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 .
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s specification (“spec”) are to the published application US 2025/0087809-A1, unless stated otherwise. Further, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed February 1, 2024 and June 8, 2026 is in compliance with 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The use of the term “PPM Triazine” [0014], which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC§ 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 15-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The term “composed of” of the phrase “composed of a plastic” in claims 15, 23 and 28 is a transitional phrase which renders the claim indefinite. The transitional phrase “composed of” has been interpreted in the same manner as either “consisting of” or “consisting essentially of,” depending on the facts of the particular case. See AFG Industries, Inc. v. Cardinal IG Company, 239 F.3d 1239, 1245, 57 USPQ2d 1776, 1780-81 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (based on specification and other evidence, “composed of” interpreted in same manner as “consisting essentially of”); In re Bertsch, 132 F.2d 1014, 1019-20, 56 USPQ 379, 384 (CCPA 1942) (“Composed of” interpreted in same manner as “consisting of”; however, the court further remarked that “the words ‘composed of’ may under certain circumstances be given, in patent law, a broader meaning than ‘consisting of.’”) (MPEP 2111.03.IV).
The term “composed of” of the phrase “composed of a plastic,” renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of the scope of the claimed invention, and the public would not be able to determine the boundaries of what constitutes infringement (see MPEP 2173, MPEP 2111.01(II)).
Claims 16-22 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent on claims 15 and therefore include, and do not remedy the indefiniteness issues of claim 15 identified hereinabove.
Claims 24-27 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent on claim 23 and therefore include, and do not remedy the indefiniteness issues of claim 23 identified hereinabove.
The term “PPM Triazine” of the phrase “at least one of the following materials: ammonium polyphosphate, PPM Triazine” in claim 20 is indefinite. The relationship between a trademark or tradename and the product it identifies is sometimes indefinite, uncertain and arbitrary. The formula or characteristics of the product may change from time to time and yet it may continue to be sold under the same trademark or tradename. In patent specifications and claims, every element or ingredient of the product should be set forth in positive, exact, intelligible language, so that there will be no uncertainty as to what is meant. Arbitrary trademarks or trade names which are liable to mean different things at the pleasure of manufacturers do not constitute such language, Ex parte Kattwinkle, 12 USPQ 11 (Bd. Apps. 1931). Appropriate correction is required.
The term “EPP” of the phrase “the foam is EPP” in claims 16 is an abbreviation which lacks antecedent basis and renders the claim indefinite.
The term “EPP” of the phrase “the foam is EPP,” renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of the scope of the claimed invention, and the public would not be able to determine the boundaries of what constitutes infringement (see MPEP 2173, MPEP 2111.01(II)).
In order to overcome the indefiniteness issues identified above, and to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, the following amendments to claim 16 are respectfully suggested for clarity, of which find support in the specification as filed (expanded polypropylene (EPP) – [0006]):
“. . . the foam is expanded polypropylene (EPP) or polyisocyanurate.”
The term “fireproof” of the phrase “fireproof coating at least in certain regions” in claims 15 and 23 is a relative term which render the claim indefinite. The term “fireproof” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This therefore renders “fireproof coating” indefinite. It is noted that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed term “fireproof coating”, in view of the Applicant’s specification and for examination on the merits, is any degree of fire proofness.
Claims 16-22 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent on claims 15 and therefore include, and do not remedy the indefiniteness issues of claim 15 identified hereinabove.
Claims 24-27 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent on claim 23 and therefore include, and do not remedy the indefiniteness issues of claim 23 identified hereinabove.
The term “high” of the phrase “high-voltage stores” in claims 15, 23, and 28 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This therefore renders “high-voltage stores” indefinite. It is noted that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed term “high-voltage”, in view of the Applicant’s specification and for examination on the merits, is any value of voltage.
Claims 16-22 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent on claims 15 and therefore include, and do not remedy the indefiniteness issues of claim 15 identified hereinabove.
Claims 24-27 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent on claim 23 and therefore include, and do not remedy the indefiniteness issues of claim 23 identified hereinabove.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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) 15, 17-20, 22-23, 25, and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Grenier (WO-2020047059-A1; “Grenier”).
Regarding Claim 15, Grenier teaches lithium-ion batteries have an increased power density and, in hybrid or electric vehicles, may contain thousands of individual battery cells [0002] (high-voltage stores).
Grenier teaches that the resin (the main body) in the intumescent composition may comprise epoxy resin (a form of plastic) [0029].
Grenier teaches an intumescent layer that may prevent thermal runaway of the battery [Abstract] by providing fire protection in a vehicle comprising a lithium-ion battery [0001] (an absorber structure).
Grenier teaches that the intumescent layer is applied to at least a portion of the floor of the vehicle (arrangement surface) adjacent to the battery between the battery and the vehicle body [0008], where the term “battery” refers to an individual battery cell as well to a battery pack comprising a plurality of battery cells [0027] (for the arrangement of a multiplicity of energy storage cells).
Grenier teaches that the intumescent (fire protective, or fireproof) composition may comprise optional additives [0093], and the composition is applied as a coating [0007] and in case of a thermal runaway of a battery cell or the entire battery the spread of a fire is prevented or at least inhibited for a prolonged period of time [0004] as a result of the coating [0010] (increasing heat resistance of the main body).
Regarding Claim 17, Grenier teaches that the floor of the vehicle (the arrangement surface) has the coating ([0008], [0010]).
Regarding Claim 18, Grenier teaches a sprayed-on coating [0105].
Regarding Claim 19, Grenier teaches that the oligomeric or polymeric compound (the coating) may be polyurea [0029].
Regarding Claim 20, Grenier teaches additives included in the intumescent composition [0093], such as ammonium polyphosphate [0094].
Regarding Claim 22, Grenier teaches the crosslinked intumescent coating or the crosslinked intumescent self-supported film or sheet is at least partially applied to the external and/or internal side of any of the exterior wall elements and/or to any side of any of the interior wall elements, if present [0108], which forms a closed surface if applied to the entirety of the housing.
Regarding Claim 23, Grenier teaches lithium-ion batteries have an increased power density (for high-voltage stores) and, in hybrid or electric vehicles, may contain thousands of individual battery cells [0002] (an energy storage arrangement, comprising a multiplicity of energy storage cells).
Grenier teaches that the resin (the main body) in the intumescent composition may comprise epoxy resin (a form of plastic) [0029].
Grenier teaches an intumescent layer that may prevent thermal runaway of the battery [Abstract] by providing fire protection in a vehicle comprising a lithium-ion battery [0001] (an absorber structure).
Grenier teaches that the intumescent layer is applied to at least a portion of the floor of the vehicle (arrangement surface) adjacent to the battery between the battery and the vehicle body [0008], where the term “battery” refers to an individual battery cell as well to a battery pack comprising a plurality of battery cells [0027] (for the arrangement of a multiplicity of energy storage cells; the multiplicity of energy storage cells are arranged on the arrangement surface).
Grenier teaches that the intumescent (fire protective, or fireproof) composition may comprise optional additives [0093], and the composition is applied as a coating [0007] and in case of a thermal runaway of a battery cell or the entire battery the spread of a fire is prevented or at least inhibited for a prolonged period of time [0004] as a result of the coating [0010] (increasing heat resistance of the main body).
Regarding Claim 25, Grenier teaches that the battery, in particular lithium-ion battery, may be a battery pack comprising a plurality of individual battery cells, wherein the crosslinked intumescent coating or the crosslinked intumescent self-supported film or sheet is positioned to thermally insulate at least some of the individual battery cells from each other (intermediate spaces are formed between the energy storage cells, and the main body covers the intermediate spaces) in the expanded and optionally charred state . In addition, the curable intumescent coating composition or the crosslinked intumescent self-supported film or sheet may be applied to the housing walls and interior dividing walls of the battery pack [0109].
Regarding Claim 27, Grenier teaches that the battery may comprise exterior wall elements defining a housing (an energy store housing) and optionally interior wall elements, wherein the crosslinked intumescent coating or the crosslinked intumescent self-supported film or sheet is at least partially applied to the external and/or internal side of any of the exterior wall elements and/or to any side of any of the interior wall elements, if present [0108] (the absorber structure of the energy store arrangement is fastened to the housing).
Regarding Claim 28, Grenier teaches a method to provide fire protection to a battery (high voltage stores – [0002]). Grenier teaches that the resin (the main body) in the intumescent composition may comprise epoxy resin (a form of plastic) [0029].
Grenier teaches that the method reduces or prevents thermal runaway of a battery by applying the curable intumescent composition (increasing heat resistance) to any part of the battery to form a coating thereon and curing the coating to obtain a crosslinked intumescent coating thereon [0141].
Claim(s) 15, 21, 23, 24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Page (US-20150221914-A1; “Page”).
Regarding Claim 15, Page teaches a battery housing as shown in Fig. 3 of Page and Fig. 7 of Page below (the main body comprises an arrangement surface for arrangement of a multiplicity of energy storage cells) having a body and a lid mateable with the body [0006]. Page teaches that the casing 400 can be modified to hold multiple layers of battery housings such that sufficient voltage can be supplied from one casing 400 to satisfy the requirements of a large device, such as an electric car [0078] (high-voltage stores). Page teaches suitable base polymers for the intumescent flame-retardant material (fireproof) being a thermoplastic [0034], a plastic. At least a portion of at least one of the body and the lid comprises an intumescent flame-retardant material [0006] (an absorber structure - increasing heat resistance of the main body). Page teaches that a mixture of the different components, including fire retardants (additives) [0033] can be compounded into a composite [0035].
Regarding Claim 21, Page teaches a plurality of blind-holes 203 for venting gas, heat, and pressure [0047]. As shown in Fig. 3 of Page, Fig. 4 of Page and Fig. 7 of Page below, the ventilation openings extend away from the arrangement surface because the body and lid, when mated, provide a chamber dimensioned to hold at least one battery and a venting passageway from the chamber [0006].
Regarding Claim 23, Page teaches a battery housing as shown in Fig. 3 of Page and Fig. 7 of Page below (an energy store arrangement - the main body comprises an arrangement surface for arrangement of a multiplicity of energy storage cells, and the multiplicity of energy storage cells are arranged on the arrangement surface) having a body and a lid mateable with the body [0006]. Page teaches that the casing 400 can be modified to hold multiple layers of battery housings such that sufficient voltage can be supplied from one casing 400 to satisfy the requirements of a large device, such as an electric car [0078] (high-voltage stores). Page teaches suitable base polymers for the intumescent flame-retardant material (fireproof) being a thermoplastic [0034], a plastic. At least a portion of at least one of the body and the lid comprises an intumescent flame-retardant material [0006] (an absorber structure - increasing heat resistance of the main body). Page teaches that a mixture of the different components, including fire retardants (additives) [0033] can be compounded into a composite [0035].
Regarding Claim 24, the energy storage cells are round cells, arranged on the arrangement surface (the housing) to be upright and to extend in the vertical direction (see Fig. 3 of Page, Fig. 4 of Page and Fig. 7 of Page below). The ventilation openings extend away from the arrangement surface because the body and lid, when mated, provide a chamber dimensioned to hold at least one battery and a venting passageway from the chamber [0006] (the ventilation openings are each formed in an extension of the energy storage cells).
PNG
media_image1.png
397
425
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 26, Page teaches cooling conduits that transfer waste heat generated by batteries 204 during operational use (e.g., charging or discharging) out of housing 200. The cooling conduits can also transfer heat generated during a thermal runaway out of housing 200. The cooling conduits can be made from a fire-resistant material [0052]. As shown in Fig. 7 of Page below, the ventilation is provided in a transverse direction.
[AltContent: textbox (200 – Housing
201 – Removeable Lid
204 – Batteries
205 – Body
206 – Cavity
210 – Upwardly Projecting Lip to Enable Stacking of Housing 200 [0048]
211 – Gaps at Four Corners of Lip 210 for Venting of Gases and Pressure [0049]
213 – Transverse Channels that Extend Through Body 205 that Transfer Heat Out of Housing [0052])]
Fig. 3 of Page, duplicated from Sheet 3 of 10 of Drawings of Page
[AltContent: textbox (201 – Removeable Lid
203 – Blind Holes for Venting of Gases and Heat [0047]
214 – Lip that Nestles into Rim of Each Cavity 206 when Mated to Body 205 [0046])]
PNG
media_image2.png
272
371
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4 of Page, duplicated from Sheet 3 of 10 of Drawings of Page
[AltContent: textbox (Ventilation Openings )]
PNG
media_image3.png
514
498
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (301 – Removable Lid Similar to Lid 201
303 – Through-Holes for Venting Gas, Heat and Pressure [0063]
304 – Batteries
305 – Housing Body
322 – Venting Chambers )]
[AltContent: textbox (Arrangement Surface)][AltContent: arrow]
Fig. 7, duplicated from Sheet 6 of 10 of Drawings of Page
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grenier (WO-2020047059-A1; “Grenier”) in view of Faucher (US-6423425-B1; “Faucher”) and Lehenmeier (US-20230002582-A1; “Lehenmeier”).
Grenier teaches the limitations of Claim 15 as discussed above.
Grenier further teaches polyisocyanates that can be employed as curing agents in the curable intumescent composition [0077], which also includes an expansion gas which causes the composition to foam [0091], as well as foam stabilizers [0102], forming an expanded foam [0103]. Grenier teaches polyurethanes which can be used as polymeric polyols which are prepared by reacting polyester polyols or acrylic polyols with a polyisocyanate such that the OH/NCO equivalent ratio is greater than 1:1 so that free hydroxyl groups are present in the product. These polyurethanes can be used as the polymer plastic in the main body of the coating [0028], [0029], [0064]. Grenier directs the reader to the polyurethane polymers described in U.S. Patent US-6423425-B1 for further examples [0064].
Grenier does not teach polyisocyanurates or EPP, expanded polypropylene.
Faucher teaches that polyurethanes and polyureas typically are produced by reacting a polyisocyanate and an active hydrogen-containing polymer. Examples of aliphatic and cycloaliphatic polyisocyanates in the reaction include 4,4-methylenebisdicyclohexyl diisocyanate (hydrogenated MDI), hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI)(i.e., 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate), isophorone diisocyanate (IPDI), methylenebis(cyclohexyl isocyanate), cyclohexylene diisocyanate (hydrogenated XDI) and isocyanurates thereof [36], forming polyisocyanurates, as evidenced by Lehenmeier. Lehenmeier indicates that the term “polyurethane” is known by the person skilled in the art as including not only polymers containing urethane groups but as also including polymers containing no or very low amounts of urethane groups, as long as these polymers are derived from difunctional or polyfunctional isocyanates. Examples are polyetherureas, polyisocyanurates, polyureas and polycarbodiimides [0051].
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 absorber structure of Grenier by incorporating a plastic foam as the main body comprising polyisocyanurate as taught by Faucher and evidenced by Lehenmeier. Grenier and Faucher each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)) by falling in the same field of endeavor. Grenier provides the adequate motivation for incorporating these features readily known in the art, by indicating to the reader to examine Faucher for further examples of polyurethanes, and that those examples fall within the scope of the absorber structure of Grenier (Grenier, [0064]). It would be obvious to pick from the finite list of options provided for in paragraph [0051] of Lehenmeier and arrive at the combination claimed (MPEP 2143).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-20050170238-A1 to Abu-Isa I. teaches a battery case made of an intumescent flame retardant polymeric composition that provides fire shielding, thermal shielding and a low heat release rate; teaches vent holes provided in the battery case; teaches a fire-resistant additive that is combined with the base polymer to produce the flame retardant polymeric material that is molded into the battery case (Abstract); teaches that this additive may contain cyanurates or polyphosphates of ammonium or melamine or s-triazine [0025]
US-20210167438-A1 to Evans O. teaches a heat control member for batteries with flame-resistance properties (Abstract) including expanded polypropylene [0142]
US-20170244080-A1 to Hartmeyer M. teaches foams that can be rendered fireproof [0017] that can consist of expanded polypropylene [0018]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to whose telephone number is (571)270-0315. The examiner can normally be reached 8a.m.-5p.m..
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/WILLIAM FADDOUL SAVAGE/
Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights