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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 6/12/2026 does not put the application in condition for allowance.
Examiner withdraws all rejections in the prior office action due to the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Kang (CN211743231, Machine Translation)
Regarding Claim 1, Kang et al. teaches a battery assembly [Fig. 1-2, bottom of page 2] comprising:
a plurality of battery cells [3, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2]; and
a vent [5, 6, and 9, Fig. 1, bottom of page 2] inserted between side surfaces [Fig. 2] of adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2, to top of page 3],
the vent comprising a venting passage [6, Fig. 1, bottom of page 2] therein, and configured to discharge venting gas discharged from the plurality of battery cells [middle of page 3].
Regarding Claim 2, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches further comprising a cell case [1, Fig. 2, top to middle of page 3] having an inner space in which the plurality of battery cells and the vent are accommodated [Fig. 2, top to middle of page 3].
Regarding Claim 3, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the cell case comprises two-unit cases that are coupled to each other [Fig. 2, top to middle of page 3].
Regarding Claim 4, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein each of the two-unit cases comprises a main body formed in a plate shape, an upper bent portion bent in a horizontal direction at an upper end of the main body, and a lower bent portion bent in the horizontal direction at a lower end of the main body [Fig. 1-2, the structure in figure 2 shows a rectangular structure and would have an upper bent portion bent in a horizontal direction at an upper end of the main body, and a lower bent portion bent in the horizontal direction at a lower end of the main body]
Regarding Claim 5, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches further comprising an end cover [2, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2] covering an opening formed in the cell case [1, Fig. 2, top to middle of page 3].
Regarding Claim 6, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent is formed in a plate shape [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2].
Regarding Claim 7, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises an inlet [Fig. 1, bottom of page 2, see area of 5 closer to the battery] formed in a first side surface facing the plurality of battery cells and an outlet [see other side of 5 in the area of 6, Fig. 1, bottom of page 2 ] formed in a second side surface not facing the plurality of battery cells [Fig. 2, 0071].
Regarding Claim 8, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises an inlet formed in a portion facing terrace portions of the adjacent battery cells [see area of 5 for the inlets, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2].
Regarding Claim 9, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises two inlets [see plurality 5 facing batteries, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2] corresponding to one battery cell of the plurality of battery cells, and an outlet [see opposite side of plurality of 5 facing area of 6, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2] formed between the two inlets.
Regarding Claim 10, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent is configured so that a flow direction of a fluid introduced into an inlet of the vent and a flow direction of a fluid flowing through the venting passage are perpendicular to each other [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2, and in figure 1, see 5 for the inlet and 6 for the passage perpendicular to 5].
Regarding Claim 11, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent is configured so that a flow direction of a fluid flowing through the venting passage and a flow direction of a fluid discharged to an outlet of the vent are perpendicular to each other [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2, and in figure 1, see 5 for the inlet and 6 for the passage perpendicular to 5].
Regarding Claim 12, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises an outer partition wall [4, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2] protruding outward from a surface to be located between two battery cells of the plurality of battery cells located on a same side surface of the vent [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2].
Regarding Claim 13, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises, in an inner space [see area of 6, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2], an inner partition wall [see 7, Fig. 1, bottom of page 2] dividing the venting passage into a plurality of unit passages [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2, 7 divides the plurality of inlets 5 in figure 1].
Regarding Claim 14, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises two or more inlets [see plurality of 5, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2] connected to different unit passages of the plurality of unit passages [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2, each 5 is a different ventilation passage].
Regarding Claim 15, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the cell case is configured to be stackable in a longitudinal direction [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2].
Regarding Claim 16, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches a battery module comprising a plurality of battery assemblies according to claim 1 [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2].
Regarding Claim 17, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches battery pack comprising a plurality of battery assemblies according to claim 1 [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2].
Regarding Claim 19, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. wherein the two or more inlets [see plurality of 5, Fig. 2, bottom of page 2] connected to different unit passages are offset from one another in a vertical direction [Fig. 2, bottom of page 2, each 5 is a different ventilation passage].
Regarding Claim 20, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. teaches wherein the vent has a first side surface facing a first battery cell of the plurality of battery cells, a second side surface facing a second battery cell of the plurality of battery cells, a top edge, a bottom edge and a pair of side edges, and wherein an inlet of the venting passage is formed in the first side surface and an outlet of the venting passage is formed in the bottom edge [Fig. 1-2, bottom of page 2].
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.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kang (CN21174323, Machine Translation) in view of Hill (US Pub No. 2010/0025132)
Regarding Claim 18, Kang et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Kang et al. is silent on a vehicle comprising a plurality of battery assemblies according to claim 1.
Hill et al. teaches a battery assembly for a vehicle [Fig. 2A, 0050].
Since Kang et al. teaches the use of a battery assembly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to apply the battery assembly of Kang et al. in place of the battery assembly of Hill et al. as it is merely the selection of a convention engineering design and one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so.
The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, A.).
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MICHAEL Y SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-0557. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-7PM.
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, MATTHEW MARTIN can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/MICHAEL Y SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights