DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
In the amendment dated 2026-06-03, the following has occurred: Claims 1, 12, and 14 have been amended; Claims 9 and 16-20 have been canceled; Claims 21-26 have been added.
Claims 1-8, 10-15 and 21-26 are pending and are examined herein. This is a Final Rejection.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-8, 10-15, and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldsche (US 2023/0175602 to Goldsche et al.) in view of Zribal (US 2021/0320375 to Zribal et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Goldsche teaches:
a peripheral pressure equalization unit 100 mounted to a wall 102 of a battery housing in a vehicle (Fig. 2, ¶ 0020, 0154)
Goldsche teaches use on a wall of an electrochemical device, including a vehicle battery housing. Zribal is additionally cited for teaching use of a peripheral pressure equalization device in a traction battery housing (¶ 0002). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use such a device on a traction “battery pack” enclosure wall, within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase, based on the prior art of record, with the motivation to ensure pressure equalization in the event of thermal runaway or other abnormalities to prevent the buildup of dangerous gases.
PNG
media_image1.png
834
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1006
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Goldsche further teaches:
the pressure unit configured to be inserted through a mounting opening from the interior side of the enclosure in some embodiments, depending on the engineer’s choice (¶ 0106-0107)
wherein the peripheral component assembly includes a backing plate 132 that interfaces with the surface of the wall facing the insertion direction, which in interior-side-insertion embodiments would be the interior wall (Fig. 4, ¶ 0172)
and a twist lock that that interfaces with an exterior surface of the wall in interior-side-insertion embodiments, formed of a plurality of keyed flanges fitted into keyways in the wall opening, and twisted to lock it in the place (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claims 2-3, Goldsche teaches:
use of the peripheral pressure unit on a wall of a traction battery housing
A structure or method step that is obvious to try— such as one that is chosen from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, has been found to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). It would have been obvious to place the peripheral component on any particular wall as they all serve the same purpose with respect to the valve function, absent evidence of unexpected results.
Regarding Claim 4, Goldsche teaches:
wherein the peripheral component assembly is rotatable between an alignment position and an engagement position relative to the mounting opening (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 5, Goldsche teaches:
in the alignment position, a mounting tab of the twist lock is received within a slot of the mounting opening (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 6, Goldsche teaches:
a radial slot outward of an outer circumference of the mounting opening (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 7, Goldsche teaches:
the mounting tabs are angularly displaced from the slot and are positioned to engage the exterior surface of the wall in the interior-to-exterior embodiments (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 8, Goldsche teaches:
wherein a gap between the backing plate and a mounting tab is equal to a thickness of the wall (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 10, Goldsche teaches:
a groove on the backing plate with a sealing ring between the backing plate and the interior surface of the wall (Fig. 4, ¶ 0173)
Regarding Claim 11, Goldsche teaches:
a block-off plate 136 removably secured to the backing plate 132, within the broadest reasonable interpretation of “removably secured”
Regarding Claim 12, Goldsche teaches:
the twist lock located radially outward of at least a portion of the peripheral component body (Fig. 2)
Regarding Claim 13, Goldsche teaches:
at least a portion of the peripheral component body extends outward of the exterior surface of the wall, namely the locking components (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 14, Goldsche teaches:
a battery housing on which the peripheral pressure component is sited, such that it would have been obvious to position a battery array in the enclosure housing
A structure or method step that is obvious to try— such as one that is chosen from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, has been found to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Regarding Claim 15, Goldsche teaches:
an interior-to-exterior embodiment, wherein the backing plate would be closer to the inside, where the battery components, such as a battery array, would be sited, than the twist lock on the other side of the wall
Regarding Claim 21, Goldsche teaches:
wherein the block-off plate 136 is secured to a portion of the backing plate on a side of the backing plate that faces toward the interior, in the interior-insertion embodiment, and seals off the peripheral component body from the interior, at least within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase, understanding that gases are not sealed off at least under some conditions, since the peripheral component is a pressure equalization device
Regarding Claim 22, Goldsche teaches:
at least three ridges that protrude, from a surface of the backing plate, of an interior-facing embodiment, that are interpreted to be “assembly aids” within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase, since they are points of purchase for a hand operating to insert the component (Fig. 1)
PNG
media_image3.png
818
634
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 23, Goldsche teaches:
grooves on the front surface that are radially outward of the twist lock features, which are themselves radially outward of a portion of the peripheral component body (Figs. 1-4)
Regarding Claim 24, Goldsche teaches:
a plurality of twist locks and slots, the twist locks being slotted into the slots, and then rotated to engage the wall, as claimed (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 25, Goldsche teaches:
a peripheral pressure equalization unit 100 mounted to a wall 102 of a battery housing in a vehicle (Fig. 2, ¶ 0020, 0154)
Goldsche teaches use on a wall of an electrochemical device, including a vehicle battery housing. Zribal is additionally cited for teaching use of a peripheral pressure equalization device in a traction battery housing (¶ 0002). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use such a device on a traction “battery pack” enclosure wall, within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase, based on the prior art of record, with the motivation to ensure pressure equalization in the event of thermal runaway or other abnormalities to prevent the buildup of dangerous gases.
PNG
media_image1.png
834
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1006
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Goldsche further teaches:
the pressure unit configured to be inserted through a mounting opening from the interior side of the enclosure in some embodiments, depending on the engineer’s choice (¶ 0106-0107)
wherein the peripheral component assembly includes a backing plate 132 that interfaces with the surface of the wall facing the insertion direction, which in interior-side-insertion embodiments would be the interior wall (Fig. 4, ¶ 0172)
and a twist lock that that interfaces with an exterior surface of the wall in interior-side-insertion embodiments, formed of a plurality of keyed flanges fitted into keyways in the wall opening, and twisted to lock it in the place (Figs. 2-5)
Regarding Claim 26, Goldsche teaches:
a peripheral pressure equalization unit 100 mounted to a wall 102 of a battery housing in a vehicle (Fig. 2, ¶ 0020, 0154)
Goldsche teaches use on a wall of an electrochemical device, including a vehicle battery housing. Zribal is additionally cited for teaching use of a peripheral pressure equalization device in a traction battery housing (¶ 0002). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use such a device on a traction “battery pack” enclosure wall, within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase, based on the prior art of record, with the motivation to ensure pressure equalization in the event of thermal runaway or other abnormalities to prevent the buildup of dangerous gases.
PNG
media_image1.png
834
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1006
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Goldsche further teaches:
the pressure unit configured to be inserted through a mounting opening from the interior side of the enclosure in some embodiments, depending on the engineer’s choice (¶ 0106-0107)
wherein the peripheral component assembly includes a backing plate 132 that interfaces with the surface of the wall facing the insertion direction, which in interior-side-insertion embodiments would be the interior wall (Fig. 4, ¶ 0172)
and a twist lock that that interfaces with an exterior surface of the wall in interior-side-insertion embodiments, formed of a plurality of keyed flanges fitted into keyways in the wall opening, and twisted to lock it in the place (Figs. 2-5)
the gap between the front surface of the back plate and a mounting tab of each twist lock is approximately equal to a thickness of the wall (Fig. 4)
at least three ridges that protrude, from a surface of the backing plate, of an interior-facing embodiment, that are interpreted to be “assembly aids” within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase, since they are points of purchase for a hand operating to insert the component (Fig. 1)
PNG
media_image3.png
818
634
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
The arguments submitted 2026-06-03 have been considered but do not place the application in condition for allowance. In response to the amendments, the claims are now rejected in view of Goldsche and Zribal.
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 Michael Dignan, whose telephone number is (571) 272-6425. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 10 AM and 6:30 PM. If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tiffany Legette, can be reached at (571)270-7078. Another resource that is available to applicants is the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR). Information regarding the status of an application can be obtained from the (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAX. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, please feel free to contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Applicants are invited to contact the Office to schedule an in-person interview to discuss and resolve the issues set forth in this Office Action. Although an interview is not required, the Office believes that an interview can be of use to resolve any issues related to a patent application in an efficient and prompt manner.
/MICHAEL L DIGNAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights