DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1, 4-8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 106280466).
Zhou discloses a flame-retardant and fire-resistant silicone polymer composition and laminates thereof. Concerning claim 1, Zhou discloses the silicone polymer composition comprises a silicone polymer, mica particles, flame retardants, coupling agents, and a plurality of glass additives that can be in powder form that have a softening point from 300°C to 1050°C, wherein the glass powders can have different softening points and such a composition is disposed on another sheet (para. 0007-0149). Regarding the thickness ratio as claimed, Zhou discloses depends upon the specific requirements (para. 0065). While it is noted that this specific application with respect to the thickness is in regard to cabling, Examiner takes the position that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the thickness ratio to the claimed ratio, in order to meet the specific requirements for the specific application. Examiner notes that the term “for batteries” is a statement of intended use and given that the structure is the same as that claimed, the laminate of Zhou meets the instant limitations when in a laminate form. Additionally, since there is no material or specific definition of “impact-resistant material”, any layer can meet the claimed and as such, the disclosure of further layers by Zhou would meet the instant limitations.
With respect to claim 4, Zhou discloses an embodiment showing a 1:1 ratio of the higher and lower softening point glass powders in the siloxane composition (para. 0082). Concerning claims 5 and 6, Zhou discloses that blends of glass additives having high and low softening points provide compositions that produce ceramics upon heating, wherein such compositions exhibit good mechanical properties after exposure to a wide range of temperatures (para. 0029). As such, in order to exhibit good mechanical properties after exposure to a wide range of temperatures, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have the claimed glass powders with softening points within the claimed ranges and ratio. Regarding claims 7 and 8, the glass powders include silicon oxide and other metal oxides including some of the claimed oxides (para. 0066). In regards to claim 12, since the materials and structure are the same, the laminate of Zhou would meet the limitations of claim 12.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 9-11 are 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. The prior art is silent to the combination of the elements as presented in claims 2-3 and the independent claim and claims 9-11 and the independent claim. Examiner notes that claim 9 depends upon claim 6 and as such, any amendments to that effect would require the limitations of claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lou et al. (Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry) discloses flame-retarded silicone rubber compositions. Evans et al. (US 20210167438) discloses components to manage thermal runaway issues in EV batteries. Zhang et al. (CN 107141811) discloses a ceramicized silicone rubber composition comprising at least two different glass powders. Dietz et al. (WO 2021/144758) discloses a thermal runaway barrier for rechargeable batteries.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRASHANT J KHATRI whose telephone number is (571)270-3470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6:30PM.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
PRASHANT J. KHATRI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/PRASHANT J KHATRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783