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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species B, directed to an embodiment of the battery module where the barrier layer fills an inner space between an inlet port and outlet port and between the frame and battery cell stack, in the reply filed on 02/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d)
with a filing date of 04/14/2022. The certified copy of KR10-2021-0048791 has been filed in the present
application, received on 05/08/2023. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by
37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 8 – 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1, Foreign priority date of 08/13/2020). {Examiner Note: For citations of the instant specification the Examiner is utilizing the US PG Pub. of the instant application: US 2023/0402703 A1}
PNG
media_image1.png
586
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 showing inner and outer surfaces of the module frame in Jeon.
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]).
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]). Jeon further teaches that the discharge holes 45 of the second plate 40 and the gas outlets 22 of the provided on the flame retardant cover do not overlap ([0086];[0120]); thus, while not shown, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the discharge holes 45 in Jeon to be covered, from an underside, by the flame retardant cover 21 and member 25 (Refer to position of the cover and member in Figs. 1 and 4).
In the instant specification, the barrier layer is defined to express “the shape of a film for blocking the hole of the venting part 900, 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]).
Therefore, because the flame retardant structure in Jeon is included between the second plate 40 and the battery cells of the battery module in the form of a layer, and covers, from an underside, the discharge holes 45 of the second plate 40, the layer of flame retardant material formed by the upper surface portion 21a of the flame retardant cover and flame retardant member 25 provides a structure that reads on the claimed barrier layer.
Regarding Claim 3, Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. For the flame retardant member, Jeon particularly exemplifies using a foam pad including mica ([0104]). As such, by particularly exemplifying using mica in at least the flame retardant member, which as established above is included in the structure corresponding to the claimed barrier layer, Jeon appears to further disclose wherein the barrier layer comprises mica-based material, which is within the claimed selection of heat-resistant plastic, CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic), GFRP (Glass Fiber Reinforced Plastics), Mica-based material, Ceramic-based material, or silicon.
Regarding Claim 5, 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, Jeon further discloses 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.
PNG
media_image2.png
431
532
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 showing stacking direction in Jeon.
Regarding Claim 8, 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, 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, Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Jeon further discloses wherein 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 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]), as such based on the 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, 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 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.)}
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(s) 3 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further below.
Regarding Claim 3, 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.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hosokawa (JP2014107178A, cited in Restriction mailed 12/31/2025) and Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1, cited in 05/08/2023 IDS).
Regarding Claim 2, Jeon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Both the flame retardant cover and member in Jeon are taught to allow for the discharging of gas to the outside of the battery module ([0106]). Jeon further generally teaches using materials having fire retardants, heat insulating/resistant, or nonflammable materials for both the flame retardant cover and member ([0096];[0104]).
Jeon does not 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 a material having a melting point of about 200°C or less.
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 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 alto taught to be made of a material having a lower melting point that 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 thus suppresses the decreases safety of the seal battery pack structure and ([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]). Yonemochi 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]).
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, to modify the flame-retardant structure of Jeon to comprise a material that is capable of melting, as taught by Hosokawa, and capable of melting at a temperature within the claimed range of about 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 (Yonemochi: [0038];[0043]) and obtaining improved sealing of the battery module while also ensuring the venting capability/heat resistance/fire propagation blocking capability desired by Jeon.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chanjae (KR102220693B1, cited in 05/08/2023 IDS, Machine translation provided).
Regarding Claim 4, 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]).
Jeon does not 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) 6 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yonemochi (US PG Pub. 2008/0220321 A1, cited in 05/08/2023 IDS).
Regarding Claims 6, 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.
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]).
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 modify the fire retardant layer structure in Jeon such that a layer of fire retardant structure is included within discharge holes of the battery module, as taught by Yonemochi, with a reasonable expectation of success protecting against corrosion/short circuiting by sealing the discharge holes while also achieving the gas discharge capability desired by Jeon.
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.
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 modify the fire retardant layer structure in Jeon to include, in addition to a layer between the cells and second plate, a layer of fire retardant material within the discharge holes of the second plate as taught by Yonemochi, and thus obtain the claimed structure, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a flame retardant structure that achieve the fire propagation blocking and gas discharging capability desired by Jeon as well as the a structure capable of protecting against corrosion/short circuiting by dust/water.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chiba (US PG Pub. 2013/0252037 A1).
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}.
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 deformation thereof
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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US PG Pub. 2022/0052392 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi (US PG PUB. 2022/0037726 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, 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.
Conclusion
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 3/17/2026