Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/273,131

HEAT-CONDUCTIVE COMPOSITION, HEAT-CONDUCTIVE MEMBER, AND BATTERY MODULE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jul 19, 2023
Examiner
LI, AIQUN
Art Unit
1766
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sekisui Polymatech Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
523 granted / 822 resolved
-1.4% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
865
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
45.3%
+5.3% vs TC avg
§102
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 822 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Objections Claims 2 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 2 and 4 recite “the (D) polysiloxane compound”, which appears to be “the polysiloxane compound (D)”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 4 is 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. Claim 4 recites the limitation “the alkyl group “. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in claim 1. The phrase should state the “at least one alkyl group”. 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. Claims 1, 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US2017/0029571A1 (Kusunoki), which is listed in Applicant’s information disclosure statement. Regarding claims 1 and 4, Kunsunoki teaches a curable silicone composition comprising: an organopolysiloxane of network structure having at least two alkenyl groups ([0035]), which meets the claimed (A); an organohydrogenpolysiloxane having at least 4 terminal hydrosilyl groups ([0033]), which meets the claimed (B) ; an inorganic filler such as alumina ([0133]), which meets the claimed thermally conductive filler (C) as evidenced by instant disclosure ([0018]); and a linear organopolysiloxane having C1-C12 monovalent saturated hydrocarbon group such as butyl and hexyl ([0032] and [0089]), which meets the claimed (D) and alkyl group, respectively. Regarding claim 5, Kunsunoki teaches that the composition cures into a product that can be applied to electronics as encapsulating materials ([0147]-[0148]). 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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20200308404A1 (Liu), which is listed in Applicant’s information disclosure statement. Regarding claims 1 and 4, Liu teaches a thermally conductive composition comprises : a polyorganosiloxane which has an average per molecule of at least two unsaturated organic group, i.e., alkenyl groups ([0013] and [0017]), which meets the claimed (A). an organohydrogenpolysiloxane having an average of at least two silicon-bonded hydrogen atoms per molecule ([0037]), which meets the claimed (B); a single thermally conductive filler or a combination of two or more thermally conductive fillers ([0034]), which meets the claimed (C); and a compound of the formula ([0029], formula (I)): PNG media_image1.png 100 396 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein Ra can be an alkyl group having 1 to 6 carbon atoms ([0029]), which renders the claimed alkyl group having 4 or more carbon atoms or butyl group and the claimed polysiloxane (D) obvious since it has been held that in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside range disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 f. 2d 257,191 USPQ 90(CCPA 1976). See MPEP 2144.05.I. Regarding claims 2 and 3, Liu teaches that in formula (I) ([0029]), Rb can be an acrylate or methacrylate group, which meets the claimed reactive group and (meth)acryloyl group in polysiloxane compound (D). Regarding claim 5, Liu teaches the composition cures to form a cured polymer material ([0055]). Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2021/0359355A1 (Schmitt) in view of Liu. Schmitt teaches a battery module comprises a plurality of battery cells arranged in the form of a stack of battery cells, which are enclosed by a mechanical bracing device ([0008] and Figure 1), which meets the module housing, wherein a thermally conductive in the form of a gap filler is located between the outer face of the stack of battery cells and the mechanical bracing device ([0009], [0012] and Figure 1). Schmitt does not teach the instantly claimed thermally conductive gap filler. Liu teaches a thermally conductive composition comprises : a polyorganosiloxane which has an average per molecule of at least two unsaturated organic group, i.e., alkenyl groups ([0013] and [0017]), which meets the claimed (A). an organohydrogenpolysiloxane having an average of at least two silicon-bonded hydrogen atoms per molecule ([0037]), which meets the claimed (B); a single thermally conductive filler or a combination of two or more thermally conductive fillers ([0034]), which meets the claimed (C); and a compound of the formula ([0029], formula (I)): PNG media_image1.png 100 396 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein Ra can be an alkyl group having 1 to 6 carbon atoms ([0029]), which renders the claimed alkyl group having 4 or more carbon atoms or butyl group and the claimed polysiloxane (D) obvious since it has been held that in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside range disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 f. 2d 257,191 USPQ 90(CCPA 1976). See MPEP 2144.05.I. Liu teaches the composition cures to form a cured polymer material on an article ([0055]), which can be electronic components([0056]), wherein the interface between the surface of the article and the surface of the cured polymer material is fully contacted with no or quite less air spaces therefore improved thermal conductivity ([0002], [0007] and [0055]). At the time the invention was made it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to include the cured thermally conductive polymer as the thermally conductive gap filler material of Schmitt. The rationale to do so would have been the motivation provided by the teaching of Liu that to do so would predictably provide full contact between the interfaces therefore improved thermal conductivity ([0007] and [0055]), which is desirable by Schmit ([0012] and [0038]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIQUN LI whose telephone number is (571)270-7736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am -4:00 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-2721302. 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. /AIQUN LI/ Ph.D., Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600894
LIGNIN-BASED DRILLING FLUIDS AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597596
NANO-SILICON-GRAPHITE COMPOSITE NEGATIVE ELECTRODE MATERIAL WITH CARBON COATING AND ALUMINUM METAPHOSPHATE COMPOSITE MODIFICATION LAYER ON SURFACE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592654
MOISTURE ENABLED ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION MATERIALS AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577451
POLYANIONIC SURFACTANTS AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576430
Method of Pretreating a Pipeline or Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+22.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 822 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month