DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/11/2026 has been entered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 10/10/2025, has been entered. Claims 1 and 3 have been amended. Claims 2 and 4 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 3, and 5-11 are now pending in this application.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 3, 5-7, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasui (US-20120288738-A1) in view of Ichiro (US-20090233161-A1).
Regarding claim 1,
Yasui teaches a battery case (Fig. 2(a), 30; Fig. 3(a), 40; [0052]) comprising:
an inner case (Fig. 2(a), 30; [0030]) including a battery accommodating chamber (Fig. 2(a), chamber within 30 accommodating 10) that accommodates a plurality of batteries (Fig. 2(a), 10; [0030]),
an inner gas discharge part (Fig. 2(a), 33; [0040]) through which a gas generated [0040] in the plurality of batteries 10 is discharged [0040] to an outside of the battery accommodating chamber (see Fig. 2(a), gas arrow indicating discharge outside of chamber within 30; [0040]);
and a plurality of positioning parts (Fig. 3(a-b),41; [0033]; wherein there is an instance of 41 at least for each instance of 100, see also Fig. 5) disposed from an outer surface of the inner case (Fig. 3(b), leftmost surface of 30) to directly contact an inner surface of the outer case (Fig 3(b), surface directly left 30, disposed parallel to 30), to position the inner case with respect to the outer case (Fig. 3(b), wherein 41 positions 30 with respect to 40), and disposed at intervals from each other (see Fig. 5, wherein 61, and thus 41 and 31, are disposed at intervals from each other)
an outer case (Fig. 3(a), 40; [0031]; wherein 40 surrounds and protects battery modules 100 such that it is a case) including an inner case accommodating chamber (Fig. 3(a), space inside 40 that accommodates inner cases 30; [0032]);
and an outer gas discharge part through which the gas is discharged to an outside (Fig. 4, 60; [0034]);
and one or more gas guide passages (Fig. 2(a), 33; Fig. 3(b), arrow between 41, Fig. 7, 82) defined by an outer surface of the inner case (Fig. 2(a), 31), an inner surface of the outer case (Fig 3(b), surface near 61;Fig. 7, surface near 80a, 80b, and 80c), and the plurality of inner case positioning parts and configured to guide a gas from the inner gas discharge part to the outer gas discharge part (Fig. 3(b), arrow path between 41; [0033], wherein 31 defines gas passage 33, and wherein the surface near 61 and positioning member 41 defines arrow path between 41, and wherein the inner surface of outer case 80a, 80b, and 80c defines path 82).
Yasui fails to teach that the positioning parts are inner case positioning parts (as 41 is depicted as separate from the inner case 30) and fails to teach, in the embodiment above, wherein the plurality of inner case positioning parts include a plurality of ribs, and each of the plurality of ribs extends in a longitudinal direction of the battery case from one end part to another end part of the inner case. In another embodiment (see Figs. 6/7), Yasui teaches a plurality of ribs (Fig. 7, 81; [0059], wherein 81 is a rib because it is a long, thin, protruding member), and each of the plurality of ribs extends in a longitudinal direction of the battery case (Fig. 6, wherein 80 and thus the ribs of Fig. 7 extends in all orthogonal directions including a longitudinal direction) from one end part (Fig. 6, upper end of 80) to another end part (Fig. 6, lower end of 80). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to replace the positioning parts with a ribbed channel such that the ribbed channel in the embodiment of Fig. 7 is between the inner and outer case (Fig. 4, ribbed channel positioned in channel wherein 41 is disposed) of the battery case 30 from one end part (Fig. 2, right side end part of 30) to another end part of the inner case (Fig. 3, left side end part of 30) because 41 is disposed in a hollow channel, and Ichiro generally teaches placing a serpentine path in a hollow channel is advantageous to extend the length of the gas path and prevent oxygen combustion [0059]. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143.A.).
However, Yasui still fails to teach that the positioning parts are inner case positioning parts (as 41 is depicted as separate from the inner case 30).
Ichiro teaches inner case (Fig. 4, 2; [0042]) positioning parts (Fig. 4, 6; [0042]; wherein 6 is integrally formed with 2 and positions 2 with respect to 1 as shown in Fig. 4). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to integrally form the plurality of positioning parts 41 of Yasui with the inner case 31, as Ichiro suggests that an integrally formed positioning part can provide an anti-shock function [0042].
Regarding claim 3,
PNG
media_image1.png
272
464
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), the battery case further comprising one ridge part (Fig. 7, base plate 80a, 80b, 80c that 81 is attached to; [0059]) and a plurality of protrusions (Fig. 7, protruding portion of 81; [0059]) wherein each of one or more gas guide passages is located between a corresponding pair of the plurality of ribs adjacent to each other at a distance (Fig. 7, wherein 82 is between corresponding pairs of ribs adjacent to each other at a distance), and when a direction from the inner gas discharge part toward the outer gas discharge part is a gas flow direction (Fig. 7, 82), at least one of the plurality of ribs includes the one ridge part and the plurality of protrusions protruding from the one ridge part to be away from the one ridge part as going toward the outer gas discharge part (Fig. 4, 60, wherein protruding portions of 81 can protrude in the direction of 61) in the gas flow direction (annotated Fig. 7, arrow along protrusion) and located at intervals from each other (wherein protruding portions of 81 are located at intervals from each other along 80a, 80b, 80c; [0059]).
Regarding claim 5,
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the battery accommodating chamber accommodates a plurality of cylindrical batteries (see rejection of claim 1 above), and the outer case includes the outer gas discharge part only at one end in a height direction of each of the plurality of cylindrical batteries accommodated in the battery accommodating chamber (Fig. 4, 60; [0057]), and the inner case includes the inner gas discharge part (see rejection of claim 1 above) only at another end in the height direction (Fig. 4, wherein 33 is only at the another end in a height direction of battery modules 100 and thus battery cells 10, relative to the outer gas discharge part 60). The examiner notes that the limitation “a height direction” can be arbitrary and dependent on the viewing angle of the observer.
Regarding claim 6,
PNG
media_image2.png
410
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the battery accommodating chamber accommodates a plurality of cylindrical batteries (see rejection of claim 1 above), and the inner case includes the inner gas discharge part at one end and another end (Fig. 4, 33) in a height direction of each of the plurality of cylindrical batteries accommodated in the battery accommodating chamber (annotated Fig. 4, wherein the arrow depicts a height direction, wherein the height direction is situated along each of the plurality of cylindrical batteries 10 as depicted in Fig. 2(a); the examiner notes that the limitation “a height direction” can be arbitrary and dependent on the viewing angle of the observer), and the outer case includes the outer gas discharge part at a central part located other than both ends in the height direction (annotated Fig. 4, wherein 60 is along a central plate 40c which is other than both ends 40a and 40b in the height direction).
Regarding claim 7,
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the inner case and the plurality of inner case positioning parts are integrated with an insulating material (Fig. 4, 41, [0033], wherein a rubber material is an insulating material such that the inner case 30 is integrated with rubber inner case positioning part 41 and thus integrated with insulating material).
Regarding claim 9,
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches a battery pack comprising: the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); and the plurality of batteries arranged in the battery accommodating chamber of the battery case (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 10,
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein a number of the plurality of inner case positioning parts 41 are more than two (Fig. 3(b) wherein each instance of 41 corresponds to an instance of 61, Fig. 5, wherein there are at least 3 instances of 61 and thus 41), the outer case 40 has a rectangular-parallelepiped shape (see Fig. 5, rectangular-parallelepiped shape of 40) and the plurality of inner case positioning parts (Fig. 3(b). 41) are in direct contact (Fig. 3(b), wherein 41 is in direct contact with 40) with four surfaces (wherein 61 a-d is along 4 separate surfaces of rectangular-parallelepiped shape of 40, and there is a 41 corresponding to each instance of 61) of the of the rectangular-parallelepiped shape (Fig. 5, rectangular-parallelepiped of 40), and each of the plurality of the inner case positioning parts 41 is in contact with only one surface (Fig. 5, separate surfaces on which 61a-d are disposed) of the rectangular-parallelepiped shape (Fig. 5, rectangular-parallelepiped of 40).
Regarding claim 11,
Yasui in view of Ichiro teaches the battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), three of the plurality of the inner case positioning parts (Fig. 3(b) wherein each instance of 41 corresponds to an instance of 61, Fig. 5, wherein there are at least 3 instances of 61 and thus 41) are in direct contact (Fig. 3(b), wherein 41 is in direct contact with the surface of 40) with a same surface of the rectangular-parallelepiped shape (Fig. 5, leftmost surface of parallelepiped shape of 40).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasui (US-20120288738-A1) in view of Ichiro (US-20090233161-A1), Yasui* (US-20120263982-A1), and Shiotsu (US-20160104923-A1).
Regarding claim 8,
Yasui in view of Ichiro battery case according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to teach a meshed member covering the outer gas discharge part or an air-permeable and waterproof member that allows the gas to pass therethrough, includes an air-permeable and waterproof material configured to prevent external water from entering the outer case, and covers the outer gas discharge part. Yasui*, analogous in the art of gas discharge members for batteries, teaches a member covering the outer gas discharge part (Fig. 10; member 56 covering gas release duct 42; [0102]), includes an air-permeable (see [0102], wherein 56 is permeable to water vapor) and waterproof material (see [0102], wherein 56 prevents condensation from entering and is thus waterproof) configured to prevent external water from entering the outer case, and covers the outer gas discharge part (Fig. 10, 56; [0102]) wherein the member 56 is made of a waterproof moisture permeable member in order for condensation within the battery module to be prevented [0102] because the member 56 is permeable to water vapor. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the outer gas discharge port 60 of Yasui to be covered with the air-permeable, water-proof member of Yasui* in order to prevent condensation from forming within the battery (Yasui*; [0102]).
However, Yasui in view of Ichiro and Yasui* still fails to teach the member is a meshed member. Shiotsu, analogous in the art of gas discharge members for batteries, teaches the gas discharge duct (Fig. 9, 51) be covered with a metal mesh member (Fig. 9, 58). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the member covering the outer gas discharge part 60 to be a meshed member, as Shiotsu teaches that a meshed member reduces the temperature of the discharged by contact with the mesh [0070], helping to prevent ignition by the exhaust gas [0074], thus improving the safety of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Yasui does not disclose the inner positioning members include a plurality of ribs. However, this is not persuasive. In another embodiment, Yasui teaches a plurality of ribs (Fig. 7, 81; [0059], wherein 81 is a rib because it is a long, thin, protruding member), and each of the plurality of ribs extends in a longitudinal direction of the battery case (Fig. 6, wherein 80 and thus the ribs of Fig. 7 extends in all orthogonal directions including a longitudinal direction) from one end part (Fig. 6, upper end of 80) to another end part (Fig. 6, lower end of 80). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to replace the positioning parts with a ribbed channel such that the ribbed channel in the embodiment of Fig. 7 is between the inner and outer case (Fig. 4, ribbed channel positioned in channel wherein 41 is disposed, which extends in a longitudinal direction of 30 along cells 100) of the battery case 30 from one end part (Fig. 2, right side end part of 30) to another end part of the inner case (Fig. 3, left side end part of 30) because 41 is disposed in a hollow channel, and Ichiro generally teaches placing a serpentine path in a hollow channel is advantageous to extend the length of the gas path and prevent oxygen combustion [0059]. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143.A.).
Applicant argues that the ribs are not merely positioning elements but also a gas guiding structure. However, this is not persuasive, as Yasui teaches ribs that are both a gas guiding structure (see Fig. 7, gas path) and a positioning element (Fig. 7, wherein ribs position casing elements with respect to each other), wherein Yasui generally teaches the advantage of adding serpentine paths to hollow channels [0059], wherein the placement of such a serpentine path in the hollow channel seen in Fig. 4 is a simple substitution of known elements expected to achieve predictable results of extending a gas path. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 10/10/2025, have been fully considered and, due to the amendments, are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ichiro (US-20090233161-A1).
Applicant argues all other claims, including new claims 10 and 11, should be allowed at least due to their dependency on an allowable claim 1. However, this is not persuasive, as the rejections on all claims have been sustained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: (US-20180233790-A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL WYROUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-4806. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10am-5pm.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE can be reached on (571) 270-7078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. 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, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL CHRISTIAN ST WYROUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights