CTNF 18/287,282 CTNF 83744 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 § 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji (JP-2018160405A) in view of Zhang et al. (WO2020/067161) using US 2021/0074983A1 as English equivalent document . Regarding Claim 1, Zhang et al. reference discloses a battery comprising: a housing comprising an opening (Figure 1, numerals 20 – casing, 21A - opening) ; a positive electrode that is at least partially disposed within the housing (Figure 1, numeral 32 – positive electrode and Paragraph [0023]) ; a negative electrode that is at least partially disposed within the housing (Figure 1, numeral 34 – negative electrode and Paragraph [0023]) ; an electrolyte disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Paragraphs [0014] and [0018]– electrolytic solution) ; and at least one densified expanded polymer membrane covering the opening of the housing, wherein the electrolyte is configured to release at least one gas during operation of the battery (Figure 2, numeral 500 - gasket and Paragraphs [0024], and [0026]) , wherein the at least one gas is chosen from Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ), Hydrogen (H 2 ), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Methane (CH 4 ) or any combination thereof (Paragraph [0027]) ; and wherein the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane has a CO 2 permeability greater/higher than the water vapour permeability (Paragraphs [0034]-[0037] – increasing the exposed area inside the battery of the gasket, it is possible to increase the amount of permeation of gas such as carbon dioxide gas generated inside the battery to the outside of the battery) . However, Koji does not disclose that the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane has a CO2 permeability to the water vapour permeability ratio of more than 0.5. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the claimed ratio for the CO2/water permeability, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). However, Koji does not disclose that the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane has a crystallinity of 75% to 100%. Zhang et al. reference discloses a separator for an electricity storage device such ad lithium ion batteries (Abstract and Paragraph [0002]) wherein the separator comprising a polyolefin microporous membrane having degree of crystallinity of the polyethylene of the polyolefin microporous membrane is 80 to 99% as measured by X-ray diffraction (XRD), and the crystallite size of the polyethylene of the polyolefin microporous membrane is 14.2 to 40.0 nm as measured by XRD (Paragraph [0021]) . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the polyolefin microporous membrane as taught by Zhang et al., since Zhang et al. states at Paragraph [0013] that such a modification would provide a separator for an electricity storage device having usable quality. Regarding Claim 2, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane is an at least one densified expanded fluoropolymer membrane (Zhang et al. - Paragraph [0097] – fluorine-based resins such as polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and polytetrafluoroethylene). Regarding Claim 3, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 2, wherein the at least one densified fluoropolymer membrane comprises PTFE (Zhang et al. - Paragraph [0097] – fluorine-based resins such as polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and polytetrafluoroethylene). Regarding Claim 4, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane comprises a copolymer (Zhang et al. - Paragraph [0097] – fluorine-based resins such as copolymers of ethylene and vinyl alcohol, copolymers of C 2 -C 12 α-olefins and carbon monoxide). Regarding Claim 5, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1 except for the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane has a CO 2 permeability to water vapour permeability ratio of more than 0.55. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the claimed ratio for the CO2/water permeability, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding Claim 6, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1 except for the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane has a CO 2 permeability to water vapour permeability ratio of more than 1.0. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the claimed ratio for the CO2/water permeability, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding Claim 7, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane has a density of 0.8 g/cm 3 to 2.4 g/cm 3 (Zhang et al. – Paragraphs [0237] – 3.00 g/cm 3 and [0239] – 1.35g/cm 3 ) . Regarding Claim 8, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane is sintered (Zhang et al. – Paragraphs [0104]-[0110] – heat treating the porous body at a temperature below the melting point of the porous body). Regarding Claim 9, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the battery is a secondary battery (Abstract – secondary battery). Regarding Claim 10, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 9, wherein the secondary battery is a lithium-ion battery (Abstract – nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji (JP-2018160405A) in view of Zhang et al. (WO2020/067161) using US 2021/0074983A1 as English equivalent document and Shen et al. (CN-202888289U) . Regarding Claim 11, Koji and Zhang et al. references discloses the battery of claim 1 including an insulating layer except for the battery comprises a composite vent covering the opening of the housing, the composite vent comprising the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane and at least one additional membrane, the at least one additional membrane being located between the housing and the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane. Shen et al. reference discloses a new-type lithium battery composite membrane, the composite membrane comprises a polytetrafluoroethylene microporous membrane, micro-porous, polyimide modified membrane, polyvinylidene fluoride, polytetrafluoroethylene microporous membrane is provided with a micro-hole, polyimide modified membrane provided lower surface on the polytetrafluoroethylene microporous membrane, polyvinylidene fluoride is the polyimide modified membrane outer surface. polyimide modified membrane of the utility model of new lithium battery composite separator by polytetrafluoroethylene microporous film with high temperature resistance is set, and polyvinylidene fluoride with over-charging performance, improves the overall performance of the lithium battery, the lithium battery is stable and safe work (Abstract and Figure 1, numerals 1 - polytetrafluoroethylene microporous membrane, 2- polyimide modified membrane, and 3-polyvinylidene fluoride). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery with composite vent layer as taught by Shen et al., since Shen et al. states at Abstract that such a modification would improve the overall performance of the lithium battery, wherein the lithium battery is stable and safe work. Regarding Claim 12, Koji, Zhang et al., and Shen et al. references discloses the battery of claim 11, wherein at least one additional membrane comprises a porous fluoropolymer (Shen et al. – Figure 1 and Paragraph [0009] - PTFE). Regarding Claim 13, Koji, Zhang et al., and Deng et al. references discloses the battery of claim 12, wherein the porous fluoropolymer is expanded PTFE (Shen et al. – Figure 1 and Paragraph [0009] - PTFE). Regarding Claim 14, Koji, Zhang et al., and Deng et al. references discloses the battery of claim 11, wherein the composite vent comprises an intermediate layer located between the at least one densified expanded polymer membrane and the at least one additional membrane (Shen et al. – Figure 1, numerals 2 and 3 and Paragraph [0009] - PVDF) . Regarding Claim 15, Koji, Zhang et al., and Deng et al. references discloses the battery of claim 14, wherein the intermediate layer comprises a perfluoropolymer selected from fluorinated ethylene propylene polymer (FEP), perfluoroalkoxy alkane (PFA), a terpolymer of tetrafluoroethylene, hexafluoropropylene and vinylidene fluoride (THV), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), and ethylene tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE) (Shen et al. – Figure 1, numerals 2 and 3 and Paragraph [0009] - PVDF) . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUY-TRAM NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3167. The examiner can normally be reached M-W, 7:00am - 3pm, 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 supervisor, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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. /HUY TRAM NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 2 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 3 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 4 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 5 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 6 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 7 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/287,282 Page 8 Art Unit: 1774