DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 2, and 7-9 are amended, Claims 5 and 6 are cancelled and Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are pending examination as discussed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the new limitation “the contacter comprises a protrusion that protrudes from …” is indefinite because it is unclear how the contacter comprises a protrusion when in the specification the contacter is the protrusion. The protrusion is the contacter and so they are one in the same, not two elements. The limitation will be interpreted as being the same component.
Claims 2-4 & 7-10 are rejected for being dependent upon rejected claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, the new limitation “as the contacter” is indefinite since how the term relates to the rest of the claim language is unclear. It seems the claim is saying the contacter has a higher density than a contact region but it isn’t clear how to compare these two different elements.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US 2020/0243937 (Kaga) in view of US 4547438 (McAurther) and US 2017/0104253 (Choi).
Regarding claims 1 & 9, Kaga teaches a metal air battery (abstract) with a packaging material provided with openings and a water repellant film ([0044, 0048, 0050, 0078]) welded as to cover the opening ([0086]). It is noted that thermally bonding as described, is seen as welding.
Kaga is silent to a plate member.
While Kaga teaches spacers between each of the batteries to allow air flow (Fig. 18, [0133]), Kaga doesn’t teach the spacers as being a plate.
Choi teaches a metal air battery system that uses a plate member with contactors between and contacting each of the batteries and allowing air flow to the cathode side of the battery (Figs. 2A-4; [0052, 0055-0061]). Choi teaches this allows for air to be directed to the cathode and the plate can be used as current collector. As discussed in the 112 rejection above, the contactor/protrusion are one in the same and so this limitation is met.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the air flow plate of Choi in the battery module of Kaga to aid in air flow and use as a current collector.
Kaga is silent to a pair of fixing members.
McArthur teaches a battery assembly to house multiple metal air batteries (Abstract, Fig. 1, 2:1-11, 3:40-45). The housing includes a pair of fixing members (56, 58, 60) at a surface end in a surface direction, which are opposingly arranged and sandwich the cells together (Fig. 1, 4:35-55). The fixing members aid in keeping the cells from moving.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the fixing members of McArthur with the cells of Kaga to keep the cells and the plates from moving around when forming a battery assembly.
Regarding claims 2-4, Kaga in view of Choi shows the plate member has multiple contactors that make contact with the metal air battery (Fig. 2A). As for the contact density being denser in one region versus another, it is well known in the art to vary the protuberances of the flow plate to change and improve the air flow of the batteries or the electrical conductivity of the assembly. The contact regions face the openings and water repellant film.
Regarding claims 7, 8 & 10, Choi teaches the contactor can be cylindrical, spindle shaped and can have holes through it (Figs. 4A-5).
Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US 2020/0243937 (Kaga) in view of US 4547438 (McAurther) and US 9780423 (Tsukada).
Regarding claims 1 & 9, Kaga teaches a metal air battery (abstract) with a packaging material provided with openings and a water repellant film ([0044, 0048, 0050, 0078]) welded as to cover the opening ([0086]). It is noted that thermally bonding as described, is seen as welding.
Kaga is silent to a plate member.
While Kaga teaches spacers between each of the batteries to allow air flow (Fig. 18, [0133]), Kaga doesn’t teach the spacers as being a plate.
Tsukada teaches a metal air battery system that uses a plate member with contactors extending from the plate member and located between and contacting each of the batteries. This plate allows air flow to the cathode side of the battery (Abstract; Figs. 1, 4-7; 3:35-45, 5:10-20, 6:7-7:40). Tsukada teaches this allows for improved flow and decrease weight and it can be used as current collector. As discussed in the 112 rejection above, the contactor/protrusion are one in the same and so this limitation is met.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the air flow plate of Tsukada in the battery module of Kaga to aid in air flow and use as a current collector.
Kaga is silent to a pair of fixing members.
McArthur teaches a battery assembly to house multiple metal air batteries (Abstract, Fig. 1, 2:1-11, 3:40-45). The housing includes a pair of fixing members (56, 58, 60) at a surface end in a surface direction, which are opposingly arranged and sandwich the cells together (Fig. 1, 4:35-55). The fixing members aid in keeping the cells from moving.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the fixing members of McArthur with the cells of Kaga to keep the cells and the plates from moving around when forming a battery assembly.
Regarding claims 2-4, Kaga in view of Tsukada shows the plate member has multiple contactors that make contact with the metal air battery (Fig. 2A). As for the contact density being denser in one region versus another, it is well known in the art to vary the protuberances of the flow plate to change and improve the air flow of the batteries or the electrical conductivity of the assembly. The contact regions face the openings and water repellant film.
Regarding claims 7, 8 & 10, Tsukada teaches the contactor can be cylindrical, spindle shaped and can have holes through it (Figs. 5-7; 7:30-37).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/28/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant appears to argue that the current claims of a contacter with protrusions defines over the cited prior art. However, as discussed above, these two terms refer to the same element and so they are not separate elements and as such have the same meaning and only one element is needed to meet the limitation. The teachings of Choi as discussed above and the new art of Tsukada as discussed above meet the limitation.
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 KEITH WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-3458. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8am - 4pm.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Keith Walker/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
