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 .
Status of Claims
This is a final office action for application 18/215,879 in response to the amendment(s) filed on 06/09/2026. Claims 1-6 are under examination.
Withdrawn Objections
The amendment(s) to the claim(s), specification, and/or drawing(s) filed 06/09/2026 is acknowledged and the previous claim objections are withdrawn.
Relevant MPEP Sections
MPEP 2114 relating to Apparatus and Article claims – Functional Language: While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. >In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997)
MPEP 2115: "Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, "[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996<, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 9 June 2026 have been fully considered but were not found persuasive over the previous prior art rejection of record for the reasons set forth below.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because claims 1 and 6 do not require permanent storage of all electrolyte entering the reservoir, does not specify a minimum retention time or quantity, and does not exclude a drain or electrolyte return passage. Leeson expressly teaches that liquid electrolyte settles from the vented stream and flows along bottom portion 15 before reaching drain opening 16 (see e.g. Column 7 lines 41-48). Thus, during operation, separated electrolyte necessarily occupies and remains within the vent plug enclosure for at least a period of time. Leeson further expressly discloses an operating condition in which drain openings 16 are blocked by the electrolyte level, while pressure relief remains available through inlet opening 17 (see e.g. Column 7 lines 55-63). Under that disclosed condition, separated electrolyte entering the vent plug enclosure would accumulate and remain therein while gases continue through the vent path. The amended limitations relate to functional language and the material worked upon therefore do not structurally distinguish the claimed apparatus from Leeson (see MPEP 2114 and 2115 above).
However, if “remain therein” requires retention beyond the temporary residence expressly disclosed by Leeson, new prior art Pittaway et al. (US-20050121074-A1) was identified and discloses a known alternative gas liquid separation device in which moisture carried by a gas stream contacts internal surfaces and drains into a collection cup where it remains until the cup is removed or emptied (see e.g. paragraphs [0033]-[0035] of Pittaway). It would have been obvious to modify the electrolyte collection region of Leeson to retain the separated electrolyte in a collection reservoir, as taught by Pittaway, when return of discharged electrolyte is undesirable. Such a modification would predictably prevent separated electrolyte from reaching surrounding equipment while continuing to permit gases to pass through the outlet.
Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments do not overcome the rejections of claims 1 through 6. The previous rejections are maintained. An additional rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is also set forth below based on Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway (US-20050121074-A1). See claims 1-6 rejections below.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) and further in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A).
Regarding Claim 1, Leeson discloses a containment apparatus for collecting liquid and vaporized electrolyte from a battery relief vent (see e.g. "vent plug assembly" in Column 3 lines 33-34 and FIG. 7) comprising:
a body (see e.g. "base" in Column 3 line 35 and part number 12 in FIG. 7) comprising a reservoir (see e.g. " the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 " in Column 7 lines 45-46 and annotated figure below), a relief vent aperture (see e.g. " inlet opening 17" in Column 7 line 29 and part number 17 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), an internal baffle (see e.g. " baffle 50" in Column 7 line 12 and part number 50 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), and an upper vent aperture (see e.g. " annular opening 38 through which the gases are ultimately vented to the atmosphere." in Column 4 lines 48-50 and part number 38 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below); and a push-on connection that attaches said relief vent aperture to said battery relief vent (see e.g. "threads 14" in Column 3 line 36 and part number 14 in FIG. 7 and part number "While the above discussion has been directed toward vent systems for batteries wherein the plug assembly is threaded into its respective vent well, it can be appreciated that the concepts taught and inventions claimed also apply to a vent system wherein the vent plug has no threads and can be press fitted into the well." in Column 8 lines 32-37).
Leeson expressly teaches that, although threads 14 are shown, the vent plug may alternatively “have no threads and can be press fitted into the well” (Column 8 lines 32–37). Thus it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that a press-fit attachment is a push-on connection under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, as it attaches by axial insertion without requiring separate fastening structure.
Regarding the limitation “wherein liquid electrolytes are released from said pressure relief vent and travel through said relief vent aperture and into said reservoir and remain therein,” Leeson discloses that gases combined with liquid electrolyte are forced from the battery cell through inlet opening 17 and into the vent plug enclosure, where contact with baffles 50 and 51 and the internal surfaces causes the liquid electrolyte to settle onto bottom portion 15 (see e.g. Column 7 lines 26–51). Inlet opening 17 corresponds to the claimed relief vent aperture, and the vent plug enclosure above bottom portion 15 corresponds to the claimed reservoir. Although Leeson teaches that most of the separated electrolyte eventually returns to the battery cell through drain opening 16, the claim does not require permanent retention, a particular retention period, or a reservoir without a drain. Therefore, the electrolyte necessarily remains within the vent plug enclosure for at least a period of time while settling and flowing toward drain opening 16. Leeson further discloses that drain opening 16 may be blocked by the electrolyte level (see e.g. Column 7 lines 52–64). Under this disclosed condition, a person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that separated electrolyte within the vent plug enclosure would at least temporarily collect and remain therein because the disclosed drain opening is blocked.
Leeson does not disclose that the containment apparatus comprises a viewing window on an external side of said body.
Burns, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery packages that contain electrolyte as well as vents to release it, discloses a vent for a battery housing (see e.g. "a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing" in Column 3 lines 23-24) that comprises a viewing window (see e.g. "the battery housing 110 contains a communication port 108 in one of the exterior surfaces 120. The communications port or multi-functional window serves as a port to provide information about the battery type, the battery capacity, the state of charge of the battery, the number of charge/discharge cycles, the temperature of the battery, the size of the battery and other parameters. Communications ports 108 also serves as a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing 110." in Column 3 lines 15-24).
Burns further teaches that incorporating a transparent window into a battery housing allows internal conditions to be monitored without requiring additional openings or structural complexity (see e.g. Column 3 line 68-Column 4 line 2 and Column 1 line 52-Column 2 line 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. such that it includes a viewing window as taught by Burns et al. in order to permit external observation of internal battery conditions while maintaining a sealed housing as suggested by Burns. The proposed modification merely applies a known technique (providing a transparent monitoring window in a battery housing) to a known battery vent containment structure to yield the predictable result of enabling visual inspection of internal conditions.
PNG
media_image1.png
616
987
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Leeson, figure 2, annotated for illustration)
Regarding Claim 2, Leeson in view of Burns discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson further discloses that said liquid and vaporized electrolyte released from said battery relief vent deflects and condense on said internal baffle in order to capture said electrolyte within said reservoir (see e.g. "the process of seeking an exit from the vent plug enclosure, the contact of the fluid stream with the baffles and the internal surfaces of the enclosure produces a scrubbing effect which causes most of the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 until it reaches drain opening 16 and returns to the cell below. The gaseous phase continues to flow to the atmosphere" in Column 7 lines 41-49).
Burns teaches providing a transparent window on an exterior surface. In the modified apparatus, the inward facing surface of the window would form an internal surface exposed to the vented fluid stream. Therefore, liquid and vaporized electrolyte contacting the baffles and internal window surface would deflect, separate, and condense there before being collected within the reservoir.
Regarding Claim 4, Leeson in view of Burns discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson further discloses that said baffle comprises a V-shaped extension positioned above said push-on connection (see e.g. annotated figure below) and a channel that direct said vaporized electrolyte to said upper vent aperture (see e.g. annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
518
1077
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Leeson, figure 2, annotated for illustration)
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Adams et al. (US-5422199-A).
Regarding Claim 3, Leeson in view of Burns discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson in view of Burns does not disclose that the push-on connection further comprises a rubber O-ring and a fixed stop.
Adams, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery venting systems, discloses a containment apparatus with a push-on connection comprising a rubber O-ring (see e.g. "o-ring seal 40" in Column 5 line 48 and part number 40 in FIG. 3) and a fixed stop (see e.g. "edge abutment 38" in Column 5 line 46 and part number 38 in FIG. 2).
Adams further teaches that these serve to seal the containment apparatus to the battery relief vent and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edge of the apparatus (see e.g. Column 4 lines 61-66). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that the push-on connections includes a rubber o-ring and a fixed stop as taught by Adams et al. in order to better seal the containment apparatus to the battery and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edges as suggested by Adams.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Searles (US-20200220133-A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Leeson in view of Burns discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson in view of Burns does not disclose that the viewing window comprises an installation direction indicator.
Searles, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery apparatuses discloses a installation direction indicator on a battery housing (see e.g. "the top cap includes the label portion 324 which may be used to ensure the correct orientation of the battery, but in other examples the orientation indicator could be another feature such as a marking, sticker, ridge or other visually noticeable feature provided on one side of the battery pack." in paragraph [0093]).
Searles further teaches that this ensures there is a reference to determine which way round the battery pack should be inserted (see e.g. paragraph [0055]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the view window of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that it comprises an installation direction indicator as taught by Searles in order to determine which way round the containment apparatus goes as suggested by Searles. Providing such an indicator is a routine and predictable design choice to allow a user to determine the correct orientation of the containment apparatus during installation.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) in view of Adams et al. (US-5422199-A) and further in view of Searles (US-20200220133-A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Leeson discloses a containment apparatus for collecting liquid and vaporized electrolyte from a battery relief vent (see e.g. “vent plug assembly” in Column 3 lines 33-34 and FIG. 7) comprising:
a body (see e.g. “base” in Column 3 line 35 and part number 12 in FIG. 7) comprising a reservoir (see e.g. “ the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 “ in Column 7 lines 45-46 and annotated figure below), a relief vent aperture (see e.g. " inlet opening 17" in Column 7 line 29 and part number 17 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), an internal baffle (see e.g. “ baffle 50” in Column 7 line 12 and part number 50 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), and an upper vent aperture (see e.g. “ annular opening 38 through which the gases are ultimately vented to the atmosphere.” in Column 4 lines 48-50 and part number 38 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below); and a push-on connection that attaches said relief vent aperture to said battery relief vent (see e.g. “threads 14” in Column 3 line 36 and part number 14 in FIG. 7 and part number “While the above discussion has been directed toward vent systems for batteries wherein the plug assembly is threaded into its respective vent well, it can be appreciated that the concepts taught and inventions claimed also apply to a vent system wherein the vent plug has no threads and can be press fitted into the well.” in Column 8 lines 32-37).
Leeson expressly teaches that, although threads 14 are shown, the vent plug may alternatively “have no threads and can be press fitted into the well” (Column 8 lines 32–37). Thus it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that a press-fit attachment is a push-on connection under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, as it attaches by axial insertion without requiring separate fastening structure.
Leeson further discloses that said baffle comprises a V-shaped extension positioned above said push-on connection (see e.g. annotated figure below) and a channel that directs said vaporized electrolyte to said upper vent aperture (see e.g. annotated figure below) wherein said liquid and vaporized electrolyte released from said battery relief vent deflects and condense on said internal baffle and window in order to capture said electrolyte within said reservoir (see e.g. “the process of seeking an exit from the vent plug enclosure, the contact of the fluid stream with the baffles and the internal surfaces of the enclosure produces a scrubbing effect which causes most of the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 until it reaches drain opening 16 and returns to the cell below. The gaseous phase continues to flow to the atmosphere” in Column 7 lines 41-49).
Leeson does not disclose that the containment apparatus comprises a viewing window on an external side of said body. Burns, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery packages that contain electrolyte as well as vents to release it, discloses a vent for a battery housing (see e.g. “a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing” in Column 3 lines 23-24) that comprises a viewing window (see e.g. “the battery housing 110 contains a communication port 108 in one of the exterior surfaces 120. The communications port or multi-functional window serves as a port to provide information about the battery type, the battery capacity, the state of charge of the battery, the number of charge/discharge cycles, the temperature of the battery, the size of the battery and other parameters. Communications ports 108 also serves as a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing 110.” in Column 3 lines 15-24).
Regarding the limitation “wherein said liquid and vaporized electrolyte released from said battery relief vent deflects and condenses on said internal baffle and window and travel through said relief vent aperture and into said reservoir and remain therein,” Leeson in view of Burns discloses this limitation for the reasons discussed above regarding claims 1 and 2. Vaporized electrolyte that condenses becomes liquid electrolyte and is thereafter subject to the same collection and temporary retention described above. The claim does not require that the electrolyte remain in vapor form after condensation.
Burns further teaches that incorporating a transparent window into a battery housing allows internal conditions to be monitored without requiring additional openings or structural complexity (see e.g. Column 3 line 68-Column 4 line 2 and Column 1 line 52-Column 2 line 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. such that it includes a viewing window as taught by Burns et al. in order to permit external observation of internal battery conditions while maintaining a sealed housing as suggested by Burns.
Leeson in view of Burns does not disclose that the push-on connection further comprises a rubber O-ring and a fixed stop for attaching said relief vent aperture to said battery relief vent. Adams, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery venting systems, discloses a containment apparatus with a push-on connection comprising a rubber O-ring (see e.g. “o-ring seal 40” in Column 5 line 48 and part number 40 in FIG. 3) and a fixed stop (see e.g. “edge abutment 38” in Column 5 line 46 and part number 38 in FIG. 2).
Adams further teaches that these serve to seal the containment apparatus to the battery relief vent and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edge of the apparatus (see e.g. Column 4 lines 61-66). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that the push-on connection includes a rubber O-ring and a fixed stop as taught by Adams et al. in order to better seal the containment apparatus to the battery and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edges as suggested by Adams.
Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Adams does not disclose that the viewing window comprises an installation direction indicator. Searles, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery apparatuses, discloses an installation direction indicator on a battery housing (see e.g. “the top cap includes the label portion 324 which may be used to ensure the correct orientation of the battery, but in other examples the orientation indicator could be another feature such as a marking, sticker, ridge or other visually noticeable feature provided on one side of the battery pack.” in paragraph [0093]).
Searles further teaches that this ensures there is a reference to determine which way round the battery pack should be inserted (see e.g. paragraph [0055]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the viewing window of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. and further in view of Adams et al. such that it comprises an installation direction indicator as taught by Searles in order to determine the correct orientation of the containment apparatus as suggested by Searles. Providing such an indicator is a routine and predictable design choice to allow a user to determine the correct orientation of the containment apparatus during installation.
PNG
media_image3.png
612
1137
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Leeson, figure 2, annotated for illustration)
Claims 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) and further in view of Pittaway et al. (US-20050121074-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Leeson discloses a containment apparatus for collecting liquid and vaporized electrolyte from a battery relief vent (see e.g. "vent plug assembly" in Column 3 lines 33-34 and FIG. 7) comprising:
a body (see e.g. "base" in Column 3 line 35 and part number 12 in FIG. 7) comprising a reservoir (see e.g. " the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 " in Column 7 lines 45-46 and annotated figure below), a relief vent aperture (see e.g. " inlet opening 17" in Column 7 line 29 and part number 17 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), an internal baffle (see e.g. " baffle 50" in Column 7 line 12 and part number 50 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), and an upper vent aperture (see e.g. " annular opening 38 through which the gases are ultimately vented to the atmosphere." in Column 4 lines 48-50 and part number 38 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below); and a push-on connection that attaches said relief vent aperture to said battery relief vent (see e.g. "threads 14" in Column 3 line 36 and part number 14 in FIG. 7 and part number "While the above discussion has been directed toward vent systems for batteries wherein the plug assembly is threaded into its respective vent well, it can be appreciated that the concepts taught and inventions claimed also apply to a vent system wherein the vent plug has no threads and can be press fitted into the well." in Column 8 lines 32-37).
Leeson expressly teaches that, although threads 14 are shown, the vent plug may alternatively “have no threads and can be press fitted into the well” (Column 8 lines 32–37). Thus it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that a press-fit attachment is a push-on connection under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, as it attaches by axial insertion without requiring separate fastening structure.
Regarding the limitation “wherein liquid electrolytes are released from said pressure relief vent and travel through said relief vent aperture and into said reservoir and remain therein,” Leeson discloses that gases combined with liquid electrolyte are forced from the battery cell through inlet opening 17 and into the vent plug enclosure, where contact with baffles 50 and 51 and the internal surfaces causes the liquid electrolyte to settle onto bottom portion 15 (see e.g. Column 7 lines 26–51). Inlet opening 17 corresponds to the claimed relief vent aperture, and the vent plug enclosure above bottom portion 15 corresponds to the claimed reservoir. Although Leeson teaches that most of the separated electrolyte eventually returns to the battery cell through drain opening 16, the claim does not require permanent retention, a particular retention period, or a reservoir without a drain. Therefore, the electrolyte necessarily remains within the vent plug enclosure for at least a period of time while settling and flowing toward drain opening 16. Leeson further discloses that drain opening 16 may be blocked by the electrolyte level (see e.g. Column 7 lines 52–64). Under this disclosed condition, a person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that separated electrolyte within the vent plug enclosure would at least temporarily collect and remain therein because the disclosed drain opening is blocked.
Leeson does not disclose that the containment apparatus comprises a viewing window on an external side of said body.
Burns, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery packages that contain electrolyte as well as vents to release it, discloses a vent for a battery housing (see e.g. "a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing" in Column 3 lines 23-24) that comprises a viewing window (see e.g. "the battery housing 110 contains a communication port 108 in one of the exterior surfaces 120. The communications port or multi-functional window serves as a port to provide information about the battery type, the battery capacity, the state of charge of the battery, the number of charge/discharge cycles, the temperature of the battery, the size of the battery and other parameters. Communications ports 108 also serves as a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing 110." in Column 3 lines 15-24).
Burns further teaches that incorporating a transparent window into a battery housing allows internal conditions to be monitored without requiring additional openings or structural complexity (see e.g. Column 3 line 68-Column 4 line 2 and Column 1 line 52-Column 2 line 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. such that it includes a viewing window as taught by Burns et al. in order to permit external observation of internal battery conditions while maintaining a sealed housing as suggested by Burns. The proposed modification merely applies a known technique (providing a transparent monitoring window in a battery housing) to a known battery vent containment structure to yield the predictable result of enabling visual inspection of internal conditions.
Leeson discloses that separated electrolyte settles within the vent plug enclosure and flows along bottom portion 15 before returning to the battery cell through drain opening 16. Leeson in view of Burns therefore does not explicitly disclose that the separated electrolyte is retained within the reservoir until the reservoir is emptied.
Pittaway, however, although directed to respiratory ventilation systems, is reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by Leeson because both references concern separating liquid from a flowing gas stream, collecting the separated liquid, and permitting the gas to continue through an outlet, discloses a gas and liquid separation apparatus comprising an inlet, an outlet, an internal partition, and a collecting cup (see e.g. [0025]–[0034] and FIGs. 1–3 of Pittaway). Pittaway discloses that moisture carried by a gas stream contacts the sides of collecting cup and other internal surfaces, drains into collecting cup, and collects therein (see e.g. “Water in the system drains into the trap 1, and moisture carried by the air stream impacts upon the sides of the cup 30 and/or on other exposed internal surfaces of the trap 1, e.g. the top of the valve plate 20 and the interior of the sealing skirt 16, and drains into the cup 30 where it collects” in paragraph [0034] of Pittaway) and that the collected liquid remains in collecting cup until the cup is removed for emptying (see e.g. paragraph [0035] of Pittaway).
Pittaway further teaches this allows for fluid in the system to be collected and removed without interrupting operation of the system (see e.g. paragraphs [0011] and [0034] of Pittaway). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that the liquid electrolytes are released from said pressure relief vent and travel through said relief vent aperture and into said reservoir and remain therein as taught by Pittaway et al. in order to collect and remove fluid within the system during operation as suggested by Pittaway.
PNG
media_image1.png
616
987
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Leeson, figure 2, annotated for illustration)
Regarding Claim 2, Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson further discloses that said liquid and vaporized electrolyte released from said battery relief vent deflects and condense on said internal baffle in order to capture said electrolyte within said reservoir (see e.g. "the process of seeking an exit from the vent plug enclosure, the contact of the fluid stream with the baffles and the internal surfaces of the enclosure produces a scrubbing effect which causes most of the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 until it reaches drain opening 16 and returns to the cell below. The gaseous phase continues to flow to the atmosphere" in Column 7 lines 41-49).
Burns teaches providing a transparent window on an exterior surface. In the modified apparatus, the inward facing surface of the window would form an internal surface exposed to the vented fluid stream. Therefore, liquid and vaporized electrolyte contacting the baffles and internal window surface would deflect, separate, and condense there before being collected within the reservoir.
Regarding Claim 4, Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson further discloses that said baffle comprises a V-shaped extension positioned above said push-on connection (see e.g. annotated figure below) and a channel that direct said vaporized electrolyte to said upper vent aperture (see e.g. annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
518
1077
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Leeson, figure 2, annotated for illustration)
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) and further in view of Pittaway et al. (US-20050121074-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Adams et al. (US-5422199-A).
Regarding Claim 3, Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway does not disclose that the push-on connection further comprises a rubber O-ring and a fixed stop.
Adams, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery venting systems, discloses a containment apparatus with a push-on connection comprising a rubber O-ring (see e.g. "o-ring seal 40" in Column 5 line 48 and part number 40 in FIG. 3) and a fixed stop (see e.g. "edge abutment 38" in Column 5 line 46 and part number 38 in FIG. 2).
Adams further teaches that these serve to seal the containment apparatus to the battery relief vent and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edge of the apparatus (see e.g. Column 4 lines 61-66). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that the push-on connections includes a rubber o-ring and a fixed stop as taught by Adams et al. in order to better seal the containment apparatus to the battery and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edges as suggested by Adams.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) and further in view of Pittaway et al. (US-20050121074-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Searles (US-20200220133-A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway discloses the containment apparatus of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Leeson in view of Burns and further in view of Pittaway does not disclose that the viewing window comprises an installation direction indicator.
Searles, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery apparatuses, discloses an installation direction indicator on a battery housing (see e.g. "the top cap includes the label portion 324 which may be used to ensure the correct orientation of the battery, but in other examples the orientation indicator could be another feature such as a marking, sticker, ridge or other visually noticeable feature provided on one side of the battery pack." in paragraph [0093]).
Searles further teaches that this ensures there is a reference to determine which way round the battery pack should be inserted (see e.g. paragraph [0055]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the view window of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that it comprises an installation direction indicator as taught by Searles in order to determine which way round the containment apparatus goes as suggested by Searles. Providing such an indicator is a routine and predictable design choice to allow a user to determine the correct orientation of the containment apparatus during installation.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leeson et al. (US-4072799-A) in view of Burns et al. (US-5206097-A) in view of Pittaway et al. (US-20050121074-A1) in view of Adams et al. (US-5422199-A) and further in view of Searles (US-20200220133-A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Leeson discloses a containment apparatus for collecting liquid and vaporized electrolyte from a battery relief vent (see e.g. “vent plug assembly” in Column 3 lines 33-34 and FIG. 7) comprising:
a body (see e.g. “base” in Column 3 line 35 and part number 12 in FIG. 7) comprising a reservoir (see e.g. “ the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 “ in Column 7 lines 45-46 and annotated figure below), a relief vent aperture (see e.g. " inlet opening 17" in Column 7 line 29 and part number 17 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), an internal baffle (see e.g. “ baffle 50” in Column 7 line 12 and part number 50 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below), and an upper vent aperture (see e.g. “ annular opening 38 through which the gases are ultimately vented to the atmosphere.” in Column 4 lines 48-50 and part number 38 in FIG. 2 and annotated figure below); and a push-on connection that attaches said relief vent aperture to said battery relief vent (see e.g. “threads 14” in Column 3 line 36 and part number 14 in FIG. 7 and part number “While the above discussion has been directed toward vent systems for batteries wherein the plug assembly is threaded into its respective vent well, it can be appreciated that the concepts taught and inventions claimed also apply to a vent system wherein the vent plug has no threads and can be press fitted into the well.” in Column 8 lines 32-37).
Leeson expressly teaches that, although threads 14 are shown, the vent plug may alternatively “have no threads and can be press fitted into the well” (Column 8 lines 32–37). Thus it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that a press-fit attachment is a push-on connection under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, as it attaches by axial insertion without requiring separate fastening structure.
Leeson further discloses that said baffle comprises a V-shaped extension positioned above said push-on connection (see e.g. annotated figure below) and a channel that directs said vaporized electrolyte to said upper vent aperture (see e.g. annotated figure below) wherein said liquid and vaporized electrolyte released from said battery relief vent deflects and condense on said internal baffle and window in order to capture said electrolyte within said reservoir (see e.g. “the process of seeking an exit from the vent plug enclosure, the contact of the fluid stream with the baffles and the internal surfaces of the enclosure produces a scrubbing effect which causes most of the liquid phase in the stream to settle out and flow down bottom portion 15 until it reaches drain opening 16 and returns to the cell below. The gaseous phase continues to flow to the atmosphere” in Column 7 lines 41-49).
Leeson does not disclose that the containment apparatus comprises a viewing window on an external side of said body. Burns, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery packages that contain electrolyte as well as vents to release it, discloses a vent for a battery housing (see e.g. “a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing” in Column 3 lines 23-24) that comprises a viewing window (see e.g. “the battery housing 110 contains a communication port 108 in one of the exterior surfaces 120. The communications port or multi-functional window serves as a port to provide information about the battery type, the battery capacity, the state of charge of the battery, the number of charge/discharge cycles, the temperature of the battery, the size of the battery and other parameters. Communications ports 108 also serves as a vent to release excess pressure from the interior of the housing 110.” in Column 3 lines 15-24).
Regarding the limitation “wherein said liquid and vaporized electrolyte released from said battery relief vent deflects and condenses on said internal baffle and window and travel through said relief vent aperture and into said reservoir and remain therein,” Leeson in view of Burns discloses this limitation for the reasons discussed above regarding claims 1 and 2. Vaporized electrolyte that condenses becomes liquid electrolyte and is thereafter subject to the same collection and temporary retention described above. The claim does not require that the electrolyte remain in vapor form after condensation.
Burns further teaches that incorporating a transparent window into a battery housing allows internal conditions to be monitored without requiring additional openings or structural complexity (see e.g. Column 3 line 68-Column 4 line 2 and Column 1 line 52-Column 2 line 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. such that it includes a viewing window as taught by Burns et al. in order to permit external observation of internal battery conditions while maintaining a sealed housing as suggested by Burns.
Leeson discloses that separated electrolyte settles within the vent plug enclosure and flows along bottom portion 15 before returning to the battery cell through drain opening 16. Leeson in view of Burns therefore does not explicitly disclose that the separated electrolyte is retained within the reservoir until the reservoir is emptied.
Pittaway, however, although directed to respiratory ventilation systems, is reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by Leeson because both references concern separating liquid from a flowing gas stream, collecting the separated liquid, and permitting the gas to continue through an outlet, discloses a gas and liquid separation apparatus comprising an inlet, an outlet, an internal partition, and a collecting cup (see e.g. [0025]–[0034] and FIGs. 1–3 of Pittaway). Pittaway discloses that moisture carried by a gas stream contacts the sides of collecting cup and other internal surfaces, drains into collecting cup, and collects therein (see e.g. “Water in the system drains into the trap 1, and moisture carried by the air stream impacts upon the sides of the cup 30 and/or on other exposed internal surfaces of the trap 1, e.g. the top of the valve plate 20 and the interior of the sealing skirt 16, and drains into the cup 30 where it collects” in paragraph [0034] of Pittaway) and that the collected liquid remains in collecting cup until the cup is removed for emptying (see e.g. paragraph [0035] of Pittaway).
Pittaway further teaches this allows for fluid in the system to be collected and removed without interrupting operation of the system (see e.g. paragraphs [0011] and [0034] of Pittaway). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that the liquid electrolytes are released from said pressure relief vent and travel through said relief vent aperture and into said reservoir and remain therein as taught by Pittaway et al. in order to collect and remove fluid within the system during operation as suggested by Pittaway.
Leeson in view of Burns in view of Pittaway does not disclose that the push-on connection further comprises a rubber O-ring and a fixed stop for attaching said relief vent aperture to said battery relief vent. Adams, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery venting systems, discloses a containment apparatus with a push-on connection comprising a rubber O-ring (see e.g. “o-ring seal 40” in Column 5 line 48 and part number 40 in FIG. 3) and a fixed stop (see e.g. “edge abutment 38” in Column 5 line 46 and part number 38 in FIG. 2).
Adams further teaches that these serve to seal the containment apparatus to the battery relief vent and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edge of the apparatus (see e.g. Column 4 lines 61-66). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the containment apparatus of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. such that the push-on connection includes a rubber O-ring and a fixed stop as taught by Adams et al. in order to better seal the containment apparatus to the battery and reduce undesired fluid leakage around the edges as suggested by Adams.
Leeson in view of Burns in view of Pittaway and further in view of Adams does not disclose that the viewing window comprises an installation direction indicator. Searles, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery apparatuses, discloses an installation direction indicator on a battery housing (see e.g. “the top cap includes the label portion 324 which may be used to ensure the correct orientation of the battery, but in other examples the orientation indicator could be another feature such as a marking, sticker, ridge or other visually noticeable feature provided on one side of the battery pack.” in paragraph [0093]).
Searles further teaches that this ensures there is a reference to determine which way round the battery pack should be inserted (see e.g. paragraph [0055]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the viewing window of Leeson et al. in view of Burns et al. and further in view of Adams et al. such that it comprises an installation direction indicator as taught by Searles in order to determine the correct orientation of the containment apparatus as suggested by Searles. Providing such an indicator is a routine and predictable design choice to allow a user to determine the correct orientation of the containment apparatus during installation.
PNG
media_image3.png
612
1137
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Leeson, figure 2, annotated for illustration)
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 JESSE EFYMOW whose telephone number is (571)270-0795. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 10:30 am - 8:30 pm EST.
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, TONG GUO can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/J.J.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
