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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8, in the reply filed on 6/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 9 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/12/2026.
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 1-8 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.
The term “normally” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “normally” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, the open/closed state of each claimed solenoid valve a, N, b, s, d is rendered indefinite by the use of the term “normally” since it is unclear when/how often/under which conditions/etc. each of the solenoid valves are open.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the detector" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Further, dependent claims 2-8 are rendered indefinite due to their dependency on indefinite claim 1 above.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites the limitations “…when an oxygen sensor value in a detector A in the battery pack is less than or equal to a or a pressure sensor value in the detector is greater than or equal to b, in this case, the solenoid valve N is closed, filling of nitrogen into the battery pack is stopped; and when the oxygen sensor value in the detector A in the battery pack is greater than or equal to c and the pressure sensor value is less than or equal to d, the solenoid valve N is opened, and N2 starts to be filled into the battery pack”, “…when the device compartment is abnormal, a primary early warning threshold D1 and a secondary early warning threshold D2 of a detector D are set, and when a detection value of the detector D is greater than the primary early warning threshold D1 and is less than the secondary early warning threshold D2, it is determined that the detector D reaches primary early warning, and an audible and visual alarm flashes and buzzes; and when the detection value of the detector D is greater than the secondary early warning threshold D2, it is determined that the detector D reaches secondary early warning, in this case, the detector D controls the solenoid valve d to be opened, the solenoid valve a is closed, the solenoid valve b and the solenoid valve s still remain in a closed state, a gaseous fire extinguishing agent bottle X is opened, and a gaseous fire extinguishing agent starts to sprayed into the device compartment” and “….when the battery compartment is abnormal, a primary early warning threshold A1 and a secondary early warning threshold A2 of a combination detector A, a primary early warning threshold B1 and a secondary early warning threshold B2 of a combination detector B, a primary early warning threshold C1 and a secondary early warning threshold C2 of a combination detector C are set, when a detection value of a combination detector A in a battery pack is greater than or equal to the primary early warning threshold A1 but is less than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold A2, in this case, a central controller controls the audible and visual alarm to flash and buzz; when the detection value of the combination detector A in the battery pack is greater than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold A2 and a detection value of a detector B in a battery cluster is greater than or equal to the primary early warning threshold B1 and is less than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold B2, in this case, the detector A raising an alarm controls the solenoid valve a of the battery pack in which the detector A is located to be normally open, and solenoid valves a of the remaining battery packs are closed, the gaseous fire extinguishing agent bottle X is opened to start to spray the gaseous fire extinguishing agent to the battery pack with thermal runaway; when the detection value of the combination detector B is greater than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold B2, the combination detector B controls the solenoid valve b of the battery cluster in which the battery pack with thermal runaway is located to be opened, and the gaseous fire extinguishing agent starts to be sprayed in the battery cluster; when a detection value of the combination detector C is greater than or equal to the primary early warning threshold C1 and is less than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold C2, a gaseous fire extinguishing agent bottle Y is opened, and a gaseous fire extinguishing agent starts to be sprayed in a space of the battery compartment; and when the detection value of the combination detector C is greater than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold C2, the solenoid valve s is opened, and external firewater starts to be sprayed in the battery compartment”. Claim 1 is directed to a method including contingent limitations that are contingent on certain condition precedents that are not required to be met, e.g., “when” a detector detects a value.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. For example, assume a method claim requires step A if a first condition happens and step B if a second condition happens. If the claimed invention may be practiced without either the first or second condition happening, then neither step A or B is required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. If the claimed invention requires the first condition to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires step A. If the claimed invention requires both the first and second conditions to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires both steps A and B.
See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016) for an analysis of contingent claim limitations in the context of both method claims and system claims. In Schulhauser, both method claims and system claims recited the same contingent step. When analyzing the claimed method as a whole, the PTAB determined that giving the claim its broadest reasonable interpretation, “[i]f the condition for performing a contingent step is not satisfied, the performance recited by the step need not be carried out in order for the claimed method to be performed” (quotation omitted). Schulhauser at 10. When analyzing the claimed system as a whole, the PTAB determined that “[t]he broadest reasonable interpretation of a system claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, still requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur.” Schulhauser at 14. Therefore "[t]he Examiner did not need to present evidence of the obviousness of the [ ] method steps of claim 1 that are not required to be performed under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim (e.g., instances in which the electrocardiac signal data is not within the threshold electrocardiac criteria such that the condition precedent for the determining step and the remaining steps of claim 1 has not been met);" however to render the claimed system obvious, the prior art must teach the structure that performs the function of the contingent step along with the other recited claim limitations. Schulhauser at 9, 14. See MPEP 2111.04(II).
Similarly, dependent claims 2-8 depend on claim 1 reciting a contingent limitation and/or recite contingent limitations themselves.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (CN212725410U, refer to English machine translation by EPO) in view of Wang et al. (CN114306989A, refer to English machine translation by EPO).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou discloses a prevention and control method of nitrogen protection and multi-region level-by-level detection for an energy storage power station (lithium battery low-oxygen temperature control protection system based on equipment room, see Title; nitrogen control, see p.5-6), the prevention and control method of nitrogen protection and multi-region level-by-level detection for an energy storage power station comprising two modes: a normal operating mode and an abnormal mode (normal, abnormal, see p.3), wherein:
1) in the normal operating mode, a solenoid valve a and a solenoid valve N are normally open, a solenoid valve b, a solenoid valve s, and a solenoid valve d are normally closed, nitrogen starts to be filled into a battery pack, and when an oxygen sensor value in a detector A in the battery pack is less than or equal to a or a pressure sensor value in the detector is greater than or equal to b, in this case, the solenoid valve N is closed, filling of nitrogen into the battery pack is stopped; and when the oxygen sensor value in the detector A in the battery pack is greater than or equal to c and the pressure sensor value is less than or equal to d, the solenoid valve N is opened, and N2 starts to be filled into the battery pack (air pressure sensor, see p.4; solenoid valve, turn on nitrogen generator, oxygen concentration sensor, see p.5); and
2) the abnormal mode comprises that a device compartment is abnormal and that a battery compartment is abnormal (three-level protection, four-level protection in which abnormality is detected, see p.5);
when the device compartment is abnormal, a primary early warning threshold D1 and a secondary early warning threshold D2 of a detector D are set, and when a detection value of the detector D is greater than the primary early warning threshold D1 and is less than the secondary early warning threshold D2, it is determined that the detector D reaches primary early warning, and an audible and visual alarm flashes and buzzes; and when the detection value of the detector D is greater than the secondary early warning threshold D2, it is determined that the detector D reaches secondary early warning, in this case, the detector D controls the solenoid valve d to be opened, the solenoid valve a is closed, the solenoid valve b and the solenoid valve s still remain in a closed state (alarm module including an acousto-optic alarm, see p.4; send alarm message to fire manager, see p.5); and
when the battery compartment is abnormal, a primary early warning threshold A1 and a secondary early warning threshold A2 of a combination detector A, a primary early warning threshold B1 and a secondary early warning threshold B2 of a combination detector B, a primary early warning threshold C1 and a secondary early warning threshold C2 of a combination detector C are set, when a detection value of a combination detector A in a battery pack is greater than or equal to the primary early warning threshold A1 but is less than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold A2, in this case, a central controller controls the audible and visual alarm to flash and buzz; when the detection value of the combination detector A in the battery pack is greater than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold A2 and a detection value of a detector B in a battery cluster is greater than or equal to the primary early warning threshold B1 and is less than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold B2, in this case, the detector A raising an alarm controls the solenoid valve a of the battery pack in which the detector A is located to be normally open, and solenoid valves a of the remaining battery packs are closed; when the detection value of the combination detector B is greater than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold B2, the combination detector B controls the solenoid valve b of the battery cluster in which the battery pack with thermal runaway is located to be opened; when a detection value of the combination detector C is greater than or equal to the primary early warning threshold C1 and is less than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold C2; and when the detection value of the combination detector C is greater than or equal to the secondary early warning threshold C2, the solenoid valve s is opened (alarm module including an acousto-optic alarm, see p.4; send alarm message to fire manager, see p.5).
However, Zhou does not disclose a gaseous fire extinguishing agent bottle X is opened, and a gaseous fire extinguishing agent starts to sprayed into the device compartment; the gaseous fire extinguishing agent bottle X is opened to start to spray the gaseous fire extinguishing agent to the battery pack with thermal runaway; the gaseous fire extinguishing agent starts to be sprayed in the battery cluster; a gaseous fire extinguishing agent bottle Y is opened, and a gaseous fire extinguishing agent starts to be sprayed in a space of the battery compartment; external firewater starts to be sprayed in the battery compartment.
Wang discloses a liquid nitrogen and water mist synergistic fire suppression and extinguishing system and method for lithium battery energy storage power station which effectively solve risk of thermal runaway (see Title, p.1).
Zhou and Wang are analogous art because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely battery temperature control methods.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to corporate a fire suppression and extinguishing system using liquid nitrogen and water mist because Wang teaches improved safety.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses detection elements comprised in the combination detector A in step 2) are VOCs, smoke, CO, temperature, O2, and pressure; and when any one of detection values of four detection elements of CO, VOCs, smoke, and temperature in the combination detector A reaches the primary early warning threshold A1 and the detection values of the four detection elements of CO, VOCs, smoke, and temperature are all less than the secondary early warning threshold A2, it is determined that a current early warning level of the detector A is the primary early warning (alarm based on pressure, oxygen concentration, temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Regarding claim 3, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses when the four detection elements of CO, VOCs, smoke, and temperature in the combination detector A all reach the secondary early warning threshold A2, it is determined that the current early warning level of the combination detector A is the secondary early warning (alarm based on pressure, oxygen concentration, temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Regarding claim 4, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses detection elements comprised in the combination detector B in step 2) are flame, H2, smoke, and temperature; and when any one of three detection elements of H2, smoke, and temperature in the combination detector B reaches the primary early warning threshold B1 and is less than the secondary early warning threshold B2 and at the same time a flame sensor value remains unchanged, it is determined that a current early warning level of the detector B is the primary early warning (alarm based on pressure, oxygen concentration, temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Regarding claim 5, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses when the three detection elements of H2, smoke, and temperature in the combination detector B all reach the secondary early warning threshold B2 and the flame sensor value reaches the secondary early warning threshold B2, it is determined that the current early warning level of the combination detector B is the secondary early warning (alarm based on temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Regarding claim 6, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses when detection values of detection elements of smoke and flame in the combination detector C in step 2) all reach the primary early warning threshold C1, it is determined that a current early warning level of the combination detector C is the primary early warning (alarm based on pressure, oxygen concentration, temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Regarding claim 7, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses when the detection values of the detection elements of smoke and flame in the combination detector C all reach the secondary early warning threshold C2, it is determined that the current early warning level of the combination detector C is the secondary early warning (alarm based on pressure, oxygen concentration, temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Regarding claim 8, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses a detection element in the detector D is VOCs (alarm based on pressure, oxygen concentration, temperature, abnormal gas, see p.5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM.
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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 7/9/2026
Prosecution Insights