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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/31/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(a) as being anticipated by Uchiumi et al. (JP 2013-246920 A, hereinafter Uchiumi, previously cited).
Re Claim 1. Uchiumi teaches a flameproof electronic device (Fig. 1 & 2), comprising:
a housing (item 2), having an accommodation space and a pair of vents (item 21);
an electronic assembly (items 1 & 11), disposed in the accommodation space of the housing, wherein at least a portion of the electronic assembly is separated from the housing (Fig. 1 & 2) and a flow channel (a space between items 2 and 11) is enclosed by the electronic assembly and an internal surface of the housing, and the flow channel is extended between the pair of vents; and
a thermal-expandable structure (item 3), arranged in the accommodation space of the housing and corresponding to at least one of the vents,
wherein the thermal-expandable structure is configured to expand to seal the vent correspondingly when the thermal-expandable structure is heated to greater than or equal to a predetermined temperature (P3),
wherein a grid (Fig. 7) is arranged on the vent and has a back side facing the electronic assembly, a plurality of holes is defined on the grid (Fig. 7), the thermal-expandable structure is attached on the back side to be located in the housing (P7) and fully misaligned with each hole (Fig. 7).
Re Claim 2. Uchiumi teaches wherein the electronic assembly comprises a battery cell (P2).
Re Claim 7. Uchiumi teaches wherein the thermal-expandable structure is configured to expand to seal the plurality of holes (P3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/31/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 and 8, regarding claim 1, applicant argued that Uchiumi does not teach the thermal-expandable structure is attached on the back side to be located in the housing and fully misaligned with each hole, because the heat-expandable refractory resin material still partially obscures the pores of the metal mesh.
The examiner disagrees with this because nowhere in Uchiumi discloses that the heat-expandable refractory resin material still partially obscures the pores of the metal mesh. As the heat-expandable refractory resin material is only on the metal mesh, the heat-expandable refractory resin material is fully misaligned with each hole.
Applicant also argued that it is difficult to coat the heat-expandable refractory resin material in pores of the lattice-shaped wire mesh due to structural limitation.
The applicant has not provided any evidence showing the inoperability of Uchiumi. Without any evidence, applicant’s argument is mere allegation.
Conclusion
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood from the texts. Only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out to emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, however, each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN E YOON whose telephone number is (571)270-5932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM- 5 PM.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN E YOON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
4/7/2026
Prosecution Insights