DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office action addresses claims 1, 5-8, 10-20, and newly added claims 21 and 22. Claims 19 and 20 are allowed. Claims 1, 5-8, 10-18, 21 and 22 contain allowable subject matter, however they remain rejected under the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting. Accordingly, this action is made final.
Double Patenting
Claims 1, 5-8, 10-18, 21, and 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of US Patent 12,453,559 (previously a provisional rejection over application 18464845). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. The claims of the ‘559 patent recite all of the limitations of instant claims 1, 5-8, 16, and 21 (the “depressed groove” of ‘559 corresponds to the claimed “third score groove”) except for ---the specific location and spacing of the notch groove in instant claim 1. However, the position is taken that the location of the notch groove would be a matter of routine design choice (claim 2 of ’559 recites that the notch groove is formed in the opening area, and that the opening area is defined by the first, second and third groove segments [sections]). The optimal location of the notch groove could be determined by one skilled in the art, and as such the limitation is rendered obvious. Further, the dimensions and ratios in instant claims 10 and 11 would also be rendered obvious. A battery pack comprising a box body (claim 17) and an electrical device are also obvious variants of the ‘559 claims. Regarding the accommodating space/walls recited in claims 12-15, as stated above it is known to provide a pressure relief portion on a bottom surface of a battery (as opposed to a lid portion). Regarding claim 22, the relative depths of the groove sections (groove segments) could be readily adjusted to determine which segment opens first. Accordingly, the instant claims are obvious variants of the ‘559 patent claims.
Claims 1, 5-8, 10-18, 21, and 22 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 21-23, 25-29, 32-34, 36-42, 44 and 45 of copending Application No. 18/333167 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. The claims of the ‘167 application recite all the limitations of instant claims 1, 5-8, 10 and 21 except for the distance of the notch groove from the third groove segment. However, the exact spacing of the notch groove from the third groove segment would be a matter of routine design choice (the ‘845 claims already recite several details about where the groove is in relation to the first and second groove segments, and that it is “only located within the opening region”). Regarding claim 11, the recited dimensions would also be a matter of routine design choice. The general use of a pressure relief device in a battery is known and renders claims 16-18 obvious. Regarding the accommodating space/walls recited in claims 12-15, as stated above it is known to provide a pressure relief portion on a bottom surface of a battery. Regarding claim 22, the relative depths of the groove sections (groove segments) could be readily adjusted to determine which segment opens first.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed December 15, 2025. Applicant states that the double patenting rejections should be withdrawn based on the new language added to the independent claims. However, the claims (claims 1 and 16 and their dependents) still do not avoid the claims in the ‘559 patent (issuing from the ‘845 application) and the ‘167 application for the reasons stated in the above rejections. As an additional note, although the rejection over the ‘167 application is provisional, the rejection cannot be withdrawn at this time because the ‘167 application and the instant application have the same priority date (effective filing date) (8/31/2021) and there was no double patenting rejection made in ‘167 application over the instant application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 are allowed. Claims 1, 5-8, and 10-18, 21 and 22 would be allowable if the double patenting rejections were obviated.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The independent claims each recite that the extension direction of the first groove section is perpendicular to the third groove section, and a distance between the notch groove and the third groove section along a direction parallel to the extension direction of the first groove section is less than a distance between the end of the first groove section and the third groove section along the extension direction of the first groove section. The combination of JP ‘570 and Lee does not teach or fairly suggest this limitation, as noted by Applicants in the remarks. Further, it is noted that the apparatus of JP ‘570 already has predetermined hinge points determined by the geometry (see for example Fig. 8); accordingly it would not have been obvious to add a further notch or hinge point inside the opening area of JP ‘570.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan Crepeau whose telephone number is (571) 272-1299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
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 phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 272-1700. Documents may be faxed to the central fax server at (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).
/Jonathan Crepeau/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
March 25, 2026