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 Arguments
The following is in response to the applicant’s remarks filed 10/28/25.
As agreed upon previously in the interview filed 09/11/25, the amendments overcome the previous rejection.
A new basis for rejection appears below as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, US20180183026A1 (previously cited), Kim, KR20170020997A, and Cho, US20050277017A1 (cited in IDS 10/22/24).
Regarding claim 1, Matsumoto teaches an electrode assembly (10) in which electrodes and separators are alternatingly stacked [0055][fig. 6]; and
a battery case (50) in which the electrode assembly (10) is accommodated [0055][fig. 6],
wherein the battery case (50) comprises a first gas pocket (narrow portion (56b))[fig. 6] in which a first collection space configured to receive gases from the electrode assembly is defined (narrow portion formed with gas discharge valve (60))[fig. 6], and in which is provided a first exhaust port (60) configured to receive a discharge therethrough of the gases in the first collection space [0032], and wherein the battery case comprises a body in which a housing accommodating the electrode assembly is defined, the first gas pocket extends along a side of the body so that the housing and the first collection space are connected (narrow portion (56b) formed to the side of wide portion (56a) which accommodates the assembly (10))[fig. 6], and wherein the first gas pocket has a first height (L1) in a first direction perpendicular to a major surface of the electrode assembly, the body of the battery case has a second height (L2) in the first direction [fig. 6].
Matsumoto does not teach a second gas pocket in which a second collection space configured to receive the gases exhausted from the first exhaust port is defined, and in which is provided a second exhaust port configured to receive a discharge therethrough of the gases in the second collection space, the second gas pocket is provided above the first gas pocket. and the first gas pocket is separated from the body by an opening that has a third height in the first direction, the third height being less than the first height and the second height.
Kim teaches an electrode assembly housed within a battery case (30) comprising a first gas pocket wherein the first gas pocket (gas collecting portion (20))[0058] has a first height (L1) in a first direction perpendicular to a major surface of the electrode assembly (electrode assembly (not shown))[0065], the body (30) of the battery case has a second height (L2) in the first direction, and the first gas pocket is separated from the body by an opening that has a third height in the first direction (L3) the third height being less than the first height and the second height (see annotated fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
466
823
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Further, Kim teaches that discharging gas from the first gas pocket (gas collecting portion) is done to avoid discharging electrolyte [0040]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine gas pocket dimensions of Kim into the electrode assembly of Matsumoto to prevent electrolyte leakage.
Cho teaches an electrode assembly accommodated in a battery case [0002] comprising a first (space below plate (72)) and second gas pocket (space (72))[fig. 3] wherein the second gas pocket (72) in which a second collection space configured to receive the gases exhausted from the first exhaust port is defined (receives gas from the battery case when plate (72) breaks), the second gas pocket is provided above the first gas pocket [fig. 3], and is provided a second exhaust port (second plate (71)) configured to receive a discharge therethrough of the gases in the second collection space (discharges gas from space (72))[0048][0049][fig. 3]. Further, Cho teaches having a first and second gas pocket as described can improve the cycle-life of a battery as well as establish its safety [0057]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date combine the second gas pocket of Cho into the battery of Matsumoto to increase cycle life and safety of the battery.
Regarding claim 15, Matsumoto teaches a battery pack [0003] comprising the secondary battery of claim 1.
Claims 2, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, US20180183026A1 (previously cited), Kim, KR20170020997A, and Cho, US20050277017A1 (cited in IDS 10/22/24) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Guen, KR20180113855A (previously cited).
Regarding claim 2, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 1.
Further, Cho teaches wherein the first exhaust port is positioned above a first through-hole connecting the first collection space and the second collection space first (space below plate (72)) and second gas pocket (space (72))[fig. 3].
Combined Matsumoto does not teach the first exhaust port being configured to control opening and closing of the first through-hole, and the second exhaust port is positioned above a second through-hole connecting the second collection space and an outside of the battery case, the second exhaust port being configured to control opening and closing of the second through-hole.
Guen teaches wherein the first exhaust port is positioned above a first through-hole connecting the first collection space and the second collection space (opening between internal space of case (140) and between the upper and lower vents in which notch (154b-1) is formed)[fig. 3],
the first exhaust port being configured to control opening and closing of the first through-hole (exhaust port opens hole at setpoint pressure)[0070], and
the second exhaust port is positioned above a second through-hole connecting the second collection space and an outside of the battery case (opening between space between upper and lower vents and outside of case where notch (1534a-1) is formed)[fig. 3],
the second exhaust port being configured to control opening and closing of the second through-hole (exhaust port opens hole at setpoint pressure)[0070]. Further, Guen teaches that the exhaust ports configured as such increases safety and reduces fire risk [0006]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the gas exhausting structures of Guen into the battery of Matsumoto to improve safety and reduce fire risk.
Regarding claim 8, Combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 2.
Further, Guen teaches wherein the first exhaust port and the second exhaust port are each configured to have different opening pressures from each other (only a portion of the pressure which results from breaking the lower vent is transferred to the upper vent which causes it to break)[0070]
Regarding claim 10, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 8,
Further, Guen teaches wherein the opening pressure of the first exhaust port is greater than the opening pressure of the second exhaust port (only a portion of the pressure which results from breaking the lower vent is transferred to the upper vent which causes it to break)[0070].
Claims 4 – 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, US20180183026A1 (previously cited), Kim, KR20170020997A, Cho, US20050277017A1 (cited in IDS 10/22/24), and Guen, KR20180113855A as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Kawai, US20220367964A1.
Regarding claim 4, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 2.
Further, Guen teaches wherein the first exhaust port and the second exhaust port have formed therein a first incision and a second incision, respectively (notches (154b-1)(154a-1))[fig. 3], so that at or above a certain pressure, the first incision and the second incision are configured to open the first through-hole and the second through-hole, respectively (notches open at setpoint pressure)[0070].
Combined Matsumoto does not teach the exhaust port material.
Kawaii teaches a second battery pack comprising a plurality of batteries [0002] wherein the secondary battery pack comprises a housing (10) wherein the housing comprises a first (inside case) and second (ventilation chamber (100)) gas pocket [fig. 1] wherein the first and second gas pocket have a first (110)[fig. 4] and second exhaust port (125)[fig. 5] wherein the first exhaust port is made of an elastic material (elastic material such as silicone rubber)[0050]. Further, Kawaii teaches the elastic material has a high heat resistance [0050]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the material of Kawaii into the exhaust ports of Matsumoto to increase heat resistance.
Regarding claim 5, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 4.
Further, Guen teaches wherein the first incision and the second incision each comprise 2 to 4 incision lines [fig. 3].
Regarding claim 6, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 4.
Further, Guen teaches wherein the first incision and the second incision each comprise cross (“+”) shaped incision lines [0068].
Regarding claim 9, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 2.
Further, Guen teaches the first exhaust port and the second exhaust port are configured to have different opening pressures from each other (only a portion of the pressure which results from breaking the lower vent is transferred to the upper vent which causes it to break)[0070]
Combined Matsumoto does not teach wherein the first exhaust port and the second exhaust port are each formed of materials having different elasticities from each other
Kawaii teaches a battery pack comprising a plurality of secondary batteries [0002] wherein the secondary battery pack comprises a housing (10) wherein the housing comprises a first (inside case) and second (ventilation chamber (100)) gas pocket [fig. 1] wherein the first and second gas pocket have a first (110)[fig. 4] and second exhaust port (125)[fig. 5] wherein the first exhaust port is made of an elastic material (elastic material such as silicone rubber)[0050]. Further, Kawaii teaches the elastic material has a high heat resistance [0050]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the material of Kawaii into the exhaust ports of Matsumoto to increase heat resistance.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, US20180183026A1 (previously cited), Kim, KR20170020997A, Cho, US20050277017A1 (cited in IDS 10/22/24), Guen, KR20180113855A and Kawai, US20220367964A1 as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Nakano, US20210020884A1.
Regarding claim 7, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 4.
Combined Matsumoto does not teach wherein the first exhaust port and the second exhaust port each further comprise an adhesive disposed on the first incision and the second incision, respectively, to additionally seal the first incision and the second incision, and wherein an adhesive force sealing each of the first incision and the second incision is released when the respective first incision and the second incision are opened by gas pressure.
Nakano teaches a battery pack (100) comprising a plurality of secondary batteries (10) [0002] wherein the battery pack comprises a case (1)[fig. 1] wherein the case comprises a first (breathable film (4)) and second exhaust port (design plate (5))[fig. 4] wherein the first and second exhaust port comprise an adhesive (6) which seals the first and second exhaust port [fig. 4][0011] wherein the sealing force of the first and second adhesive is overcome at a predetermined gas pressure [0033]. Further, Nakano teaches the exhaust port with the taught adhesive allows for airflow during normal battery conditions, but also prevents explosion during a high-pressure state [0035]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the adhesive of Nakano into the battery of combined Matsumoto to prevent battery explosions.
Claims 11 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, US20180183026A1 (previously cited), Kim, KR20170020997A, and Cho, US20050277017A1 (cited in IDS 10/22/24) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee, US20210265699A1.
Regarding claim 11, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 1.
Combined Matsumoto does not teach further comprising a gas sensor disposed inside the second gas pocket, the gas sensor being configured to detect a presence of the gases within the second collection space or to measure a constitution of the gases.
Lee teaches a secondary battery (14)[0002] comprising an electrode assembly disposed within a case (14a)[fig. 3] wherein the case comprises an exhaust port (battery case is punctured at a pressure setpoint)[0079][0081] wherein the battery further comprises a gas sensor disposed inside the second gas pocket, the gas sensor being configured to detect a presence of the gases within the second collection space or to measure a constitution of the gases (sensing unit (90) detects CO2 flowing from the venting parts)[0086]. Further, Lee teaches monitoring the gas increases the stability of the battery [0087]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the sensor of Lee into the battery of Matsumoto to improve stability.
Regarding claim 12, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 11.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the gas sensor is configured to detect a presence of carbon dioxide (CO2)(detects CO2 flowing from the venting parts)[0086].
Regarding claim 13, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 11.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the gas sensor is configured to trigger a notification signal the presence of the gases within the second collection space is detected (transmit battery status)[0091][0092].
Regarding claim 14, combined Matsumoto teaches the secondary battery of claim 1.
Combined Matsumoto does not teach further comprising an air pressure sensor disposed inside at least one of the first gas pocket or the second gas pocket, the air pressure sensor being configured to measure air pressure.
Lee teaches a secondary battery (14)[0002] comprising an electrode assembly disposed within a case (14a)[fig. 3] wherein the case comprises an exhaust port (battery case is punctured at a pressure setpoint)[0079][0081] wherein the battery further comprises an air pressure sensor disposed inside at least one of the first gas pocket or the second gas pocket, the air pressure sensor being configured to measure air pressure (pressure sensor)[0015][0016]. Further, Lee teaches the pressure sensor to allow for indication of overcharging at a value greater than a predetermined pressure value [0017][0022]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the pressure sensor of Lee in to the battery of Matsumoto to detect an overcharging state of the battery.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M GREENE whose telephone number is (571)270-1340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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.
/PATRICK MARSHALL GREENE/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724