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 .
Summary
This is the response to the communication filed on 01/28/2026.
Claims 1-2, 4-9 and 12-14 remain pending in the 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ref JPS6454257 or ‘257 (with provided machine English translation) in view of Schweinbenz et al. (DE102012217630 with provided machine English translation). Further evidence is provided by Daley (US 2,980,747).
Addressing claims 1-2 and 13, Ref ‘257 discloses a batter module (figs. 1-5) comprising:
a battery cell stack in which a plurality of battery cells 1 are stacked in a thickness direction of the battery cells (a y-axis direction) (see annotated fig. 1-2 and 5 below),
a module frame that houses the battery cell stack and has an inner surface and an outer surface (see annotated fig. 5 below), and
an end plate (see annotated fig. 3 below) that is coupled to the module frame and covers a front surface or a rear surface of the battery cell stack,
wherein the module frame is formed with at least two vents (fig. 5 shows at least two vents) in the form of holes that define an inlet port (the opening at the inner surface) on the inner surface of the module frame and an outlet port (opening at the outer surface) on the outer surface of the module frame,
wherein each vent is covered by a cover 3 having at least one opening formed therein (breathability waterproof membrane, which implies the existence of at least one opening),
wherein a width direction (a z-axis direction) and a longitudinal direction (an x-axis direction) of the battery cell are perpendicular to the y-axis direction (see annotated fig. 1-2 and 5 below),
wherein the at least two vents are formed on a surface of the module frame extending along the x-axis direction and the y-axis direction (fig. 4),
wherein the inlet port and the outlet port on the z-axis direction are formed at different positions in the x-axis direction or in the y-axis direction (formed in the different positions in the y-axis direction as shown in annotated fig. 5),
wherein the at least two vents comprise a first vent and a second vent (fig. 5 shows multiple vents that include the claimed first vent and second vent).
Ref ‘257 shows the first direction extending from the inlet port of the first vent to the outlet port of the first vent is the same as the second direction extending from the inlet port of the second vent to the outlet port of the second vent.
PNG
media_image1.png
744
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ref ‘257 is silent regarding the first direction is different from the second direction.
Schweinbenz discloses vent holes for battery; wherein, figs. 1-2 show vent holes 105 having different directions.
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the battery module of Ref ‘ 257 with the known vent holes arrangement having different extension directions between the respective inlet and outlet as disclosed by Schweinbenz in order to direct the exhaust gas in different directions (Schweinbenz [0038]) and obtain the predictable result of venting gas from the battery cells (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143).
Addressing claim 4, fig. 4 of Ref ‘257 shows the far left row of vent holes being closer to the front surface and the far right row of vent holes being closer to the rear surface than to a central part of the battery cell stack.
Addressing claim 5, Ref ‘257 discloses the battery cells are sealed Ni-Cd battery cells, which includes the claimed electrode lead protruding from a first end of the battery cell and the electrode lead is located on the front surface or the rear surface of the battery cell stack as evidenced by fig. 1 of Daley.
Addressing claim 6, annotated fig. 5 below shows the inlet port and the outlet port include curves as claimed.
PNG
media_image2.png
326
564
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Addressing claim 7, Ref ‘257 is silent regarding the positions of the inlet port and the outlet portion in the x-axis direction of the module are different; however, since Ref ‘257 already discloses that the positions of the inlet port and outlet port along a direction are different, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the vent holes of Ref ‘257 to have the positions of the inlet port and the outlet port along the x-axis to be different in order to accomplish the same result of venting gas from the battery cells.
Addressing claim 8, Ref ‘257 discloses in fig. 5 the positions of the inlet port and the outlet port in the y-axis direction in the module frame are different.
Addressing claim 9, figs. 4-5 of Ref ‘257 disclose at least two vents are arranged in a plurality of rows, and the plurality of rows are arranged along the x-axis direction.
Addressing claim 12, JP’257 describes the breathability waterproof membrane is “micro textile” (page 1 of the translation document), which corresponds to the claimed mesh shape.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ref JPS6454257 or ‘257 (with provided machine English translation) in view of Schweinbenz et al. (DE102012217630 with provided machine English translation) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-9 and 12-13 above, and further in view of Christensen et al. (US 5,709,964).
Addressing claim 14, figs. 1-5 of Ref ‘257 discloses the battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells. Ref ‘257 is silent regarding the at least one battery module comprises a first battery module and a second battery module and the first and the second direction are different form direction in which the second batter module is located from the first battery module.
Christensen discloses multiple battery modules (battery packs 28) arranged front to back (fig. 1).
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the battery pack of Ref ‘257 with multiple battery modules arranged in front to back arrangement as disclosed by Christensen in order to increase the power output of the battery pack. In the modified battery pack of Ref ‘257 in view of Schweinbenz and Christensen, the first direction and the second direction are different from direction in which the second battery module is located from the first battery module because the first and second direction of the vent holes as disclosed by Schweinbenz are perpendicular to or are different from the x-axis (fig. 1), which is the arrangement direction of the first and second battery modules in the modified battery pack of Ref ‘257.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-9 and 12-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any to any of the references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571)-272-1307. 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.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 02/20/2026