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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 6, 2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Action on October 10, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on December 18, 2025 in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on October 10, 2025 have been received and entered. Specification at page 8, line 20 has been amended to correct a typographical error regarding the feature “battery cell”, because of which the drawings objection was overcome. Claims 1, 7, 12, 13, 16, 17 and 18 were amended. Claim 11 was cancelled and claims 19 and 20 were added. Claims 1-10 and 12-20 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Independent claims 1 and 16 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ootsuki et al. (WO 2019163839 A1, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding independent claims 1 and 16 the applicant argues that as shown in the figures of Ootsuki, the fire-resistant resin layer 22 (which the Office associates with the claimed fire-extinguishing material layer) contacts the battery cell 11, however the substrate 21 (which the Office associates with the claimed flame-retardant pad) does not contact the battery cell. In other words, Ootsuki fails to disclose or suggest the fire-extinguishing material layer arranged in at least a part of the flame-retardant pad, where a surface of the flame- retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with one of the pair of adjacent battery cells (see page 8).
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed on December 18, 2025, with respect to independent claims 1 and 16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1 and 16 has been withdrawn.
Because of the direct/indirect dependency of claims 2-10 and 12-15 on claim 1, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections applied to these claims have been withdrawn.
Because of the direct/indirect dependency of claims 17 and 18 on claim 16, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections applied to these claims have been withdrawn.
Upon further consideration, new ground of rejection is presented under Schaefer, T. (US 20140014376 A1) in view of Yu et al. (US 20170225429 A1).
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 non-obviousness.
Claim 1-10 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer, T. (US 20140014376 A1) in view of Yu et al. (US 20170225429 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Schaefer teaches an electrochemical energy store (battery pack) in which a plurality of electrochemical cells (2) (battery module) are contained in a housing (1) (module frame) [0047]. In the electrochemical energy store (battery module), intermediate elements (10) are disposed between the electrochemical cells (2) [Abstract, 0053 and Fig. 2]. The intermediate elements (10) are composed of an extinguishing agent or an extinguishing agent additive or comprise or have an extinguishing agent or an extinguishing agent additive [Abstract and 0007]. An extinguishing agent is defined on the present invention as a substance or a mixture of substances which exerts an extinguishing effect on fire, i.e. preferably a retarding effect, and/or which prevents or impedes fires from starting [0010], form which intermediate elements (10) are a flame retardant member.
Schaefer does not teach the feature “wherein the flame-retardant member comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame- retardant pad and wherein a surface of the flame-retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with at least one of the pair of adjacent battery cells”.
Yu teaches thermoplastic composite articles that comprise one or more flame retardants [0002]. The taught thermoplastic composite articles can be shaped depending on the particular use application [0064]. Figure 10 shows an article (1000) comprising a core (1010) and strips (1020 and 1030) on its surface [0100]. The cores of the present invention can be configured to comprise a flame retardant material and the strips may comprise compounded flame retardant material, EG material, EG materials in combination with a Group II or Group III metal hydroxide (fire-extinguishing materials) [0100, 0101 and 0103]. The strips (1020 and 1030) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) [0100]. It is taught that the employed strips, which may adopt a layer form, may increase or enhance flame retardancy on desired areas of the core surface [0100].
From the teachings of Yu, the article (1000) is analogous to the flame-retardant member, the core (1010) is analogous to the flame-retardant pad and the strips (1020 and 1030) are analogous to the fire- extinguishing material layer.
If the intermediate elements (10) (flame retardant members) of Schaefer are modified to adopt the teachings of Yu regarding the article (1000) (flame retardant member analogous), the claimed features “wherein the flame-retardant member comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame- retardant pad” would be met. In consequence, the feature “wherein a surface of the flame-retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with at least one of the pair of adjacent battery cells” would be met as well.
Schaefer is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely battery module comprising: a battery cell stack comprising a plurality of battery cells; a module frame accommodating the battery cell stack; and a flame-retardant member between a pair of adjacent battery cells in the battery cell stack.
Yu is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a flame-retardant member which comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame- retardant pad.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate elements (flame retardant members) of Schaefer to include the feature “wherein the flame-retardant member comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame-retardant pad and wherein a surface of the flame-retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with at least one of the pair of adjacent battery cells”, because Yu teaches that by employing the referred features, flame retardancy on desired areas of the core (flame-retardant pad analogous) surface may be increased or enhanced.
Regarding claim 2, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion and length and width of the battery assembly of Schaefer are designated as the first and second direction respectively, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 3, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing layers) could be located on desired areas of the core (1010) (flame-retardant pad analogous), therefore they can be located “in a center portion of the flame-retardant pad”.
Regarding claim 4, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion and length and width of the core (1010) (flame-retardant pad analogous) of Schaefer are designated as the first and second direction respectively, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 5, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 4. From claim 1 (on which claim 4 depends) discussion, the strips (1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) have symmetry with the length and width of the core (1010) (flame-retardant pad analogous).
Regarding claim 6, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 4. From claim 1 (on which claim 4 depends) discussion, the strips (1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) (flame retardant member analogous), which means that both strips could adopt a geometry and position according to the desired effects. From the previous reasoning, the strips (1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) could be configured in a way that meets the feature “wherein a length of the fire-extinguishing material layer decreases in a lateral direction from a center of the flame- retardant pad”.
Regarding claim 7, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. Because it was taught that the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) (flame-retardant member analogous), the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be positioned in a way that the features “wherein each of the plurality of fire-extinguishing material layers are spaced apart at a predetermined distance” (claim 8) and “wherein a distance between each of the plurality of fire-extinguishing material layers increases in a lateral direction from a center of the flame-retardant pad” (claim 9) is met respectively.
Regarding claim 10, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. From claim 1 (on which claim 7 depends) discussion, the strips (1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) (flame retardant member analogous), which means that both strips could adopt a geometry and position according to the desired effects. From the previous reasoning, the strips (1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) could be configured in a way that meets the feature “wherein a length of each of the plurality of fire-extinguishing material layers increases in a lateral direction from a center of the flame-retardant pad”.
Regarding claim 13, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 14, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 15, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Schaefer further teaches a seventh embodiment, where the intermediate elements (10) (flame-retardant members) are “larger than a size of at least one of the plurality of battery cells” [Fig. 7]. Based on the discussion for claim 1, the modified intermediate elements (10) (flame-retardant members) comprise a core (1010) (flame- retardant pad), which from the description of Schaefer seventh embodiment, meet the claimed feature.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer, T. (US 20140014376 A1) in view of Yu et al. (US 20170225429 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Ootsuki et al. (WO 2019163839 A1, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 12, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer penetrates at least a part of the flame-retardant pad”.
Ootsuki a fire-resistant laminate and a battery comprising the fire-resistant laminate [0001]. On Fig. 9, a battery (module) having multiple battery cells (11) (stack) preferably have a fire-resistant laminate (25) (flame-retardant member analogous), having fire-resistant resin layers (22) (fire-extinguishing material layer analogous) provided on both sides of a substrate (21) (flame-retardant pad analogous), placed between the battery cells (11) [0076].
In a second embodiment, the substrate (21) (flame-retardant pad analogous) has a plurality of holes which may be completely blocked with the fire-resistant resin layer (22) (fire-extinguishing material layer analogous) [0060, 0063 and Fig. 4a]. It is taught that the holes, and therefore the fire-resistant resin layer (22) (fire-extinguishing material layer analogous) penetrating at least a part of the substrate (21) (flame-retardant pad analogous), can efficiently disperse flames spewing out from the battery, thereby reducing the intensity of the flames.
If the modified intermediate elements (10) (flame retardant members) are modified to include the holes completely blocked with the fire-extinguishing material layer analogous, as taught by Ootsuki, the claimed features would be met.
Ootsuki is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery module comprising: a battery cell stack comprising a plurality of battery cells; a module frame accommodating the battery cell stack; and a flame-retardant member between a pair of adjacent battery cells in the battery cell stack.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate elements (flame retardant members) of Schaefer and Yu to include the feature “wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer penetrates at least a part of the flame-retardant pad”, because Ootsuki teaches that it can efficiently disperse flames spewing out from the battery, thereby reducing the intensity of the flames.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer, T. (US 20140014376 A1) in view of Yu et al. (US 20170225429 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Schaefer teaches a method for manufacture an electrochemical energy store which consist on disposing intermediate elements between each two respective adjacent electrochemical cells of a plurality of electrochemical cells having contacts or between an electrochemical cell and a housing wall, wherein said intermediate elements consist of an extinguishing agent or an extinguishing agent additive or contain or comprise an extinguishing agent or extinguishing agent additive [claim 33]. As shown on Figure 2, a plurality of electrochemical cells (2) (battery module) are contained in a housing (1) (module frame) and comprise intermediate members (10) (flame-retardant members) positioned within adjacent electrochemical cells (2) [Abstract, 0047 and 0053].
Schaefer does not teach the feature “the flame-retardant member comprising a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame- retardant pad, wherein a surface of the flame-retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with one of the pair of adjacent battery cells”.
Yu teaches thermoplastic composite articles that comprise one or more flame retardants [0002]. The taught thermoplastic composite articles can be shaped depending on the particular use application [0064]. Figure 10 shows an article (1000) comprising a core (1010) and strips (1020 and 1030) on its surface [0100]. The cores of the present invention can be configured to comprise a flame retardant material and the strips may comprise compounded flame retardant material, EG material, EG materials in combination with a Group II or Group III metal hydroxide (fire-extinguishing materials) [0100, 0101 and 0103]. The strips (1020 and 1030) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) [0100]. It is taught that the employed strips, which may adopt a layer form, may increase or enhance flame retardancy on desired areas of the core surface [0100].
From the teachings of Yu, the article (1000) is analogous to the flame-retardant member, the core (1010) is analogous to the flame-retardant pad and the strips (1020 and 1030) are analogous to the fire- extinguishing material layer.
If the intermediate elements (10) (flame-retardant members) of Schaefer are modified to adopt the teachings of Yu regarding the article (1000) (flame-retardant member analogous), the claimed features “wherein the flame-retardant member comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame- retardant pad” would be met. In consequence, the feature “wherein a surface of the flame-retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with at least one of the pair of adjacent battery cells” would be met as well.
Schaefer is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a method of forming a battery module comprising: attaching a flame-retardant member between a pair of adjacent battery cells in a battery cell stack and housing the battery cell stack with a module frame.
Yu is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a flame-retardant member which comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame- retardant pad.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate elements of Schaefer to include the feature “wherein the flame-retardant member comprises a flame-retardant pad and a fire- extinguishing material layer, wherein the fire-extinguishing material layer is arranged in at least a part of the flame-retardant pad and wherein a surface of the flame-retardant pad and the fire-extinguishing material layer is in contact with at least one of the pair of adjacent battery cells”, because Yu teaches that by employing the referred features, flame retardancy on desired areas of the core (flame-retardant pad) surface may be increased or enhanced.
Regarding claim 17, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 16. From claim 16 discussion, the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) are spaced apart from each other.
Regarding claim 18, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 17. Because it was taught that the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) (flame-retardant member analogous), the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be positioned in a way that the feature “increasing a distance between each of the plurality of fire- extinguishing material layers in a lateral direction from a center of the flame-retardant pad” is met.
Regarding claim 19, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 17. From claim 16 (on which claim 17 depends) discussion, the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) can be placed on desired areas of the article (1000) (flame retardant member analogous), which means that it could adopt a geometry and position according to the desired effects. From the previous reasoning, the strips (1020 and 1030) (fire-extinguishing material layers) could be configured in a way that meets the feature “increasing a length of each of the plurality of fire-extinguishing material layers in a lateral direction from a center of the flame-retardant pad”.
Regarding claim 20, Schaefer and Yu teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 16. Schaefer further teaches a seventh embodiment, where the intermediate elements (10) (flame-retardant members) are “larger than a size of at least one of the plurality of battery cells” [Fig. 7]. Based on the discussion for claim 16, the modified intermediate elements (10) (flame-retardant members) comprise a core (1010) (flame- retardant pad), which from the description of Schaefer seventh embodiment, meet the claimed feature.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERTO RAMOS RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)272-2740. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/G.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JAMES M ERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 03/26/2026