Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/278,534

BATTERY PACK, AND ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM AND VEHICLE INCLUDING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 23, 2023
Examiner
RAYMOND, BRITTANY L
Art Unit
1722
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
774 granted / 1006 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1039
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.8%
+12.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1006 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
CTNF 18/278,534 CTNF 82989 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 8 and 16 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. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the at least one vent hole" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 should be dependent off of claim 4. Claim 16 recites the limitation "the at least one discharge opening" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The discharge opening is discussed in claim 9. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0097192) . Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses a battery module 10 including a battery cell 100 that can have a plurality of cells, a case frame 200, and a case cover 300 on each end of the case frame, wherein the case cover comprises a cover frame, 310, guide barriers 320, 330, 340, a cover outlet 350 for discharging gas, an anti-exposure channel 360, a mesh member 370, a flame retardant member 380, and a pre-filter 390 (Paragraphs 0032, 0034, 0038 and Figs. 2-3). Kim teaches that the case covers 300 are spaced apart from the battery cell for blocking flames (Paragraphs 0067 and Fig. 5). Kim teaches every limitation of claim 13 of the present invention and thus anticipates the claim . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-12 and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (WO Publication 2020-188949, U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0149477 will be used as an English translation) in view of Kim (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0097192) . Regarding claim 1, Yoshida discloses a battery module comprising: a plurality of batteries 14; a module casing including end plates 4, a bottom cooling plate 6, constraining members 12, and a cover plate 60; and a duct plate 28 comprising gas restricting wall portions 98 (baffles) that are inclined from the battery surface toward the cover plate and used to push gas through an opening to flow path outlets 80 to remove gas to the outside of the battery module (Paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0056, 0079 and Fig. 7). As to claim 2, Yoshida teaches a duct plate 28 having gas restricting wall portions 98 (first barrier) and a wall portion 34, 36 (second barrier) that covers the gas restricting wall portions (Paragraph 0079 and Fig. 7). Regarding claims 3 and 5, Yoshida shows that a first surface of the duct plate 28 faces the batteries while a second opposite surface includes the gas restricting wall portions 98 (Fig. 7). As to claims 4, 5 and 8, Yoshida teaches that the duct plate 28 has a plurality of openings 32 that are between the gas restricting wall portions 98, and the gas restricting wall portions partially cover the openings (Paragraph 0031 and Fig. 7). Regarding claim 6, Yoshida discloses that the wall portion 34, 36 is spaced from the openings 32 to create a gas discharge duct 38 that allows gas to flow to the outside of the module (Paragraph 0054 and Fig. 7). As to claim 7, Yoshida shows in Fig. 7 that the gas restricting wall portions 98 extends into the gas discharge duct 38. Regarding claims 9 and 10, Yoshida teaches that the gas exits the batteries in a z-direction, impinges on the wall portion 34, 36 and then moves in both directions perpendicular to z-direction (Paragraph 0056). As to claims 14 and 15, Yoshida states that the battery module can be used as a power source in a vehicle or the like that requires a high output voltage (Paragraph 0002). Yoshida fails to disclose that the gas barriers are formed on both sides/ends of the battery module so that the gas escapes in an up and down motion from the gas discharge duct. Regarding claims 1, 9-12 16 and 17, Kim discloses a battery module 10 including a battery cell 100 that can have a plurality of cells, a case frame 200, and a case cover 300 on each end of the case frame, wherein the case cover comprises a cover frame, 310, guide barriers 320, 330, 340, a cover outlet 350 for discharging gas, an anti-exposure channel 360, a mesh member 370, a flame retardant member 380, and a pre-filter 390 (Paragraphs 0032, 0034, 0038 and Figs. 2-3). Regarding claims 1 and 11, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the gas barriers of Yoshida could be formed on both sides of the battery module because Kim shows that battery modules can be formed with the battery stack on its side so that the terminals extend from side to side rather than upward, as in Yoshida. Therefore, if the gas barrier arrangement of Yoshida is used on a battery stacked like Kim, the arrangement would be formed on the sides. As to claims 9 and 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordoinary skill in the art that if the gas barrier arrangement of Yoshida was used on the sides of the battery module, the side openings where gas escapes would then be at the top and bottom of the module. Regarding claims 12, 16 and 17, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the gas restricting wall portions or the gas discharge openings of Yoshida could include mesh material because Kim teaches that mesh material within a gas flow pathway helps to stretch out and change direction of the gas path so that it further improves flame prevention. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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. BRITTANY L. RAYMOND Primary Examiner Art Unit 1722 /BRITTANY L RAYMOND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722 Application/Control Number: 18/278,534 Page 2 Art Unit: 1722 Application/Control Number: 18/278,534 Page 3 Art Unit: 1722 Application/Control Number: 18/278,534 Page 4 Art Unit: 1722 Application/Control Number: 18/278,534 Page 5 Art Unit: 1722 Application/Control Number: 18/278,534 Page 6 Art Unit: 1722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603324
LOCALIZED HIGH SALT CONCENTRATION ELECTROLYTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598747
FABRICATING THREE-DIMENSIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592434
Apparatus and Method for Shaping Pouch Film for Secondary Batteries
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586807
FUEL CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585192
IMPRINT METHOD FOR FABRICATION OF LOW DENSITY NANOPORE MEMBRANE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
77%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1006 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