DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant's election without traverse of Species 1, Species 3, and Species 6 (Claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 10-15, and 19-20) in the reply filed on 3/27/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 4, 6, 9, and 16-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species 2, 4-5, and 7-8, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Priority
3. There are no priority claims in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. There is no IDS filed in the instant application.
Claim Interpretation
5. All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
Claim Objections
6. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 10 recites “a thinned wall thickness disposed around a perimeter” but this limitation should likely read “a thinned wall thickness is disposed around a perimeter”. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “wherein the plurality of multilayer polymer laminates is hermetically sealed within the metal cell can enclosure” is unclear and so the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. It is unclear if the claim is meant to require that the enclosure itself is hermetically sealed or if the laminates are sealed and inside the enclosure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
8. Claim 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786.
Regarding Claims 1-2, Yonemochi discloses a battery 121 including a composite enclosure comprising a metal cell can enclosure (upper housing and lower housing formed of e.g. aluminum or magnesium alloy, para 0036) 25/27 (considered “composite” since it has multiple parts) including a plurality of faces (see Figs 5A/5B), wherein one of the plurality of faces is configured for locally failing during a thermal runaway event (since the faces are configured using caps 29a-f formed of low melting temperature material for locally failing, i.e. melting during times of increased temperature to allow gas emission from the enclosure, paras 0011-0014, 0036-0038), a plurality of battery cells 123a-I (meeting Claim 2) necessarily including a pair of electrodes including an anode and a cathode, a separator, and an electrolyte (in order to function as a battery cell, and see para 0006) (see entire disclosure and especially Figs 5A/5B, 7, 8A/8B and paras 0011-0014, 0036-0050, 0054-0058; see annotated 5B below). Yonemochi does not specifically disclose a multilayer polymeric film or wherein the battery cell is hermetically sealed within the multilayer polymeric film.
However, in the same field of endeavor of battery housing design having a face configured to fail during thermal runaway event, Zhang discloses a battery 1000 including a composite enclosure comprising a metal cell can enclosure (module housing) 200 (considered “composite” since it has multiple elements) including a plurality of faces, wherein one of the plurality of faces is configured locally failing (e.g. g via explosion-proof part 202 during a thermal runaway event (Figs. 8, para 104), a pouch battery cell 100 including a pair of electrodes including anode and cathode, a separator, and an electrolyte (paras 0057-0059) wherein the battery cell 100 is hermetically sealed (understood to be “hermetically” since leakage is avoided, paras 0091-0094) within a multilayer polymeric laminate film (the packaging of the battery cell 100 is a pouch/laminate having polymeric thin film layers, paras 0082-0088) contained within the metal cell can enclosure and teaches that this multilayer polymeric laminated film pouch design with a specially designed venting portion (pressure relief part) 111 can achieve precise and directional pressure relief to avoid explosion and vent exhaust to the battery enclosure’s own anti-explosion section which improves reliability of the battery (see e.g. paras 0064-0073) (see entire disclosure and especially all Figs and paras 0025-0057-0059, 0064-0073, 0082-0088, 0091-0094).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to replace the cylindrical cells of Yonemochi with the pouch battery cells of Zhang such that the composite enclosure of the battery of Yonemochi includes a multilayer polymeric laminated film that hermetically seals in the battery cell because Zhang teaches that this multilayer polymeric laminated film pouch design with a specially designed venting portion can achieve precise and directional pressure relief to avoid explosion and vent exhaust to the battery enclosure’s own anti-explosion section which improves reliability of the battery.
PNG
media_image1.png
502
1233
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, in the combined invention of Yonemochi modified by Zhang, each pouch cell would necessarily be hermetically sealed within its own multilayer polymeric laminated film pouch, and therefore, the skilled artisan would expect the battery of Yonemochi modified by Zhang to comprise a plurality of multilayer polymeric laminated films within the metal cell can enclosure. Further, because Yonemochi teaches that the housing of the battery is in a sealed state when the gas opening is blocked (claim 2 of Yonemuchi), and is “completely sealed” during construction (para 0040), it is understood that the metal cell can enclosure of Yonemochi is hermetically sealed.
Regarding Claim 7, Yonemochi teaches that the one of the plurality of faces being configured for failing includes a stable portion (the area where a blocking portion 29a-f or 143a-c is NOT formed) of the one of the plurality of faces and a sacrificial portion (blocking portion) 29a-f or 143a-c of the one of the plurality of faces, the sacrificial portion being configured for creating a vent in the one of the plurality of faces (see e.g. annotated Fig 5B, paras 0011-0014, 0036-0050, 0054-0058).
9. Claim 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, as applied to Claims 1 and 7, and further in view of Storey US PG Publication 2006/0092631.
Regarding Claims 5 and 8, Yonemochi modified by Zhang discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejections of Claim 1, which are incorporated herein in their entireties. Yonomochi teaches wherein the one of the plurality of faces is constructed with a material with a relatively low melting point (synthetic resin is exemplified and melts at 100 C°, para 0038, but other appropriate materials can be used, para 0065) and wherein a second of the plurality of faces is constructed with a metal with a relatively high melting point since one face has a claimed low-melting sacrificial portion material and another face has only metal material from which the enclosure is formed (although under broadest reasonable interpretation, all of the faces are constructed with the high melting point metal to some extent). See annotated Fig above. Yonemochi modified by Zhang does not specifically recite wherein the one of the plurality of faces is constructed with a first metal with a relatively low melting point or, pertaining to Claim 8, the sacrificial portion is constructed with a first metal including a relatively low melting point.
However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design to allow for venting of gases, Storey teaches that a fusible metal plug can successfully melt under high temperature (i.e. high pressure) conditions of a battery to provide safe venting for the battery such that the material is a metal alloy (e.g. Bi/Pb/Sn) that melts at a low temperature suitable for the specifically battery, such as at 100 °C (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Figs 1-5; paras 0026-0029). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use a mixed metal alloy having low melting temperature to form the caps of Yonemochi modified by Zhang on one of the plurality of faces from a relatively low melting temperature first metal because Storey teaches that such a metal alloy can be specifically designed/tuned for a particular type of battery being used for good pressure relief venting design, and further, the alloy taught by Storey has the same melting temperature as what is desired by Yonemuchi (100 °C). The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
10. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, as applied to Claims 1 and 7, and further in view of Joswig US PG Publication 2015/0340673.
Regarding Claim 10, Yonemochi modified by Zhang discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejections of Claim 1, which are incorporated herein in their entireties. Yonemochi modified by Zhang does not specifically recite wherein a notch including a thinned wall thickness is disposed around a perimeter of the sacrificial portion. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design to allow for venting of gases, Joswig teaches that a battery venting mechanism (pressure relief mechanism) 11 responding to overpressure of a battery cell can be formed using at least one notch 9, designed as a predetermined breaking point at a certain level of overpressure and enables rapid pressure equalization between the battery and environment when a cell releases a lot of gas due to overload, short circuit, etc (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Fig 9; para 0030, 0040-0041). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the battery of Yonemochi modified by Zhang such that a notch including a thinned wall thickness is disposed around a perimeter of the sacrificial portion because Joswig teaches that this feature provides a predetermined breaking point at a certain level of overpressure and enables rapid pressure equalization between the battery and environment when a cell releases a lot of gas due to overload, short circuit, etc.
The Office notes that “including a thinned wall thickness” is seen as a product-by-process limitation – there is no specific structure that is claimed that would differentiate a thinned wall formation from another notch formation process. Further, the Office notes that the notch of the Although the notch of Joswig is formed in an individual cell housing rather than a battery module housing, the skilled artisan would find it obvious to extend the design need met by the notch of Joswig to the safety features of an encompassing enclosure such as that of Yonemochi and Zhang. Applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.). The prior art can be modified or combined to reject claims as prima facie obvious as long as there is a reasonable expectation of success. See In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (see MPEP § 2143.02). “A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton.”KSR, 550 U.S. at ___, 82 USPQ2d at 1397. “[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle.”Id. Office personnel may also take into account “the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ.”Id. at ___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
Although the design of Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Joswig does not specifically direct the skilled artisan to form the notch including a thinned wall thickness around a perimeter of the sacrificial portion, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the notch including the thinned wall thickness around a perimeter of the sacrificial portion of Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Joswig in order to best fit this pressure-related safety feature in the same footprint as the temperature-related safety feature for compact/space-saving design since the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
11. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Lee US PG Publication 2024/0304939.
Regarding Claim 11, Yonemochi modified by Zhang discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejection of Claim 1, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. Yonomochi teaches wherein the metal cell can enclosure is formed of aluminum alloy or any other suitable material (para 0065), but fails to specifically disclose wherein the metal cell can enclosure is constructed with a clad metal. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery module design, Lee discloses that a high strength metal cell can enclosure (battery module case body) 210 can be formed using a lightweight clad metal such as aluminum in combination with a highly heat resistant metal at the inner surface of the module case with the advantage that a battery module will have better mechanical rigidity and higher heat resistance compared with the prior art (see at least Fig 7, paras 0022, 0057-0064). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use clad metal to form metal cell can enclosure of Yonemochi modified by Zhang because Lee teaches that this will allow for the metal cell can enclosure to have better mechanical rigidity and higher heat resistance compared with the prior art.
12. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Onnerud US PG Publication 2017/0214103.
Regarding Claim 12, Yonemochi modified by Zhang discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejections of Claim 1, which are incorporated herein in its entirety. Yonemochi modified by Zhang fails to specifically disclose wherein the battery cell further includes a layer of foam material configured for absorbing volumetric expansion of at least one of the electrodes. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design, Onnerud discloses a prismatic battery cell (para 0016, Fig. 1B), comprising: a hard outer case including an internal volume (para 0094, Fig. 1B, enclosure 116, internal volume occupied by member 120 and cavities 122), an electrode stack or a jelly roll electrode disposed within the internal volume (para 0092, Fig. 1B. jelly roll core members 102) and a foam structure (para 0094, Fig. 1B, member 120) disposed within the internal volume, and Onnerud teaches that this configuration is beneficial for applying a desirable pressure upon the electrode stack or the jelly roll electrode and for compressing when the electrode stack or the jelly roll electrode expands ([para 0095, 0162, “inserted between jelly rolls or wrapping individual jelly rolls to separate them, hold them in position and provide some mechanical support”) (paras 0094, 0119, Fig. 1B, member 120) (see entire disclosure and especially what is cited above and also Fig 6 and para 0111).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to includes a layer of foam material configured for absorbing volumetric expansion of at least one electrode of Yonemochi modified by Zhang because Onnerud teaches that this is beneficial for applying a desirable pressure upon the electrodes or the jelly roll electrode and for compressing when the electrode stack or the jelly roll electrode expands. The skilled artisan would expect the foam to be capable of absorbing expansion of the electrodes in addition to providing compression since the materials are in contact with one another and would necessarily provide some force upon each other.
13. Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786 and Onnerud US PG Publication 2017/0214103, as applied to Claim 12, and further in view of Zu CN214898576.
Regarding Claims 13 and 14, Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Onnerud discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejection of Claim 12, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Onnerud discloses the claimed foam but does not specifically recite wherein the layer of foam material includes a composite of foam and a metal hydroxide or wherein the layer of foam material includes a metal hydroxide sheet which contains at least ninety parts of metal hydroxide per one hundred parts of the metal hydroxide sheet by weight. However, in the same field of endeavor of protection of battery cells, Xu teaches that a foam layer used to protect battery cells, such as polyurethane foam, is beneficially coated with e.g. aluminum hydroxide can provide a thermally insulating, flame retardant, and buffering effect on the battery cell, i.e. multifunctional protection (see e.g. para n0028-n0029). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the layer of foam material of Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Onnerud such that it is a composite of foam and a metal hydroxide because Xu teaches that a foam layer, such as polyurethane foam, used to protect battery cells is beneficially coated with e.g. aluminum hydroxide can provide a thermally insulating, flame retardant, and buffering effect on the battery cell, i.e. multifunctional protection. The layered product of metal hydroxide-foam is considered a composite metal hydroxide sheet since the term “composite” is broad and can include layered products. Further, with respect to Claim 14, the metal hydroxide layer of Yonemochi modified by Zhang, Onnerud, and Xu contains only metal hydroxide, and so it contains 100 parts of metal hydroxide per one hundred parts of metal hydroxide sheet, meeting the claimed range.
14. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Schmitt US PG Publication 2021/0242527.
Regarding Claim 15, Yonemochi modified by Zhang discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejections of Claim 1, which are incorporated herein in its entirety. Yonemochi modified by Zhang fails to specifically disclose wherein the battery further comprises a layer of thermal interface material (TIM) adjacent to an interior surface of the metal cell can enclosure. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design, Schmitt discloses a battery pack wherein the cell can enclosure 20 includes a layer of thermal interface material so that the battery cells can be bonded to the enclosure 20 at its base 21 with the benefit that this is a way to mechanically fix the cell stack in the cell housing while improving thermal contact with the outside of the battery pack (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Figs. 3-4 and paras 0004, 0026, 0033). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the battery of Yonemochi modified by Zhang such that the battery further comprises a layer of thermal interface material (TIM) adjacent to an interior surface of the metal cell can enclosure because Schmitt teaches that this is a way to mechanically fix the cell stack in the cell housing while improving thermal contact with the outside of the battery pack.
15. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, Onnerud US PG Publication 2017/0214103, and Schmitt US PG Publication 2021/0242527.
Regarding Claim 19, Yonemochi discloses a battery 121 including a composite enclosure comprising a metal cell can enclosure (upper housing and lower housing formed of e.g. aluminum or magnesium alloy, para 0036) 25/27 (considered “composite” since it has multiple parts) including a plurality of faces (see Figs 5A/5B), wherein one of the plurality of faces is configured for locally failing during a thermal runaway event since the faces are configured using caps 29a-f formed of low melting temperature material for locally failing, i.e. melting during times of increased temperature to allow gas emission from the enclosure (paras 0011-0014, 0036-0038), a plurality of battery cells 123a-I (meeting Claim 2) necessarily including a pair of electrodes including an anode and a cathode, a separator, and an electrolyte (in order to function as a battery cell, and see para 0006) (see entire disclosure and especially Figs 5A/5B, 7, 8A/8B and paras 0011-0014, 0036-0050, 0054-0058). Yonemochi does not specifically disclose a multilayer polymeric film or wherein each battery cell is hermetically sealed within one of the plurality of multilayer polymeric film. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery housing design having a face configured to fail during thermal runaway event, Zhang discloses a battery 1000 including a composite enclosure comprising a metal cell can enclosure (module housing) 200 (considered “composite” since it has multiple elements) including a plurality of faces, wherein one of the plurality of faces is configured locally failing (e.g. g via explosion-proof part 202 during a thermal runaway event (Figs. 8, para 104), a pouch battery cell 100 including a pair of electrodes including anode and cathode, a separator, and an electrolyte (paras 0057-0059) wherein the battery cell 100 is hermetically sealed (understood to be “hermetically” since leakage is avoided, paras 0091-0094) within a multilayer polymeric laminate film (the packaging of the battery cell 100 is a pouch/laminate having polymeric thin film layers, paras 0082-0088) contained within the metal cell can enclosure and teaches that this multilayer polymeric laminated film pouch design with a specially designed venting portion (pressure relief part) 111 can achieve precise and directional pressure relief to avoid explosion and vent exhaust to the battery enclosure’s own anti-explosion section which improves reliability of the battery (see e.g. paras 0064-0073) (see entire disclosure and especially all Figs and paras 0025-0057-0059, 0064-0073, 0082-0088, 0091-0094). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to replace the cylindrical cells of Yonemochi with the pouch battery cells of Zhang such that the composite enclosure of the battery of Yonemochi includes a multilayer polymeric laminated film that hermetically seals in the battery cell because Zhang teaches that this multilayer polymeric laminated film pouch design with a specially designed venting portion can achieve precise and directional pressure relief to avoid explosion and vent exhaust to the battery enclosure’s own anti-explosion section which improves reliability of the battery.
Further, because Yonemochi teaches that the housing of the battery is in a sealed state when the gas opening is blocked (claim 2 of Yonemuchi), and is “completely sealed” during construction (para 0040), it is understood that the metal cell can enclosure is hermetically sealed.
Yonemochi modified by Zhang fails to specifically disclose wherein the battery cell further includes a layer of foam material configured for absorbing volumetric expansion of at least one of the electrodes of each of the plurality of battery cells. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design, Onnerud discloses a prismatic battery cell (para 0016, Fig. 1B), comprising: a hard outer case including an internal volume (para 0094, Fig. 1B, enclosure 116, internal volume occupied by member 120 and cavities 122), an electrode stack or a jelly roll electrode disposed within the internal volume (para 0092, Fig. 1B. jelly roll core members 102) and a foam structure (para 0094, Fig. 1B, member 120) disposed within the internal volume, and Onnerud teaches that this configuration is beneficial for applying a desirable pressure upon the electrode stack or the jelly roll electrode and for compressing when the electrode stack or the jelly roll electrode expands ([para 0095, 0162, “inserted between jelly rolls or wrapping individual jelly rolls to separate them, hold them in position and provide some mechanical support”) (paras 0094, 0119, Fig. 1B, member 120) (see entire disclosure and especially what is cited above and also Fig 6 and para 0111).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to includes a layer of foam material configured for absorbing volumetric expansion of at least one of the electrodes of each of the plurality of battery cells Yonemochi modified by Zhang because Onnerud teaches that this is beneficial for applying a desirable pressure upon the electrodes or the jelly roll electrode and for compressing when the electrode stack or the jelly roll electrode expands. The skilled artisan would expect the foam to be capable of absorbing expansion of the electrodes in addition to providing compression since the materials are in contact with one another and would necessarily provide some force upon each other.
Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Unnerud fails to specifically disclose wherein the battery further comprises a layer of thermal interface material (TIM) adjacent to an interior surface of the metal cell can enclosure. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design, Schmitt discloses a battery pack wherein the cell can enclosure 20 includes a layer of thermal interface material so that the battery cells can be bonded to the enclosure 20 at its base 21 with the benefit that this is a way to mechanically fix the cell stack in the cell housing while improving thermal contact with the outside of the battery pack (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Figs. 3-4 and paras 0004, 0026, 0033). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the battery of Yonemochi modified by Zhang and Onnerud such that the battery further comprises a layer of thermal interface material (TIM) adjacent to an interior surface of the metal cell can enclosure because Schmitt teaches that this is a way to mechanically fix the cell stack in the cell housing while improving thermal contact with the outside of the battery pack.
16. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemochi US PG Publication 2008/0220321 in view of Zhang WO2024/065786, Onnerud US PG Publication 2017/0214103, and Schmitt US PG Publication 2021/0242527, as applied to Claim 19, and further in view of Storey US PG Publication 2006/0092631.
Regarding Claim 20, Yonemochi modified by Zhang, Onnerud, and Schmitt discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejection of Claim 19, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. Yonomochi teaches wherein the one of the plurality of faces is constructed with a material with a relatively low melting point (synthetic resin is exemplified, but other appropriate materials can be used, para 0065) and wherein a second of the plurality of faces is constructed with a metal with a relatively high melting point since one face has a claimed low-melting sacrificial portion material and another face has only metal material from which the enclosure is formed (although under broadest reasonable interpretation, all of the faces are constructed with the high melting point metal to some extent). See annotated Fig above. Yonemochi modified by Zhang, Onnerud, and Schmitt does not specifically recite wherein the one of the plurality of faces is constructed with a first metal with a relatively low melting point. However, in the same field of endeavor of battery design to allow for venting of gases, Storey teaches that a fusible plug can successfully melt under high temperature (i.e. high pressure) conditions of a battery to provide safe venting for the battery such that the material is a metal alloy (e.g. Bi/Pb/Sn) that melts at a low temperature suitable for the specifically battery, such as at 100 °C (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Figs 1-5; paras 0026-0029). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use a mixed metal alloy having low melting temperature to form the caps of Yonemochi modified by Zhang, Onnerud, and Schmitt on one of the plurality of faces from a relatively low melting temperature first metal because Storey teaches that such a metal alloy can be specifically designed/tuned for a particular type of battery being used for good pressure relief venting design. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Conclusion
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Melack US PG Publication 2018/0048036 discloses a battery including a composite enclosure comprising a metal cell can enclosure including a plurality of faces, wherein one of the plurality of faces is configured for venting via Vent A 904 and Vent B 905 during a thermal runaway event (Figs. 2-3, 9, paras 0040-0041, 0053, 0057), a battery cell which is a pouch cell (para 0032) contained within the metal cell can enclosure (see entire disclosure and especially all Figs and paras 0025-0026, 0032, 0040-0041, 0053-0057).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA S PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-3597. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30a to 3p Eastern Time.
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, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached on 5712721481. 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.
/LISA S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights