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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 14 Sept 2023, 29, July 2025, 13 Oct 2025, and 15 April 2026 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Each drawing Figure identifier reads “Figur” and not “Figure”.
The reference numbers of the drawings are not clear and easily reproducible.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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) 18-25, 27, 31-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shelekhin et al (US 20040028995).
Regarding Claim 18, Shelekhin et al disclose a pressure equalization device (abstract; Figures 1, 1A and 1B) for equalizing an internal pressure in a battery housing (Figure 1 within 90; ¶ 31). The device comprising:
a housing (15 and 30) defining an interior (from within 90 as shown in Figure 1) and an exterior (outside of 90 toward the top as shown in the orientation of Figure 1), the housing (15 and 30) including at least one gas passage opening (70) communicating the interior and the exterior (Figure 1), the housing including a diaphragm mount (30);
a gas-tight diaphragm (20) mounted on the diaphragm mount (Figure 1) and closing off the gas passage opening (Figure 1; ¶ 33); and
a cutting element (75 generally) configured such that in an event of a deformation of the diaphragm the cutting element cuts the diaphragm at least at one location to establish a flow connection between the interior and the exterior through the gas passage opening (¶ 34), the cutting element including a spring section (the cantilevered section of 75 generally that connects between the housing 15 and the tip 78) coupling the cutting element directly or indirectly to the housing (Figure 1) such that in the event of the deformation of the diaphragm the cutting element is displaced at least partially (at least partially by virtue of having free end 78 cantilevered into the opening 70).
Regarding Claim 19, Shelekhin et al disclose where the cutting element (75 generally) includes a deflection piece (the free end generally of 75) bearing against the diaphragm in at least one operating position of the diaphragm (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 20, Shelekhin et al disclose where the deflection piece (the free end generally of 75) includes a surface (the bottom surface as shown in the orientation of Figure 1) bearing against the diaphragm when an equal ambient pressure is present in both the interior and the exterior of the housing (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 21, Shelekhin et al disclose where the deflection piece (the free end generally of 75) and/or the spring section (the cantilevered section of 75 generally that connects between the housing 15 and the tip 78) are engaged with the diaphragm in a form-fitting manner (both shown formed to the diaphragm in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 22, Shelekhin et al disclose where the cutting element (75 generally) is integrally connected to the housing (to 15 as seen in Figure 1A).
Regarding Claim 23, Shelekhin et al disclose where the housing includes a circumferential inner panel (the depth of the housing 15 shown in the Y direction of the orientation of Figure 1) delimiting the gas passage opening (70; Figure 1); and the cutting element (75 generally) protrudes from the circumferential inner panel in the form of a tongue projecting from the circumferential inner panel into the gas passage opening (Figure 1A).
Regarding Claim 24, Shelekhin et al disclose where the cutting element (75 generally) includes first and second rims (the surfaces of element 75 that connect the tip 78 to the housing 15 and shown in the Y direction of the orientation of Figure 1) on opposite sides of the cutting element (Figure 1A), the rims laterally delimiting the cutting element (Figure 1A), wherein the first and second rims converge towards each other in a direction from the circumferential inner panel towards a free end of the cutting element along at least part of a length of the cutting element (to 78).
Regarding Claim 25, Shelekhin et al disclose where at least a portion of the cutting element forms a blade (the top 78 which functions as a blade by puncturing the membrane as discussed in ¶ 34).
Regarding Claim 27, Shelekhin et al disclose where the diaphragm includes an outer face communicated with the exterior of the housing (at the top as seen in the orientation of Figure 1) and an inner face communicated with the interior of the housing (at the bottom as seen in the orientation of Figure 1); and
the cutting element (75 generally) engages the outer face of the diaphragm when the diaphragm is in a non-pressurized position (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 31, Shelekhin et al disclose where the housing (15) includes a mounting surface (18) for mounting the pressure equalization device on the battery housing (via 85), and a circumferential sealing section on the mounting surface (the portion engaging 85 as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 32, Shelekhin et al disclose where the circumferential sealing section includes a circumferential seal (85; Figure 1), the circumferential seal being a separate component from the mounting surface (from 18; Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 33, Shelekhin et al disclose where the circumferential sealing section (the portion engaging 85 as seen in Figure 1) includes a circumferential energy director protrusion formed integrally on the mounting surface (the protrusion pumping out of the bottom of 17 shown in the orientation of Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 34, Shelekhin et al disclose where the housing (15) includes an integrally formed cover extending circumferentially around the gas passage opening and projecting radially outwards on the housing (Figure 1A).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 28 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelekhin et al (US 20040028995) in view of Goggin (US 20130192688).
Regarding Claim 28, Shelekhin et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose a travel limiter including a stop spaced from the cutting element in a direction towards the exterior of the housing, the travel limiter being configured such that the cutting element strikes against the stop when the diaphragm is deformed.
Goggin teaches a pressure equalization device (Figures; ¶ 4) with a travel limiter (30 generally; Figure 3) including a stop (33) spaced from the cutting element (23; Figure 3) in a direction towards the exterior of the housing (downward in the orientation of Figure 3), the travel limiter (30 generally) being configured such that the cutting element (23) strikes against the stop when the diaphragm is deformed (in the downward direction as shown in the orientation of Figure 3; ¶ 48).
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 pressure equalization device of Shelekhin et al with the travel limiter as taught by Goggin for the advantage of supporting the cutting element and diaphragm and absorbing kinetic energy formed from the rupture of the diaphragm, as taught by Goggin (¶ 48-49).
Regarding Claim 30, Goggin teaches a housing (the circumferential perimeter of 30 shown in Figure 4), the housing includes a circumferential inner panel delimiting the gas passage opening (Figure 3); and the travel limiter (30 generally) includes a spacer (the section between the tip of 33 and the circumferential perimeter of 30) holding the stop (33) spaced apart from the circumferential inner panel (and into the gas passage opening as seen in Figure 3).
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Shelekhin et al (US 20040028995) in view of Goggin (US 20130192688).
Regarding Claim 29, Goggin teaches where the travel limiter (30 generally) includes a connection section (the perimeter of 30), but fails to expressly teach where the connection section is integrally connected to the housing.
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 travel limiter of Goggin to be integral with the housing disclosed in Shelekhin et al et al since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to reduce manufacturing material waste or decrease assembly time by decreasing the number of discrete elements.
Claim(s) 35-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelekhin et al (US 20040028995) in view of Huff (US 2225220).
Regarding Claim 35, Shelekhin et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the housing includes an integrally formed connector protruding towards the exterior of the housing, the connector being connected to the gas passage opening in a gas-conveying manner, the connector forming an outlet opening.
Huff teaches a pressure equalization device (Figure 2) with a housing (10 and 20) where the housing includes an integrally formed connector protruding towards the exterior of the housing (6; Figure 2), the connector being connected to the gas passage opening in a gas-conveying manner (Figure 3), the connector forming an outlet opening (Figure 2).
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 device of Shelekhin et al with the connector as taught by Hugg for the advantage of combining prior art elements according to known methods (a connector to a housing) to yield predictable results (to allow for connection of additional pipework or systems to the pressure equalization device).
Regarding Claim 36, Shelekhin et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the housing includes an integrally formed mounting part protruding towards the interior of the housing, the mounting part including a threaded section for connection of the pressure equalization device to the battery housing, the mounting part including an inner panel delimiting a gas passage communicated with the gas passage opening in a gas-conveying manner.
Huff teaches a pressure equalization device (Figure 2) with a housing (10 and 20) where the housing includes an integrally formed mounting part (9) protruding towards the interior of the housing (Figure 1), the mounting part including a threaded section (Figure 2 at 9) for connection of the pressure equalization device to the battery housing (to 3 of Huff where Shelekhin et al disclose the housing being a battery housing), the mounting part including an inner panel (within 13) delimiting a gas passage communicated with the gas passage opening in a gas-conveying manner (Figure 3).
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 device of Shelekhin et al with the connector as taught by Hugg for the advantage of combining prior art elements according to known methods (a connector to a housing) to yield predictable results (to allow for connection of additional pipework or systems to the pressure equalization device).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM 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 supervisors, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. 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.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights