: 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 .
Response to Amendment
This is a final Office action in response to Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed on 06/22/2026. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 13 – 15 are new. Claims 1 – 15 are pending in the current Office action.
The 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn. A new grounds of rejection, necessitated by applicant’s amendment(s) {i.e. the added limitations are new and thus change the scope of the invention in a manner that was not previously considered}, is presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant argues that the additional cited prior art references disclose/suggest the battery pack features of amended claim 1 and thus cannot, in combination with Jeon, render obvious the particular combination of features recited in claim 1.
Examiner respectfully disagrees in light of the amended limitations “wherein the barrier layer includes a material for mitigating an ignition phenomenon when an ignition occurs inside the battery module, and wherein, when the ignition occurs inside the battery module, the barrier layer is configured to open the hole of the at least one vent” being intended use language. The Courts have held that if the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim [See MPEP 2144]. In the instant case, Jeon, as established in the updated rejection below, teaches including, in between the second plate 40 having the discharge holes 45 and the battery cell stack 1, a layer of flame retardant formed by flame retardant cover 21 and flame retardant member 25 (Fig. 2 and 5; [0072];[0075 – 0076];[101 – 102]). Jeon further teaches that configuration of the gas outlet 22 and discharge hole 45 is not necessarily limited to the non-overlapping configuration taught in [0120] and that when, including flame retardant member 25 the discharge hole 45 and the gas outlet 22 may be arranged to overlap each other ([0122]).
In the rejection below, Jeon is modified to include the flame retardant structure such that is covers the underside while also allowing for gas discharge. Specifically, Jeon’s gas outlets 22, which are shown in Fig. 2 to overlap the discharge holes 45 of the battery module, are modified to include a blocking material that melts when exposed to gas discharge (Hosokawa: [0025];[0028] and Yonemochi: [0038];[0043]). As such, the corresponding barrier layer of Jeon, as modified by the prior art is capable of opening the vent hole via the melting of material included in modified gas outlet 22 and the Jeon’s corresponding barrier layer is flame-retardant, and thus necessarily and inherently would be expected to comprise a material capable of mitigating ignition, and Jeon as modified by Hosokawa and Yonemochi appears to render obvious the battery module of amended claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 – 3, 5 – 9, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1) in view of Hosokawa (JP2014107178A) and Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1) {Examiner Note: All prior art was cited in the previous O.A. mailed 06/18/2026 and For citations of the instant specification the Examiner is utilizing the US PG Pub. of the instant application: US 2023/0402703 A1}
Regarding Claim 1, Jeon discloses a battery module (Figs. 1 – 2, 100; [0037]) comprising: a battery cell stack in which a plurality of battery cells are stacked in one direction (Figs. 1 – 2, 1; [0038]), a module frame that houses the battery cell stack (Refer to frame formed by first plate 50 and second plate 40 in Fig. 2; [0110 – 0113];[0116]) and has an inner surface (Refer to corresponding inner surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 above) and an outer surface (Refer to corresponding outer surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 above) and an end plate (Figs. 1 – 2, 60; [0124 – 0127]) and covers the front and rear surface of the battery cell stack (Refer to position of side covers 60 in Figs. 1 – 2), wherein the module frame in formed with at least one venting part in the form of a hole (discharge holes 45; Figs. 1 – 2; [0119];[0123]) that defines an inlet port on an inner surface, that is an inner side {i.e. side that faces the battery cells} of the discharge hole would necessarily and inherently serve as an inlet port because it is the side in which the gas would enter from to exit the battery module frame (Figs. 1 – 2; [0019]), and an outlet port formed on the outer surface, that is the outer side of the discharge hole would necessarily and inherently serve as an outlet port because it is the side from which gas would exit the battery module (Fig. 1 – 2; [0119]).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 showing inner and outer surfaces of the module frame in Jeon.
Jeon further teaches including, in between the second plate 40 having the discharge holes 45 and the battery cell stack 1, flame retardant structure, specifically a flame retardant cover 21 and flame retardant member 25 (Fig. 2 and 5; [0072];[0075 – 0076];[101 – 102]). The upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and the flame retardant member 25 form a layer of flame retardant material between the second plate 40 and the battery cells (Refer to Fig. 2). Furthermore, both the flame retardant cover and member function to block/prevent the propagation of flames or heat between cell groups while allowing the passage of gas ([0080];[0087];[0096];[0106]).
In the instant specification, the barrier layer is defined to express “the shape of a film for blocking the hole of the venting part and it can be changed and expressed into a cover, a hood, a stopper, a cap, or other similar words” ([0097]). The applicant further teaches that the barrier layer can be provided in the form of a plate or pad for covering the hole of the venting part and can be made of a material that mitigates ignition/can withstand high temperatures and pressure ([0098];[0101 – 0103]).
Fig. 2 of Jeon appears to show gas outlets 22 of the corresponding layer of flame retardant material overlapping with the discharge holes 45. Furthermore, Jeon teaches using such an overlapping configuration because of the inclusion of flame retardant member 25 which blocks the spread of flames ([0122]). As such, through the embodiment shown in Figs. 1 – 2 and 4, Jeon appears to disclose a battery module embodiment where a layer of flame retardant structure simultaneously blocks the diffusion of flames through the outlets 22 and discharge holes 45 while also allowing for the discharge of gas ([0106];[0120];[0122]), and therefore discloses a layer corresponding to the claimed barrier layer in function and further including a material for mitigating an ignition phenomenon when an ignition occurs inside the battery module (Refer to flame retardant member 25 material; [0101 – 0104];[0109]).
Jeon does not explicitly disclose; however, the barrier layer {i.e. flame retardant cover 21 and flame retardant member 25} covering the corresponding hole {i.e. discharge hole 45} and, wherein, when the ignition occurs inside the barrier module, the barrier layer is configured to open the hole of the at least one vent.
Hosokawa teaches a battery pack including gas exhaust through hole 11b on a cover member 10 of the battery pack ([0022];[0025]). Hosokawa further teaches including blocking member 31, which is the form of a layer, over the through hole ([0025]). The blocking member is taught to reliably exhaust gas to the outside while also ensuring waterproofness of the battery pack ([0016]). The blocking member is also taught to be made of a material having a lower melting point than the tray member and cover member of the battery pack and more particularly a melting point at a temperature lower than the gas generated when malfunction occurs and higher than temperature during normal operation ([0028]). By melting when a malfunction occurs, the blocking member in Hosokawa opens to allow for gas discharge while also ensuring waterproofness of the case and suppressing decreases in safety due to the sealed battery pack structure ([0033];[0038 – 0039]).
Yonemochi also teaches a battery pack comprising cuts and caps 29a-f within the cuts, and the caps are taught to be formed from a fire-resistant resin having a melting point of 100° C (Figs. 2A-2B, 5A-5B, and 7 – 9 [0036 – 0038]). The caps seal the vent openings of the battery pack from rain or dust, and by having the capability of melting, also allows for discharge of gas caused by battery malfunction ([0042 – 0043]).
Since Jeon also teaches a battery module structure including gas discharge holes, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to cover the gas discharge holes via the flame retardant structure by having the overlapping gas outlets 22 of the flame retardant structure include a blocking member, and thus obtain a flame retardant structure layer that seals the gas discharge holes 45 of the battery module while also allowing for gas discharge, as taught by Hosokawa and Yonemochi, with a reasonable increasing the reliability of Jeon’s battery module to discharge gas when the lithium ion batteries malfunction and obtaining improved sealing of the battery module while also ensuring the venting capability/heat resistance/fire propagation blocking capability desired by Jeon (Yonemochi: [0038];[0043] and Hosokawa: [0043 – 0044]).
By including the modified flame retardant structure above {i.e. where gas outlets 22 that overlap with discharge holes 45 are enclosed by a blocking member which melts when exposed to gas discharge of a battery cell and, when the battery cells are operating normally, seals the discharge holes 45 due to directly overlapping and covering an underside of the discharge holes}, modified Jeon provides a barrier layer covering the corresponding hole {i.e. discharge hole 45} and further capable of opening the hole of vent {i.e. by melting the blocking member of gas outlet 22} when the ignition occurs inside the barrier module. The examiner notes that the limitation “when the ignition occurs inside the barrier module, the barrier layer is configured to open the hole of the at least one vent” is intended use language. The Courts have held that if the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As such, by including the blocking member structure above in the gas outlets 22 of Jeon flame retardant structure {i.e. corresponds to claimed barrier layer} which, was established above, covers the discharge holes and further only opens when exposed to battery cell discharge, modified Jeon as established provides a structure capable of performing the intended use.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Jeon’s corresponding barrier layer {i.e. flame retardant cover 21 and flame retardant member 25} includes a blocking member material in the gas outlet that overlap and thus cover, from an underside, the discharge holes of the battery module. The blocking member material is taught to melt at specific temperature a temperature lower than the gas generated when malfunction occurs and higher than temperature during normal operation (Hosokawa: [0028]).
Modified Jeon does not explicitly disclose wherein the barrier layer comprises a material having a melting point of 200°C or less.
Yonemochi further teaches that, for lithium ion batteries, at temperatures exceeding 150°C gas should be discharged from a gas discharge valve of the lithium ion battery cell 23 or the battery cell 23 may catch fire ([0043]). Yonemochi’s caps which cover/seal cuts of the battery pack are taught to particularly be formed from a fire-resistant resin having a melting point of 100° C ([0038]).
Since Jeon teaches using lithium ion cells ([0067]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, when modifying the flame retardant structure to comprise a blocking member as taught by Hosokawa and Yonemochi, to particularly select a material with a melting point within the claimed range of f 200°C or less, as taught by Yonemochi, , with a reasonable expectation in increasing the reliability of Jeon’s battery module to discharge gas when the lithium ion batteries malfunction and further preventing fire from propagating within the battery module (Yonemochi: [0038];[0043]).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Jeon teaches the flame retardant cover being comprised of materials such as mica, stainless steel, graphite, graphene, carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP), glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRP), and non-woven compressible fibers ([0096]). For the flame retardant member, Jeon exemplifies using a foam pad including mica and generally teaches using flame retardant material, a non-flammable material, or a fire-resistant insulating material ([0104]). The materials taught by Jeon overlap in scope with the claimed selection of materials which include heat-resistant plastic, CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic), GFRP (Glass Fiber Reinforced Plastics), Mica-based material, Ceramic-based material, or silicon.
Since Jeon exemplifies a finite list of materials for at least the flame retardant cover, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select of a material for the barrier layer {i.e. layer of flame retardant structure included between the battery cells and the second plate and formed by the flame retardant cover and member} within the overlapping portion of the claimed selection and taught selection, with a reasonable expectation of success that such a material would be suitable for the flame-retardant cover/member and further achieve the desired blocking of flame/heat prorogation desired by Jeon.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. The layer of flame retardant material formed by the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and flame retardant member 25 {i.e. corresponds to claimed barrier layer} is included between the second plate 40 and the battery cells of the battery module (Refer to Fig. 2); therefore, modified Jeon further provides the claimed structure of wherein the barrier layer is located between one surface of the module frame on which the venting part is formed {i.e. second plate 40} and the battery cell stack.
Regarding Claims 6 , modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. As established above, the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and the flame retardant member 25 form a layer of flame retardant material between the second plate 40 and the battery cells (Refer to Fig. 2), as such in Jeon the corresponding barrier layer is located between underside of the module frame on which the venting part is formed and the battery cell stack. As modified, Jeon’s corresponding barrier layer includes blocking members within the gas outlets that overlap and thus necessarily cover, from an underside, the discharge holes 45 of the battery module (Refer to rejection of claim 1 above and Fig. 2 in Jeon).
Modified Jeon does not disclose wherein the barrier layer fills the inner space of the venting part.
Yonemochi teaches a battery pack comprising cuts and caps 29a-f within the cuts, and the caps are taught to be formed from a fire-resistant resin (Figs. 2A-2B, 5A-5B, and 7 – 9 [0036 – 0038]). The inclusion of the caps within the cuts formed on the battery pack housing is taught by Yonemochi to seal the vent opening to prevent rain or dust from entering the battery pack and causing short-circuiting/corrosion ([0038]). The cap is also taught to have the capability to discharge gas by melting at a temperature correlating to battery malfunction ([0042 – 0043]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the fire retardant layer structure in Jeon such that the blocking member of the gas outlets of modified Jeon, are further included within/extended into the discharge holes of the battery module, because such a modification, absent new or unexpected results, would be change in shape with respect to the blocking members of the modified flame retardant structure which is considered an obvious engineering design choice (See MPEP 2144.04(IV)], and further, as one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate based on the teachings of Yonemochi above, would provide the predictable result of maintaining the gas discharge capability desired by Jeon while also achieving a greater sealing affect at the discharge hole of the battery module.
Regarding Claims 7, Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. As established above, the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and the flame retardant member 25 form a layer of flame retardant material between the second plate 40 and the battery cells (Refer to Fig. 2), as such in Jeon the corresponding barrier layer is located between one surface of the module frame on which the venting part is formed and the battery cell stack. As modified, Jeon’s corresponding barrier layer includes blocking members within the gas outlets that overlap and thus necessarily cover, from an underside, the discharge holes 45 of the battery module (Refer to rejection of claim 1 above and Fig. 2 in Jeon).
Modified Jeon does not particularly disclose a barrier layer comprising a first barrier layer that fills the inner space of the hole of the venting part and a second barrier layer that is located between one surface of the module frame on which the venting part is formed and the battery cell stack.
Yonemochi teaches a battery pack comprising cuts and caps 29a-f within the cuts, and the caps are taught to be formed from a fire-resistant resin (Figs. 2A-2B, 5A-5B, and 7 – 9 [0036 – 0038]). The inclusion of the caps within the cuts formed on the battery pack housing is taught by Yonemochi to seal the vent opening to prevent rain or dust from entering the battery pack and causing short-circuiting/corrosion ([0038]). The cap is also taught to have the capability to discharge gas by melting at a temperature correlating to battery malfunction ([0042 – 0043]).
Since Jeon also including venting holes on a battery module housing, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the fire retardant layer structure in Jeon such that the blocking member of the gas outlets of modified Jeon, are further included within/extended into the discharge holes of the battery module, and thus obtain the claimed first barrier layer that fills the inner space of the hole of the venting part, because such a modification, absent new or unexpected results, would be change in shape with respect to the blocking members of the modified flame retardant structure which is considered an obvious engineering design choice (See MPEP 2144.04(IV)], and further, as one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate based on the teachings of Yonemochi above, would provide the predictable result of maintaining the gas discharge capability desired by Jeon while also achieving a greater sealing affect at the discharge hole of the battery module.
Modified Jeon’s barrier layer also includes the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and the flame retardant member 25 form a layer of flame retardant material between the second plate 40 and the battery cells (Refer to Fig. 2). Therefore, by further including the modified structure established above, modified Jeon provides the claimed structure of a second barrier layer that is located between one surface of the module frame on which the venting part is formed and the battery cell stack {i.e. the portion of the flame retardant structure that corresponds to flame retardant member 25 in Fig. 4}.
PNG
media_image2.png
431
532
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 showing stacking direction in Jeon.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Jeon further discloses wherein, when a direction in which the plurality of cells is defined as a stacking direction, the venting part is formed on one surface of the module frame extending along the stacking direction (Refer to stacking direction in annotated FIG. 2 above and how venting parts {i.e. each group of discharge holes 45} extend along the stacking direction).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Jeon further discloses wherein the venting part is formed on the upper surface of the module frame (Refer to how discharge holes 45 are included on second plate 40 which is an upper surface of the module frame formed by first plate 50 and second plate 40 in Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Jeon further discloses wherein the at least one vent {i.e. discharge hole 45} comprises a first vent and a second vent {i.e. refer to plurality of discharge holes 45 shown in Figs. 1 – 2) and the plurality of battery cells comprises a first battery cell (Refer to battery cell in the left cell group 2 of Fig. 2; [0037]) and a second battery cell (Refer to a battery cell in the right cell group of Fig. 2; [0037]).
Jeon further teaches that the flame retardant cover and flame retardant member function to block/prevent the propagation of flames or heat between cell groups while allowing the passage of gas ([0080];[0087];[0096];[0106]). Furthermore, each gas outlet of the flame retardant structure overlaps the gas discharge holes of the battery module, and as modified, Jeon’s outlets include the blocking member that melts and thus opens their corresponding discharge hole when exposed to battery cell discharge (Yonemochi: [0038];[0043] and Hosokawa: [0043 – 0044]). As such, based on such a configuration/structure of the corresponding barrier layer {i.e. the flame retardant structure layer between the cells and the second plate 40} and well as the function of the barrier layer in modified Jeon, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect, when a first portion of the barrier layer corresponding to the first venting part formed at the position corresponding to the first battery cell is opened, a second portion of the barrier layer corresponding to a second venting part formed at a position corresponding to the first battery cell is not opened. {Examiner Note: the limitation “when a first portion of the barrier layer corresponding to the first venting part formed at the position corresponding to the first battery cell is opened, a second portion of the barrier layer corresponding to a second venting part formed at a position corresponding to the first battery cell is not opened” establishes an intended use/inherent function of the battery module. Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. As such, because modified Jeong teaches/renders obvious all the structural limitations of claim 1, and further explicitly teaches the that flame retardant layers prevents propagation of flame/heat between battery cell groups and allows discharge of gas from the cell groups included in the battery module, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect Jeon’s battery module to be capable of the claimed function. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.)}
Regarding Claim 14, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. As established above, the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and the flame retardant member 25 form a layer of flame retardant material between the second plate 40 and the battery cells (Refer to Fig. 2), as such in Jeon the corresponding barrier layer is located between one surface of the module frame on which the venting part is formed and the battery cell stack. As modified, Jeon’s corresponding barrier layer includes blocking members within the gas outlets 22 that overlap and thus necessarily cover, from an underside, the discharge holes 45 of the battery module (Refer to rejection of claim 1 above and Fig. 2 in Jeon).
Modified Jeon does not particularly disclose wherein the barrier layer includes a first barrier layer filling an inner space between the inlet port and outlet port of each of the first vent and the second vent, and a second barrier layer located between one surface of the module frame on which the first vent and second vent are formed and the battery cell stack.
Yonemochi teaches a battery pack comprising cuts and caps 29a-f within the cuts, and the caps are taught to be formed from a fire-resistant resin (Figs. 2A-2B, 5A-5B, and 7 – 9 [0036 – 0038]). The inclusion of the caps within the cuts formed on the battery pack housing is taught by Yonemochi to seal the vent opening to prevent rain or dust from entering the battery pack and causing short-circuiting/corrosion ([0038]). The cap is also taught to have the capability to discharge gas by melting at a temperature correlating to battery malfunction ([0042 – 0043]).
Since Jeon also including venting holes on a battery module housing, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the fire retardant layer structure in Jeon such that the blocking member of the gas outlets of modified Jeon, are further included within/extended into their corresponding discharge hole of the battery module, and thus obtain the claimed first barrier layer filling an inner space between the inlet port and outlet port of each of the first vent and the second vent, because such a modification, absent new or unexpected results, would be change in shape with respect to the blocking members of the modified flame retardant structure which is considered an obvious engineering design choice (See MPEP 2144.04(IV)], and further, as one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate based on the teachings of Yonemochi above, would provide the predictable result of maintaining the gas discharge capability desired by Jeon while also achieving a greater sealing affect at the discharge hole of the battery module.
Modified Jeon’s barrier layer also includes the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and the flame retardant member 25 form a layer of flame retardant material between the second plate 40 and the battery cells (Refer to Fig. 2). Therefore, by further including the modified structure established above, modified Jeon provides the claimed structure of a second barrier layer located between one surface of the module frame on which the first vent and second vent are formed and the battery cell stack {i.e. the portion of the flame retardant structure that corresponds to flame retardant member 25 in Fig. 4}.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), Hosokawa (JP2014107178A) and Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chanjae (KR102220693B1, cited in the previous O.A. mailed 06/18/2026).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Jeon teaches the flame retardant cover being comprised of materials such as mica, stainless steel, graphite, graphene, carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP), glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRP), and non-woven compressible fibers ([0096]). For the flame retardant member, Jeon exemplifies using a foam pad including mica and generally teaches using flame retardant material, a non-flammable material, or a fire-resistant insulating material for both the flame retardant cover and member ([0096];[0104]).
Modified Jeon does not particularly teach the barrier layer { i.e. layer of flame retardant structure included between the battery cells and the second plate and formed by the flame retardant cover and member} comprising at least one fire extinguishing agent selected from the group consisting of inorganic carbonates, inorganic phosphates, and inorganic sulfates.
Chanjae teaches a battery pack module having fire extinguishing function including a fire extinguishing agent for effectively and early blocking of fire caused by overcharging or abnormal operation of a battery ([0001];[0025]). Chanjae further teaches using fire extinguishing agents elected from the group consisting of calcium carbonate, ammonium phosphate (1st), and halogen compounds, or as one material selected from the group consisting of carbonate, phosphate, and Novec compounds capable of responding to electrical fires, which are emitted by external environmental factors ([0051]). The fire extinguishing agents taught by Jeon overlaps in scope with the claimed fire extinguishing agents ([0051]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a fire extinguishing agent and further a fire extinguishing agent within the overlapping portion of the Chanje’s taught finite list and claimed list within Jeon’s taught flame retardant structure, with a reasonable expectation of success that such a selection of material would be a suitable fire extinguishing agent for a battery module structure and further that such a selection would further achieve/improve the fire propagation blocking capability of the battery module, as desired by Jeon.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), Hosokawa (JP2014107178A) and Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chiba (US PG Pub. 2013/0252037 A1, cited in the previous O.A. mailed 06/18/2026).
Regarding Claim 10, Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. In Jeon, the discharge holes, corresponding to claim venting part, discharge gas from inside of the battery module to outside the battery module ([0119]), as such the discharge direction of venting part in Jeon is a direction from the inlet port {i.e. side of discharge hole that faces the battery cells} to the outlet port {i.e. outer side of the discharge hole}.
Modified Jeon does not particularly disclose a discharge direction of the venting part forming an acute angle with one surface of the module frame on which the venting part is formed.
Chiba teaches venting structures for batteries that are configured to guide gas in the battery container in a direction inclined at a predetermined angle with respect to a normal direction of a first surface to discharge the gas to the outside ([0011]). The venting structure in Chiba is included on an upper surface of the battery; thus, the first surface in Chiba is an upper surface of the battery (Refer to Figs. 2, 3A and 5 – 8B; [0036]). The predetermined angle is taught to be set in the range of, for example, 0°<θ≦90° so that the gas is not directly discharged in a direction (Z-axis direction) facing the battery lid according to the position at which the battery 1 is disposed ([0044 – 0043]). Furthermore, by discharging the gas at an angle, Chiba also teaching preventing the frame itself which forms the container is not directly heated, and the deformation thereof ([0046]).
Since the surface in which the discharge holes of Jeon are included on is also a flat upper surface, It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the discharge hole structure such that gas is guided and discharged at an angle 0°<θ≦90° with respect to the upper surface of the battery module, as taught by Chiba, and thus discharged in a direction within the claimed scope, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining avoiding direct discharge of the gas and heat on the second plate 40 of Jeon’s battery module.
Claim(s) 12 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), Hosokawa (JP2014107178A) and Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi (US PG PUB. 2022/0037726 A1).
Regarding Claims 12 and 15, Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. The battery module in Jeon is taught to include pouch-type secondar batteries ([0039 – 0040]).
Jeon does not explicitly disclose a battery pack comprising at least one battery module.
Choi teaches a battery pack including a plurality of battery modules and the battery modules include stacks of pouch-type batteries (Figs. 3 – 4; [0054 – 0058]). Choi further teaches forming battery packs that include multiple battery modules for the purpose of applying the battery modules high energy and capacity-requiring applications, such as electric vehicles ([0003 – 0004]).
Therefore, since Jeon also teaches a battery module comprising pouch cells, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply a plurality of Jeon’s battery modules in a battery pack, as taught by Choi, with a reasonable expectation of success in applying the battery modules in an application requiring high power and/or capacity such as an electric vehicle.
As shown in Figs. 3 and 15 Choi, the battery modules of the battery pack established above would be included adjacent to one another in the battery housing. Furthermore, the battery modules of Jeon include discharge hole 45, which corresponds to the claimed vent, on the top, second plate 40 of the battery module (Refer to Figs. 1 – 2 in Jeon). As such, modified Jeon’s battery pack would further provide the claimed structure of wherein the vent is position such that an adjacent battery module is not located on a discharge path extending from the inlet and outlet port, as none of the battery cells are stacked vertically on one another when housed in the battery pack (Refer to Figs. 3 and 15 of Choi for example).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), Hosokawa (JP2014107178A) and Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (CN112310552A, Machine translation provided).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Jeon discloses all limitation as set forth above. Jeon further detaches that the size and shape of the discharge holes are not limited if gas is discharged smoothly ([0119]).
Modified Jeon does not explicitly disclose wherein the size of the outlet port is larger than a size of the inlet.
Chen, directed to a battery pack including an explosion-proof valve, teaches an explosion-proof valve that is disposed on a housing of the battery pack, is in communication with the interior of the housing, and further, functions to discharge gas in the event of thermal runaway within the battery pack (Figs. 1 – 2; [0058 – 0059];[0061]). Chen further teaches the cross-sectional area of the of the main body of the valve gradually increasing from the inlet end to the outlet end ([0071]). Chen teaches that such a configuration increases the area for the gas to flow while also reducing the flow velocity of discharged gas, and thus further improves the flame arresting effect of the valve ([0071]).
Since Jeon does not necessarily limit the shape/size of the discharge holes, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the discharge holes of modified Jeon to have an outlet size that is relatively larger than the inlet, because such a modification, absent a showing of criticality/unexpected results, would be a change in form/shape with respect to the discharge holes that is considered an obvious engineering design choice [See MPEP 2144(IV)], and further, as one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate, based on Chen’s teachings above, would provide the predictable result of reduced flow velocity of discharged gas at the inlet while also increase the area for gas for flow and thus further improved gas discharge capability.
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 ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/A.Y.O./
Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 9/29/2026
