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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamata et al (JP2011134615A, as provided in the 10/29/2025 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Kamata discloses a device (electric or hybrid vehicle; see entire disclosure and especially P1, 24) comprising a battery pack (10 in Figs. 1-4; see entire disclosure and especially P24) comprising:
a lower pack frame (battery tray 30 in Figs. 1-4; see entire disclosure and especially P24) on which a plurality of battery cell arrays are mounted (plurality of batteries 20 in Figs. 1-4; see entire disclosure and especially P24);
at least one cover located on an upper part of the plurality of battery cell arrays (battery cover 40 in Figs. 1-4; see entire disclosure and especially P24); and
a vent that is mounted on the cover and extends along a longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame (air duct 42 in Figs. 1-4; see entire disclosure and especially P31, 35),
wherein the cover covers the upper part of a pair of battery cell arrays of the plurality of battery cell arrays arranged so as to face each other with respect to a width direction of the lower pack frame (see Fig. 1), and
wherein a first venting hole is formed in the cover part, and the vent covers the first venting hole (empty space of air passage 100 in Figs. 1-4 wherein air goes through; see entire disclosure and especially P31, 35).
Regarding claim 2, Kamata discloses wherein: the cover comprises a first plate (top part air duct 42 in Fig. 3), a second plate located below the first plate (bottom part of air duct 42 in Fig. 3), and a side surface part that connects an edge of the first plate and an edge of the second plate (side part of air duct 42 connecting the bottom part and top part of air passage 100; see the annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image1.png
603
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kamata Fig. 3
Regarding claim 4, Kamata discloses wherein: a lower surface of the second plate makes contact with the upper part of a first battery cell array of the plurality of battery cell arrays (the “first battery cell array” can be drawn to the battery cells 20 on the side closest to fan device 80 in Figs. 1 and 3; in Figs. 3-5, it appears the terminal portion 22 of the battery cells 20 make contact with the lower surface of the second plate; see entire disclosure and especially P27; further, every piece of the battery pack appears to be thermal contact with each other).
Regarding claim 5, Kamata discloses wherein: at least one second venting hole is formed in the second plate (jetting portions 43 in Figs. 1-4; see entire disclosure and especially P37), with the second venting hole being formed at a position adjacent to a front surface or a rear surface of the first battery cell array (jetting portion 43 in Fig. 3 can be seen to be adjacent to a rear surface of the battery cells 20 on the side closest to fan device 80).
Regarding claim 6, Kamata discloses wherein the vent comprises a first venting part extending along longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame and a second venting part extending the width direction of the lower pack frame (see the annotated Fig. below, Fig. 3, and P35 with regards to protrusion 41 being wherein the air duct 42 is provided).
PNG
media_image2.png
360
791
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kamata Fig. 1
Regarding claim 7, Kamata discloses wherein: the second venting part extends up to a bottom surface of the cover through a center of the first venting hole (as seen in Figs. 1 and 3, the second venting part (of air duct 42) extends upward toward the protrusion 41; further, see the annotated Fig. provided below).
PNG
media_image3.png
441
586
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kamata Fig. 1
Regarding claim 8, Kamata discloses wherein: the lower pack frame comprises a bottom part in contact with a lower surface of the plurality of battery cell arrays (surface of battery tray 30 wherein battery cells 20 sit; see Figs. 1-4), and a frame part in contact with at least one side surface of the plurality of battery cell arrays (sidewalls of battery tray 30 and ribs 31 in Fig. 1; see entire disclosure and especially P28; the sidewalls are in indirect physical contact with the plurality of battery cells arrays through the battery cover 40, see Fig. 4; additionally, the side walls and ribs are in thermal contact with at least one side surface of the plurality of battery cell arrays indirectly through the surface of battery tray 30 wherein battery cells 20 sit, given the surface is connected to the ribs).
Regarding claim 10, Kamata discloses wherein: the frame part comprises a side surface frame extending from an edge of the bottom part of the lower pack frame toward the upper part of the plurality of battery cell arrays (the sidewalls of battery tray 30, see Fig. 1), and an inner frame located inside the side surface frame (ribs 31 in Fig. 1), and the plurality of battery cell arrays are divided from each other by the side surface frame and the inner frame (the battery cells 20 are each given their own respective space by the sidewalls and ribs of battery tray 30, therefore, the battery cells (and thus the arrays) are separated from each other via the sidewalls and ribs).
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamata et al (JP2011134615A, as provided in the 10/29/2025 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet) as applied to claim 8, further in view of Hermansson et al (US 20110217575 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Kamata does not disclose wherein: the frame part is made of a heat insulating member.
In a similar field of endeavor, Hermansson teaches a casing for a battery pack (see entire disclosure and especially the Abstract and P28-29). Hermansson teaches the casing can comprise connectors for pipes for providing ventilation and cooling of the battery pack (see entire disclosure and especially P21). Hermansson teaches the casing is preferably made of flame retardant material and preferably also being heat insulating (see entire disclosure and especially P19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilize the teaching of Hermansson and selected the material of the upper and lower cover of Kamata to be a flame retardant heat insulating material, thereby meeting the limitation wherein the frame part is made of a heat insulating member, given Hermansson teaches a battery casing is preferably made of a material such as this and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamata et al (JP2011134615A, as provided in the 10/29/2025 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet) as applied to claim 10, further in view of Eberleh et al (US 20160359206 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kamata discloses a first end of the vent (the first end of the vent is drawn to the end of the vent that is near/close to opening 54 in Fig. 3). Kamata does not disclose wherein: at least one rupture part is formed on an outer surface of the side surface frame, and the rupture part is located adjacent to the first end of the vent.
In a similar field of endeavor, Eberleh teaches a housing for a cooling module has at least one pre-defined weakened region (see entire disclosure and especially P34, 135). Eberleh teaches this region opens up by way of material breakage at an overpressure present in a battery module and enables an out-gassing in the predefined region (see entire disclosure and especially P135).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Eberleh and provided to Kamata at least one rupture part formed on an outer surface of the side surface frame located adjacent to the first end of the vent, such as providing a weakened region to an outer surface of the side surface frame and an analogous section of the battery cover that overlaps with the side surface frame at an area adjacent to the first end of the vent, given Eberleh teaches this can enable out-gassing at the weakened region if overpressure occurs and this would allow gas to escape out and away from the battery pack (see P24) and cooling system (see P29) of Kamata.
Regarding claim 13, Kamata discloses wherein: at least one through part is formed on an inner surface of the side surface frame, and the through part communicates with the first end of the vent (opening wherein inlet passage 62 or outlet passage 63 passes through the frame; everything in the system is in thermal communication with each other).
Claims 1, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 20210074972 A1) in view of Wynn et al (US 20200152935 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a battery pack comprising:
a lower pack frame on which a plurality of battery cell arrays are mounted (cover member 210 with battery cells 120 in Figs. 15-18; see entire disclosure and especially P107);
at least one cover located on an upper part of the plurality of battery cell arrays (top cover 260 in Figs. 15-18; see entire disclosure and especially P107); and
wherein the cover covers the upper part of the a pair of battery cell arrays of the plurality of battery cell arrays arranged so as to face each other with respect to a width direction of the lower pack frame (see Fig. 18 wherein there are 4 battery cell arrays of 2 battery cells each), and
wherein a first venting hole is formed in the cover (through-holes 263 in Figs. 15-18; see entire disclosure and especially P114-115).
Kim discloses wherein the first venting hole extends along a longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame, given the holes have dimensions in both the lateral and longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame (see the annotated Fig. provided below of the extension in the longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame).
PNG
media_image4.png
230
282
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kim Fig. 15
However, Kim does not disclose a vent that is mounted on the cover and extends along a longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame, and the vent covers the first venting hole.
In a similar field of endeavor, Wynn teaches one-way valves can be used to allow evacuation of a liquid from a battery frame without allowing external liquid from entering the battery frame (P31).
Kim teaches the venting hole can be used to exhaust fire extinguishing agent of the extinguisher sheet but is silent to the material of the extinguishing agent (P115). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the benefits of utilizing a one-way valve to allow the extinguishing agent to be discharged while prevent external liquid (such as water known to cause short circuits in batteries) from entering the battery pack.
If a technique has been used to improve one device (utilize one-way valves to permit discharge of internal liquid while preventing entrance of external liquid), and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way (utilize one-way valves to permit discharge of internal fire extinguishing agent while preventing entrance of external liquid), using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill. SEE MPEP § 2141 (III) Rationale C, KSR v. Teleflex (Supreme Court 2007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Kim and provided a vent covers the first venting hole, therefore is mounted on the cover and extends along a longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame (given the venting hole extends in a longitudinal direction), because Wynn teaches this would allow the discharge of internal components in a battery structure (such as the fire extinguishing agent of Kim) while preventing entrance of liquid to a battery structure.
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses wherein: the lower pack frame comprises a bottom part in contact with a lower surface of the plurality of battery cell arrays (bottom of cover member 210 with battery cells 120 in Figs. 15-18, see specifically Figs. 17-18; also the Examiner would like to note the battery cells would be in thermal contact with the bottom of cover member 210 as well), and a frame part in contact with at least one side surface of the plurality of battery cell arrays (see four side walls of cover member 210 with battery cells 120 in Figs. 15-18, see specifically Figs. 17-18; also the Examiner would like to note the battery cells would be in thermal contact with the four side walls of cover member 210 as well).
Regarding claim 10, Kim disclose wherein: the frame part comprises a side surface frame extending from an edge of the bottom part of the lower pack frame toward the upper part of the plurality of battery cell arrays (see four side walls of cover member 210 with battery cells 120 in Figs. 15-18, see specifically Figs. 17-18), and an inner frame located inside the side surface frame (insulation spacers 230 in Figs. 15-18; the Examiner notes that lower pack frame’s side surface frames and inner frame are not required to be integral or a single component), and the plurality of battery cell arrays are divided from each other by the side surface frame and the inner frame (see Figs. 17-18).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 20210074972 A1) in view of Wynn et al (US 20200152935 A1) as applied to claim 10, further in view of Nemoto et al (US 20100032039 A1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Kim does not meet the limitation wherein the battery pack further comprises a first fastening member that fixes a part of an edge of the cover to an upper part of the inner frame, and a second fastening member that fixes a part of an edge of the vent to an upper surface of the cover.
In a similar field of endeavor, Nemoto teaches a valve can be fixed to a container, a piping, and/or an external connecter via a thermally adhesive film or adhesive agent (P27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Nemoto and provided a second fastening member, thermally adhesive film or adhesive agent, that fixes a part of an edge of the vent to an upper surface of the cover, given Nemoto teaches a thermally adhesive film or adhesive agent can be used to fix a valve to a container/structure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites wherein: the first venting hole is formed in a central part of the first plate.
Previously cited Kamata discloses wherein: the cover comprises a first plate (top part air duct 42 in Fig. 3), a second plate located below the first plate (bottom part of air duct 42 in Fig. 3), and a side surface part that connects an edge of the first plate and an edge of the second plate (side part of air duct 42 connecting the bottom part and top part of air passage 100; see the annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image1.png
603
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kamata Fig. 3
The first venting hole of Kamata is empty space of air passage 100 in Figs. 1-4 wherein air goes through. There is no reason to provide wherein the first venting hole of Kamata is formed in a central part of the first plate, given the first plate is the plate forming the top of the first venting hole.
Previously cited Kim discloses wherein a first venting hole is formed in the cover (through-holes 263 in Figs. 15-18; see entire disclosure and especially P114-115), and wherein the first venting hole extends along a longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame, given the holes have dimensions in both the lateral and longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame (see the annotated Fig. provided below of the extension in the longitudinal direction of the lower pack frame).
PNG
media_image4.png
230
282
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kim Fig. 15
However, the cover part of Kim does not comprise a first plate, a second plate located below the first plate, and a side surface that connects an edge of the first plate and an edge of the second plate as required by claim 2. Claim 3 depends from claim 2, therefore, Kim cannot be said to meet the limitations of claim 3.
Further search and consideration of the art has found no art to remedy the deficiencies of Kamata and Kim, and no other art has been found to teach the particulars of claim 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mary Byram whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/MARY GRACE BYRAM/Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights