DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Remarks
2. Applicant’s amendments submitted on 3/3/26 have been received. Claims 1, 3-6, 10, 12, 14-16, 18, and 20 have been amended.
Drawings
3. The drawings were received on 3/3/26. These drawings are acceptable.
Double Patenting
4. The provisional rejection on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/359,347 (reference application) (the ‘347 Application) on claim 1 is withdrawn because the Applicant filed a terminal disclaimer.
Claim Objections
5. Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “16, (Currently Amended)” includes a drafting error. For the purpose of this Office Action, this will be revised to “16. (Currently Amended)”. Appropriate correction is required.
6. Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “ a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing in a plurality of adjacent rows. “ includes a drafting error. For the purpose of this Office Action, the limitation has been interpreted as “ a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing in a plurality of adjacent rows, “. Appropriate correction is required.
Intended use
7. It is noted that the claims have “intended use” language such as “to prevent potting from entering the vents” and it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
8. 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.
9. Claim 10 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.
10. Claim 10 recites the limitation "the cells" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this Office Action, the limitation has been interpreted as "the plurality of battery cells" as there is antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tung (GB2613184A).
Regarding claim 1, Tung discloses a battery pack for a vehicle(vehicle battery pack 122 for vehicle 160, Figs. 4-6, p. 13, line 5) comprising: a housing including at least one pack vent between an interior and an exterior of the housing(Fig. 5, p. 13, lines 1-2, lines 8-15); a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing in a plurality of adjacent rows(battery modules 120 with array of cells 126, Figs. 2, 4 & 5, p. 10, lines 33-37); and a channel system including channel arrays (module vent volume 132, Figs. 4 & 5, p. 10, lines 33-37) including a plurality of separate channels positioned in connection with vents on each of the plurality of battery cells in a corresponding one of the plurality of adjacent rows (see rows of vent passages 140 in Fig. 3, p. 11, lines 2-6) and the plurality of separate channels are each in connection with a master channel (vent system 136, Figs. 4 & 5 ) that communicates with the at least one pack vent of the housing(p. 11, lines 6-8, p. 10, lines 33-37), wherein the channel system is enclosed from the rest of the volume of the battery pack(p. 13, lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 4, Tung discloses the channel system is isolated to prevent potting from entering the vents on each of the plurality of battery cells (a wall 138 separating the cell volume 124 and module vent volume 132, has vent passages 140 therethrough disposed substantially throughout its extent, Fig. 3, p. 11, lines 2-4).
Regarding claim 5, Tung discloses the channel arrays include a plurality of battery cell engagement panels (see wall 138 with vent passages 140, Fig. 3) and a plurality of tray panels(see holder of second ends 130 of battery cells 126 in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Tung discloses the master channel includes multiple master channels(first common vent volume 156 and second common vent volume 158, Fig. 5, p. 12, lines 1-10).
Regarding claim 9, Tung discloses the housing includes a plurality of sub-modules and each sub-module includes a channel array (see battery modules 120 with module vent volumes 132 in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 12, Tung discloses the master channel connects with the channel arrays along a face of the channel arrays(Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 18, Tung discloses the channel system includes a plurality of battery cell engagement panels(see wall 138 with vent passages 140, Fig. 3) and a plurality of tray panels (see holder of second ends 130 of battery cells 126 in Fig. 2) that include ribs defining the channel arrays (Fig. 2) and a plurality of apertures in the plurality of battery cell engagement panels (140, Fig. 3) and in communication with vents in the plurality of battery cells (p. 13, lines 8-12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. Claim(s) 2, 3, 10, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Haemmerle et al. (DE102021112231A1) as cited in IDS dated 5/21/24 with citations from equivalent US 2022/0367966.
Regarding claim 2, Tung does not explicitly disclose the housing contains a potting material encapsulating the channel system.
Haemmerle teaches a battery pack for a vehicle(abstract, [0037], Fig. 2), comprising: a housing including at least one pack vent between an interior and an exterior of the housing([0008], [0010]-[0012], [0018], [0037], [0043]); a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing(10, Fig. 2, [0034]); and a channel system including channel arrays positioned in connection with vents on each of the plurality of battery cells (see releasable wall openings 38 positioned with cell degassing openings 26 in Figs. 2-5) and the channel arrays are in connection with a master channel that communicates with the at least one pack vent of the housing (degassing channel 28, Figs. 2, 4, and 5, claims 1 and 6, [0037], [0043]), wherein the channel system is enclosed from the rest of the volume of the battery pack(Fig. 4, claim 1, [0008], [0015], [0039]). Haemmerle teaches the housing contains a potting material encapsulating the channel system(gap filler 44, Fig. 4, claim 9, [0021], [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with the housing contains a potting material encapsulating the channel system as taught by Haemmerle as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 3, modified Tung discloses the potting material is one of a foam, or a non-foamed polymeric resin (Haemmerle, gap filler 44, Fig. 4, claim 9, [0021], [0039]).
Regarding claim 10, Tung discloses soft venting might for instance occur where a cell is charged rapidly or is over charged, causing gas generation, rupture and venting, without substantive damage to a separator in the cell (which might otherwise cause a short-circuit) (p. 2, lines 30-32) but does not explicitly disclose the channel arrays include ribs defining the plurality of separate channels under the plurality of battery cells that run either longitudinal or transverse to the vehicle and are connected by a series of openings in the ribs.
Haemmerle teaches a battery pack for a vehicle(abstract, [0037], Fig. 2), comprising: a housing including at least one pack vent between an interior and an exterior of the housing([0008], [0010]-[0012], [0018], [0037], [0043]); a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing(10, Fig. 2, [0034]); and a channel system including channel arrays positioned in connection with vents on each of the plurality of battery cells (see releasable wall openings 38 positioned with cell degassing openings 26 in Figs. 2-5) and the channel arrays are in connection with a master channel that communicates with the at least one pack vent of the housing (degassing channel 28, Figs. 2, 4, and 5, claims 1 and 6, [0037], [0043]), wherein the channel system is enclosed from the rest of the volume of the battery pack(Fig. 4, claim 1, [0008], [0015], [0039]). Haemmerle teaches a channel array include ribs defining a plurality of channels under the cells that run either longitudinal or transverse to the vehicle and are connected by a series of openings in the ribs(see releasable wall openings 38 in Fig. 5 at t4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with a channel array include ribs defining a plurality of channels under the plurality of battery cells that run either longitudinal or transverse to the vehicle and are connected by a series of openings in the ribs as taught by Haemmerle as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 15, modified Tung discloses the master channel is formed directly in the potting material such that there is no separate wall material (Haemmerle, gap filler 44, Fig. 4, claim 9, [0021], [0039]).
Regarding claim 17, Tung does not explicitly disclose further comprising at least one cooling ribbon disposed along the master channel.
Haemmerle teaches a battery pack for a vehicle(abstract, [0037], Fig. 2), comprising: a housing including at least one pack vent between an interior and an exterior of the housing([0008], [0010]-[0012], [0018], [0037], [0043]); a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing(10, Fig. 2, [0034]); and a channel system including channel arrays positioned in connection with vents on each of the plurality of battery cells (see releasable wall openings 38 positioned with cell degassing openings 26 in Figs. 2-5) and the channel arrays are in connection with a master channel that communicates with the at least one pack vent of the housing (degassing channel 28, Figs. 2, 4, and 5, claims 1 and 6, [0037], [0043]), wherein the channel system is enclosed from the rest of the volume of the battery pack(Fig. 4, claim 1, [0008], [0015], [0039]). Haemmerle teaches it is preferred that the cooling base is arranged below the at least one cell pack of the battery with respect to an intended installation position of the degassing channel and in particular with respect to the battery in the motor vehicle([0010]). Haemmerle teaches further comprising at least one cooling ribbon disposed along the master channel (cooling channels 42, Fig. 3, [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with further comprising at least one cooling ribbon disposed along the master channel as taught by Haemmerle in order to provide an intended installation position of the degassing channel and in particular with respect to the battery in the motor vehicle.
17. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claims 1 and 5 above.
Regarding claim 6, Tung does not explicitly disclose a gap between the adjacent plurality of battery cell engagement panels and the adjacent plurality of tray panels is less than half a thickness of the plurality of battery cell engagement panels and the plurality of tray panels, respectively.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery pack of Tung with a gap between the adjacent plurality of battery cell engagement panels and the adjacent plurality of tray panels is less than half a thickness of the plurality of battery cell engagement panels and the plurality of tray panels, respectively in order to maximize battery pack power, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
18. Claim(s) 8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Tung does not explicitly disclose the at least one pack vent includes multiple pack vents.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery pack of Tung with the at least one pack vent includes multiple pack vents in order to more quickly vent, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04 VI).
Regarding claim 13, Tung does not explicitly disclose the master channel runs down a center of the housing dividing separate sections of the housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery pack of Tung with the master channel runs down a center of the housing dividing separate sections of the housing in order to more quickly vent, as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
19. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mitchell-Downie (US 2024/0217351).
Regarding claim 11, Tung does not explicitly disclose further comprising a thermal runaway sensor in the master channel.
Mitchell-Downie teaches a battery arrangement comprising a battery pack including a plurality of cells received in a housing having exhaust ports through which gases emitted by the cells can flow out in case of a failure such as a thermal runaway, a sensor for detecting the failure, a safety system comprising a pipe having a first end secured to the battery pack so as to collect the gases emitted through the exhaust port, and a second end, wherein the pipe can be in an inactive state in which it is collapsed, or in an active state in which it is extended to conduct the gases to a safer zone, and an extension causing device configured to place the pipe in the active state upon detection of the failure(abstract). Mitchell-Downie teaches the sensor 7 can be a pressure sensor, a temperature sensor, a gas sensor, or a thermal runaway sensor(Fig. 1, [0056]). Mitchell-Downie teaches the sensor 7 can be located inside the housing 3 or can be located outside the housing 3 and attached to it, preferably near the exhaust port 6([0056], Fig. 1). Mitchell-Downie teaches the sensor 7 may monitor a parameter suitable for detecting said failure of the battery pack 2 ([0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with further comprising a thermal runaway sensor in the master channel as taught by Mitchell-Downie in order to monitor a parameter for detecting failure of the battery pack.
20. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of DeKeuster et al. (US 2016/0197324).
Regarding claim 14, Tung does not explicitly disclose the master channel is formed by a hose that connects the channel arrays to the at least one pack vent.
DeKeuster teaches vent shield for a battery module (title). DeKeuster teaches gases generated during a venting situation may be moved from the module housing 60, and out of a vent 120 of the battery module 28, as shown in FIG. 8 ([0049]). DeKeuster teaches the vent 120 may be in the form of a hose fitting, which may include threads or barbs 124 to enable securement with a vent adapter, a vent hose, or the like([0049], Figs. 8 and 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with the master channel is formed by a hose that connects the channel arrays to the at least one pack vent as taught by DeKeuster as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
21. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rhim (US 2025/0385383).
Regarding claim 16, Tung does not explicitly disclose the master channel contains a series of spark arrestors with decreasing hole size as a gas travels towards the pack vent.
Rhim teaches battery pack with gas venting path (title). Rhim teaches the mesh filter is applied at each intersection of the gas venting paths, and as it is closer to the exit of the gas venting path, the mesh filter having smaller opening size is applied, thereby preventing particles from easily escaping out of the battery pack([0028]). Rhim teaches mesh filters 223a, 223b, 223c may be applied to the gas venting path such that as they are closer to the exit of the gas venting path, i.e., the gas outlet 219, the mesh opening size is smaller(Figs. 3 and 4, [0058]). Rhim teaches the mesh opening size of the mesh filters 223a, 223b, 223c decreases in a sequential order so as to effectively disperse the amount of particles accumulating in the gas venting path between one mesh filter 223 and another mesh filter 223 by size([0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with the master channel contains a series of spark arrestors with decreasing hole size as a gas travels towards the pack vent as taught by Rhim in order to effectively disperse the amount of particles accumulating in the gas venting path between one mesh filter and another mesh filter by size.
22. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, and further in view of Kojc et al. (US 2023/0344070).
Regarding claim 19, Tung does not explicitly disclose further comprising a breakable sheet between the plurality of battery cell engagement panels and the plurality of tray panels.
Kojc teaches a battery pack includes: a housing; a plurality of battery cells accommodated within the housing, each of the plurality of battery cells including a degassing valve; gas channel mounted to the housing as a structural member of the housing; and a thermally and electrically isolating sheet(abstract). Kojc teaches the breaking sections in the isolating sheet are configured to break if a thermal runaway occurs([0037]). Kojc teaches if the thermal runaway occurs in one of the battery cells and the breaking section that covers the battery cell breaks, a venting gas can be ejected and released from the battery cell in thermal runaway to the gas channel ([0037]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with further comprising a breakable sheet between the plurality of battery cell engagement panels and the plurality of tray panels as taught by Kojc as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
23. Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (GB2613184A) in view of Haemmerle et al. (DE102021112231A1) as cited in IDS dated 5/21/24 with citations from equivalent US 2022/0367966.
Regarding claim 20, Tung discloses a battery pack for a vehicle (vehicle battery pack 122 for vehicle 160, Figs. 4-6, p. 13, line 5), comprising: a housing including at least one vent between an interior and an exterior of the housing (p. 13, lines 1-2, lines 8-15); a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing in a plurality of adjacent rows (battery modules 120 with array of cells 126, Figs. 2, 4 & 5, p. 10, lines 33-37), a channel system including channel arrays (module vent volume 132, Figs. 4 & 5, p. 10, lines 33-37) including a plurality of separate channels positioned in connection with vents on each of the plurality of battery cells in a corresponding one of the plurality of adjacent rows (see rows of vent passages 140 in Fig. 3, p. 11, lines 2-6) and the plurality of separate channels are each in connection with a master channel (vent system 136, Figs. 4 & 5 ) that communicates with the at least one vent of the housing (p. 11, lines 6-8, p. 10, lines 33-37); but does not explicitly disclose at least one cooling element adjacent to the master channel.
Haemmerle teaches a battery pack for a vehicle(abstract, [0037], Fig. 2), comprising: a housing including at least one pack vent between an interior and an exterior of the housing([0008], [0010]-[0012], [0018], [0037], [0043]); a plurality of battery cells disposed within the housing(10, Fig. 2, [0034]); and a channel system including channel arrays positioned in connection with vents on each of the plurality of battery cells (see releasable wall openings 38 positioned with cell degassing openings 26 in Figs. 2-5) and the channel arrays are in connection with a master channel that communicates with the at least one pack vent of the housing (degassing channel 28, Figs. 2, 4, and 5, claims 1 and 6, [0037], [0043]), wherein the channel system is enclosed from the rest of the volume of the battery pack(Fig. 4, claim 1, [0008], [0015], [0039]). Haemmerle teaches it is preferred that the cooling base is arranged below the at least one cell pack of the battery with respect to an intended installation position of the degassing channel and in particular with respect to the battery in the motor vehicle([0010]). Haemmerle teaches further comprising at least one cooling ribbon disposed along the master channel (cooling channels 42, Fig. 3, [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack of Tung with at least one cooling element adjacent the master channel as taught by Haemmerle in order to provide an intended installation position of the degassing channel and in particular with respect to the battery in the motor vehicle.
Response to Arguments
24. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA HOM LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-0489. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/VICTORIA H LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724