Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/279,019

BATTERY ASSEMBLY HAVING IMPROVED SAFETY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 25, 2023
Examiner
SUN, MICHAEL Y
Art Unit
1728
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
293 granted / 519 resolved
-8.5% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
573
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
61.9%
+21.9% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 519 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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. (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. Claim(s) 1- 7, 9- 17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 and a2 as being anticipated by Itoi (US Pub No. 2012/0164490) Regarding Claim 1 , Itoi et al. teaches a battery assembly [Fig. 22, 0042, 0116] comprising: a plurality of battery cells [100, Fig. 2, 0046 ] ; and a vent [ Entire Fig. 3, and 60 in figure s 2-3 , 0046, 0049 ] located between adjacent battery cells of the plurality of battery cells [See plurality of 100, Fig. 2, 0116 , a portion of the vent is located between the battery cells meeting the limitations of between adjacent battery cells ] , the vent comprising a venting passage [60, Fig. 2, 0050] therein, and configured to discharge venting gas discharged from the plurality of battery cells [Fig. 2-3, 0049, 0054]. Regarding Claim 2 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches further comprising a cell case [20, Fig. 2, 0050] having an inner space in which the plurality of battery cells and the vent are accommodated [Fig. 2 , 0049 ] . Regarding Claim 3 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the cell case comprises two-unit cases that are coupled to each other [ Fig. 21 , 0115 ] . Regarding Claim 4 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi 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 [see annotated figure] . Examiner used circle to show upper bent portion and rectangle to show lower bend portion. 4158339 1114177 1876315 986956 Regarding Claim 5 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches further comprising an end cover [21, Fig.15 , 0051 ] covering an opening formed in the cell case [Fig. 15, 0051]. Regarding Claim 6 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent is formed in a plate shape [Fig. 9, 0088]. Regarding Claim 7 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises an inlet [See 8a, Fig. 4, 0046] formed in a first side surface facing the plurality of battery cells and an outlet [14, Fig. 3, 0045-0046] formed in a second side surface not facing the plurality of battery cells [Fig. 2, 0071] . Regarding Claim 9 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises two inlets [See 8a and 12a, Fig. 4, 0046] corresponding to one battery cell of the plurality of battery cells, and an outlet [14, Fig. 3, 0045-0046] formed between the two inlets. Regarding Claim 10 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi 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, 0050-0051]. Regarding Claim 11 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi 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, 0050-0051] . Regarding Claim 12 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises an outer partition wall [31, Fig. 3, 0054] 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. 3, 0054] . Regarding Claim 13 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises, in an inner space, an inner partition wall dividing the venting passage into a plurality of unit passages [the structure of 14 as inner partition wall in figure 3 , 0045 ] . Regarding Claim 14 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises two or more inlets [See 8a and 12a, Fig. 4, 0046] connected to different unit passages of the plurality of unit passages [Fig. 2-3, and Fig. 21, 0115 ] . Regarding Claim 15 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the cell case is configured to be stackable in a longitudinal direction [Fig. 22 , 0116 ] . Regarding Claim 16 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches a battery module comprising a plurality of battery assemblies according to claim 1 [Fig. 22, 0116] . Regarding Claim 17 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches battery pack comprising a plurality of battery assemblies according to claim 1 [Fig 22, 0116] . Regarding Claim 19 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. teaches wherein the two or more inlets [See 8a and 12a, Fig. 4, 0046] connected to different unit passages are offset from one another in a vertical direction [Fig. 21 , 0115 ] . Regarding Claim 20 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi 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 [see annotated figure] . The line is the first side surface, the dotted line is the second side surface, the circles are used to indicated the top, bottom, and side edges 2483760 797036 0 0 2514213 1084166 4303257 1004239 526387 948994 659764 1313870 604106 1186649 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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi (US Pub No. 2012/0164490) Regarding Claim 8 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi et al. is silent on wherein the vent comprises an inlet formed in a portion facing terrace portions of the adjacent battery cells . Itoi et al. teaches wherein the vent comprises an inlet [8a, Fig. 4, 0055] formed in a portion facing terrace portions of the adjacent battery cells [Fig. 4]. Since Itoi et al. teaches in figure 3 a vent for a battery assembly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to modify the vent in figure 3 of Itoi et al. with the vent configuration of Itoi in figure 4 as it is merely the selection of a conventional 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.). Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi (US Pub No. 2012/0164490) in view of Hill (US Pub No. 2010/0025132) Regarding Claim 18 , Itoi et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Itoi 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 Itoi 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 Itoi 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.). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MICHAEL Y SUN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-0557 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT MATTHEW MARTIN can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 25, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603284
MANUFACTURING METHOD OF ANODE ACTIVE MATERIAL AND SECONDARY BATTERY COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603606
Photovoltaic module assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12568693
HIGH-EFFICIENCY SILICON HETEROJUNCTION SOLAR CELL AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563856
LAMINATED PASSIVATION STRUCTURE OF SOLAR CELL AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12562682
HYBRID RECEIVER FOR CONCENTRATED PHOTOVOLTAIC-THERMAL POWER SYSTEMS, AND ASSOCIATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
56%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+27.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 519 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