherein the flame guiding part includes a second partition wall extending from the first base plate to the second base plate and disposed between the extension portion and the first partition wall [Kim Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 5 in Claim 8 above shows this configuration where the second partition wall 370/380 extends from the first base plate 330 to the second base plate and is disposed between the marked extension portion and the first partition wall 340.].
Regarding Claim 14, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 13, wherein the second partition wall extends closer to the second base plate than an end of the first partition wall [Kim Fig. 5, Modified Fig. 5 in Claim 8 above shows this configuration where the end of first partition wall 340 is further away from the second base plate than the second partition wall 370/380.].
Regarding Claim 18, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose wherein a volume of the inner chamber is 1.5 to 2.5 times a volume of one of the battery cells accommodated in the internal space of the cell housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that determining the proper ratio between the volume of a battery cell and an inner chamber would be either aesthetic design choice, dependent on the application of the battery module, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I, or a result effective variable. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the ratio is an art recognized result effective variable wherein a very small inner chamber would not be effective in providing enough ventilation space for the release of gas or flames, which would not allow for sufficient space for the gas to escape and could result in a safety problem with regard to too much gas pressure being released into the inner chamber, which could damage the module. Similarly, a very large inner chamber would not be an effective use of space in the battery module and at some point additional volume would not provide any additional benefit. Further, it would be obvious that the volume of the inner chamber would need to be larger than the volume of a battery cell; otherwise, the gas in the battery cell cannot vent quickly, which could be a safety problem due to over pressurization. Determining the workable range of the ratio of the volume of the inner chamber to the volume of the battery cell would merely require routine experimentation in order to balance and optimize ventilation needs, safety requirements, and size of the battery, which would be obvious per MPEP 2144.05II.
Regarding Claim 19, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose wherein a size of the outlet hole is 2 to 4 times a size of one of the at least one vent hole.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that determining the proper ratio between the size of the outlet hole for a battery module and the vent hole for a battery cell would be either aesthetic design choice, dependent on the application of the battery module, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I, or a result effective variable. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the ratio is an art recognized result effective variable wherein a very small outlet hole for a battery module would not be effective in providing enough ventilation for the release of gas or flames from a battery cell vent hole, which would not allow for sufficient space for the gas to escape and could result in a safety problem with regard to too much gas pressure trapped in the inner chamber, which could damage the module. Similarly, at some point additional outlet hole size would not provide any additional benefit and too large of an outlet hole size could allow debris or other matter to enter the internal chamber. Determining the workable range would merely require routine experimentation in order to balance and optimize ventilation needs, safety requirements, and performance of the battery, which would be obvious per MPEP 2144.05II.
Claims 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Meintschel, as applied to claim 1, in further view of Daisuke et al. US20160099451A1, as provided on the IDS dated 6/5/2023 and the EPO, hereinafter Daisuke.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1, wherein the inlet hole 335 includes a first inlet hole 335 as described above but is silent to a second inlet hole and the at least one partition wall includes a third partition wall disposed between the first inlet hole and second inlet hole.
Daisuke discloses a battery module [Daisuke throughout, Figs. 1-6] comprising:
a battery assembly [Daisuke 0028, Figs. 1-6] including a plurality of sub-packing units [Daisuke 0028 and throughout, sub-packing units 10a and 10b], each of the plurality of sub-packing units includes a cell housing [Daisuke 0038 and throughout, case 13 including holder 12 and covers 16 and 17], battery cells accommodated in an internal space of housing [Daisuke 0038 and throughout, case 13 including holder 12 and covers 16 and 17 holds cells 11 inside housing], and at least one vent disposed in the cell housing [Daisuke 0032, 0056-0064 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, outlet 19]and connecting the internal space to an outside of the cell housing [Daisuke 0032, 0056-0064 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, outlet 19];
and a flame blocking structure coupled to the battery assembly [Daisuke 0032, 0059-0077 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, bracket 20 with frame 30], and including an inlet hole connected to and corresponding to the at least one vent hole [Daisuke 0032, 0063-0077 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, opening portion 21 is the inlet hole corresponding to vent hole 19], an inner chamber communicating with inlet hole [Daisuke 0032, 0059-0077 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, area S1 and S2 inside bracket 20 with frame member 30 communicates with inlet hole 21], an outlet hole communicating with the inner chamber and the outside [Daisuke 0076-0077, Fig. 6, an opening at the end of frame 30 communicates with discharge passage 40 to the outside hole on the bottom left of Fig. 6], and at least one partition wall protruding in the inner chamber [Daisuke 0068 and throughout, Fig. 5, 22a and 31a],
wherein the at least one partition wall is disposed in a flow path between the inlet hole and the outlet hole [Daisuke 0068 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, 22a and 31a are disposed in a flow path between the inlet hole 21 and the outlet hole in 40 shown in Fig. 6],
wherein the cell housing includes a support member configured to accommodate the battery cells [Daisuke 0052-0057, Figs. 1-6, support member is bottom cover 17], and a case coupled to the support member [Daisuke 0052-0058 and throughout, holder 12 is coupled to the support member 17], and wherein the at least one vent hole is disposed in the support member [Daisuke 0052-0058 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, vent hole 19 is in the support member 17]. Daisuke is silent to the at least one partition wall 22a/31a at least partially overlaps the outlet hole as required by claim 1 but further discloses where the inlet hole includes a first inlet hole 21a and a second inlet hole 21b [Daisuke 0063, Fig. 1] and a third partition wall 21 disposed between the first inlet hole and the second inlet hole. It would be within the ambit of the skilled artisan to apply Daisuke’s teachings to Kim’s battery module by modifying Kim’s flame blocking structure 300 as shown in modified Fig. 4 below to accommodate Daisuke’s stacked battery assembly 10 with vent holes 19 [Daisuke Figs. 1-6] by removing Kim’s pre-filter 390 and wall 320 [See MPEP 2144.04 II, omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired] and inserting Daisuke’s vent holes 19 into modified Kim’s first and second inlet holes with a third partition wall between the first and second inlet holes as shown below or by some other suitable modification. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Daisuke’s stacked battery assembly with Kim’s battery module by modifying Kim’s flame blocking structure to accommodate a stacked battery assembly with the predicted result of a stacked battery module for increased battery capacity but without having to duplicate the flame blocking structure [Daisuke 0070-0071, reducing parts], which would have the benefit of saving space [Daisuke 0070-0071] in the battery module and confining the heated gas and flames to one outlet. See MPEP 2143 A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
PNG
media_image2.png
542
468
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16, modified Kim further modified by Daisuke discloses the battery module of claim 15 as provided above wherein the internal space of the cell housing includes a first cell accommodating portion accommodating a first portion of the battery cells [Daisuke 0028- 0038 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, case 13 including holder 12 and covers 16 and 17 for battery cells in 10B] and a second cell accommodating portion separated from the first cell accommodating portion and accommodating a second portion of the battery cells [Daisuke 0028-0038 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, case 13 including holder 12 and covers 16 and 17 for battery cells in 10A], the at least one vent hole includes a first vent hole communicating with the first cell accommodating portion [Daisuke 0028- 0038 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, vent hole 19 in case 13 including holder 12 and covers 16 and 17 for battery cells in lower assembly 10B] and a second vent hole communicating with the second cell accommodating portion [Daisuke 0028- 0038 and throughout, Figs. 1-6, vent hole 19 in case 13 including holder 12 and covers 16 and 17 for battery cells in upper assembly 10A] , and the first inlet hole communicates with the first vent hole [Kim modified to accommodate Daisuke’s stack assembly as described in Claim 15, see modified Fig. 4 above], and the second inlet hole communicates with the second vent hole [Kim modified to accommodate Daisuke’s stack assembly as described in Claim 15, see modified Fig. 4 above].
Claim 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Meintschel, as applied to Claim 1, in further view of Yasui et al. [US20120263982A1, dated October 18, 2012], hereinafter Yasui.
Regarding Claim 17, modified Kim discloses the battery module of claim 1 but is silent to a cover selectively opening or closing the inlet hole. Yasui discloses a battery module with a lid 52 on a gas release duct 42, which is configured to selectively open to release gas [Yasui 0066-0069, Fig. 6e/f]. It would be within the ambit of the skilled artisan to modify the battery module of Kim to include a cover 52 as taught by Yasui on Kim’s inlet hole 325 to protect the inlet from being inadvertently clogged by any debris in the internal chamber or any matter incidentally introduced into the outlet hole, such as water. This could be implemented by adding Yasui’s cover 52 on the upper portion of side surface 320. Such modification would read on the claimed “wherein the flame blocking structure includes a cover configured to selectively open or close the inlet hole”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Yasui’s teachings about covering a venting duct with the battery module of Yasui for a battery module where the inlets for the individual cells are protected against debris, water, etc. entering the inlet region but gas released from the battery can quickly enter the internal chamber [Yasui 0069]. Such modification would be an improvement on the battery module of Kim. See MPEP 2143 (C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 12 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding Claim 9, as provided in the Office Action dated December 5, 2025, modified Kim is silent to a pipe defining the inlet hole and further protruding from the first base plate 330 toward the inner chamber as required by claim 9. It would not be obvious to modify Kim with a pipe protruding from inlet hole 335 in first base plate 330 into the inner chamber of part 300 because there would be no known benefit of such modification. An additional search was conducted, and no other prior art was found regarding this limitation. Applicant has amended claim 9 to be independent. Therefore, Claim 9 is deemed novel and nonobvious over the prior art.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Kim is silent to a pipe defining the inlet hole and further protruding from the first base plate 330 toward the inner chamber. It would not be obvious to modify Kim with a pipe protruding from inlet hole 335 in first base plate 330 into the inner chamber of part 300 because there would be no known benefit of such modification. An additional search was conducted, and no other prior art was found. Applicant has amended claim 12 to be independent. Therefore, Claim 12 is deemed novel and nonobvious over the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendment to claim 1 filed December 5, 2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections over Kim have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the anticipation rejections of claims 1-5 over Kim, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections over Kim for claims 6-8, 10-11, 13-14, and 18-19, and the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claim 15-16 over Kim in view of Daisuke and claim 17 over Kim in view of Yasui have been withdrawn. After additional search and consideration of the new limitation, obviousness rejections are applied to claims 1-8, 10-11, 13-19 above due to the prior art of Meintschel.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 9 and 12 are persuasive in overcoming the rejections/objections in the Office action dated December 5, 2025 and are deemed novel and nonobvious over the prior art as provided above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. T. LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1681. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)270-5256. 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.
/M. T. LEONARD/Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724