DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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 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.
Claims 1-4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurokawa, et. al. (see previously attached EPO Translation of JP2013197013A, original attached with IDS), in view of Chujo, et. al. (US 20170012261 A1) and Shin, et. al. (KR20210120783A).
Regarding Claim 1, Kurokawa recites a sealed battery ([0001] battery) comprising: an electrode body ([0015] storage portion 7, which contains single cell units 2); and a battery case accommodating the electrode body (housing 3), wherein the battery case includes: a case body having an opening and accommodating the electrode body (housing 3); and a lid (top wall 3d) having a plate shape (Fig. 3, “[0010] the top wall 3d . . . is formed in a rectangular . . . . plate shape.” and closing the opening of the case body, the lid includes a safety valve made of resin (“[0039] the top wall 3d is made of a synthetic resin material . . . “ ; in context, the material is described as “stretchable,” and that thin portions 9d, e form components of the safety valve, strongly implying the valve itself is composed of resin in this embodiment) the safety valve includes a groove recessed in a thickness direction of the lid (groove 9b; “[0036] Further, in the present embodiment, as an example, as shown in FIGS. 1, 3, 12 to 14 etc., the top wall 3 d is provided with a safety valve 9 (valve) corresponding to each chamber 4. That is, a plurality of safety valves 9 are provided”). Kurokawa at [0001, 10-15, 36-39], Fig. 3, 9.
PNG
media_image1.png
575
376
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig 3 of Kurokawa.
PNG
media_image2.png
562
687
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 9 of Kurokawa.
Kurokawa recites “[0036] The safety valve 9 opens the chamber 4 by cutting the ceiling wall 3 d at the thin wall portion 9 d (weak portion) provided on the ceiling wall 3 d due to the pressure increase in the chamber 4.” Kurokawa at [0036]. Kurokawa recites a plurality of grooves 9b surrounding each of the plurality of safety valves 9, wherein the grooves 3b have a ring shape, wherein the thin portion 9e forms a “second thin portion,” 9e with a ring shape, as opposed to the linear thin wall portion 9d. Further, “[0039] under the present circumstances, in this embodiment, since the groove 9b is provided as an example, stress concentration tends to occur at the portion where the groove 9b is provided (thin portion 9e) and stress concentration occurs outside the groove 9b. Is less likely to occur . . . when the groove 9b is not provided, the portion provided with the groove 9a is deformed and extended by the action of the load on the ceiling wall 3d, and between the ceiling wall 3d and the partition 3e (portion 3e2) . . .since the groove 9b is provided as an example, concentration of stress at a corner between the ceiling wall 3d and the partition 3e (portion 3e2) is easily suppressed.” Id. at [0039].
To summarize these teachings, the groove 9b comprises the thin portion 9e. While the relative thickness of the thin portions 9d, 9e are not disclosed, because the structure of the valve is designed such that it comprises stress concentration is intended to occur “at the portion where the groove 9b is provided,” such that breakage “between ceiling [sic; this is the op wall] 3d and the partition 3e [i.e. the non-valve portions of the lid shown in Fig. 12 below]” is suppressed, this is strongly implied to be the “thinnest portion,” in order to encourage rupture at the weakest point. [I]n considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom. MPEP 2144.01. Thereby, this is the “thinnest portion,” and the thin portion 9e is a ring shaped portion having a ring shape in plan view including a bottom of the ring shaped groove.
PNG
media_image3.png
605
711
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 12 of Kurokawa, showing the partitions 3e2 and the lid 3; breakage is intended to occur along the groove 9b, via the thin portion 9e, being “[0038] largely deformed toward the outside of the housing.”
Thus, Kurokawa recites the safety valve includes a groove (9b; see Fig. 9.) recessed in a thickness direction of the lid, and the groove includes a ring-shaped groove (thin portion 9e; Fig. 9) having a ring shape in plan view, and the safety valve includes a thinnest portion having a thinnest thickness in the safety valve (strongly implied by the intended breakage along thin portion 9e to prevent improper stress concentration”), and the thinnest portion includes a ring-shaped thinnest portion having a ring shape in plan view including a bottom of the ring-shaped groove (see also [0036- 39]).
Further, Kurokawa teaches “the ring-shaped thinnest portion is configured to, in response to an internal pressure of the battery case reaching a valve-opening pressure, fracture to create a cylindrical gas vent hole surrounded by a fractured surface of the ring-shaped thinnest portion” because Fig. 12 shows breakage is intended to occur along this ring shaped portion, indicating a cylindrical gas vent hole.
However, Kurokawa is silent as to (underlined portions representing amended portions), “the lid includes a through hole penetrating through the lid in a thickness direction of the lid, a safety valve made of resin, and closing the through hole, and an annular seal surface surrounding an opening edge of the through hole, the safety valve includes: an annular joined portion hermetically joined to the annular seal surface, a flat-plate-shaped portion located inside the through hole in a plan view of the lid, and a groove recessed in the thickness direction of the lid, the groove includes a ring-shaped groove having a ring shape in the plan view, the safety valve includes a thinnest portion having a thinnest thickness in the safety valve, the thinnest portion includes a ring-shaped thinnest portion having a ring shape in the plan view and including a bottom of the ring-shaped groove.”
Chujo teaches “[0016] As shown in FIG. 1A, the battery pack 10 includes a case 11 and battery modules 21 , which are accommodated in the case 11 . Each battery module 21 includes battery cells 22 . The case 11 includes a frame 18 and a lid 33 . The frame 18 includes a rectangular through hole 31 . The lid 33 is a rectangular plate that closes the through hole 31.” Further, “[0033] (6) A seal (e.g., O-ring) may be fitted into an annular groove formed in at least one of the lid 33 and the through hole surrounding portion 32. In such a structure, rust may cause the lid 33 to become stuck to the through hole surrounding portion 32 and interfere with deformation of the lid 33. The spacers 37 arranged between the lid 33 and the through hole surrounding portion 32 maintain the gap between the lid 33 and the through hole surrounding portion 32 and decrease the area of contact between the lid 33 and the through hole surrounding portion 32. This avoids situations in which rust fixes the lid 33 to the through hole surrounding portion 32.” Finally, “[021] As shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, a seal 36 and two spacers 37 are arranged between the lid 33 and the through hole surrounding portion 32 . The seal 36 has the form of a square frame and is in contact with the entire peripheral region of the lid 33 to hermetically seal the case 11.”
PNG
media_image4.png
817
555
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1A-1B of Chujo.
This square seal is apparently distinct from the annular seal described within [0033], but the use of a hermetic seal for this annular seal is strongly implied, as otherwise this would frustrate the purpose of the larger seal 36.
This reads upon “a through hole [through hole 31] penetrating through the lid [33] in a thickness direction of the lid,” wherein the valve closes the through hole (as shown in Fig. 1A), and “an annular seal surface [because the seal is fitted into the annular groove, this is an annular seal] surrounding an opening edge of the through hole,” and “an annular joined portion hermetically [the seal 36 is hermetically sealed, and joined to the annular seal surface.”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the sealed battery of Kurokawa such that it comprises the lid 33 and the annular seal of Chujo, because Chujo teaches its lid design prevents rust along the through hole surrounding portion 32, through its inclusion of spacers and overall design.
However, modified Kurokawa does not teach “a flat-plate-shaped portion located inside the through hole in a plan view of the lid.”
Shin teaches an energy storage housing 110, formed of a metal or plastic material, having a safety valve 100 and a first through hole 110 a, and a plate spring 130 (also referred to as a leaf spring) disposed inside of the housing between the housing 110 and the cover 120, and Fig. 2 indicates this spring is found within the through hole. Shin at [0011-12], Fig. 2. This spring provides an “elastic force” to the insert type disk, and is composed of spring steel. Id. at [0019]. This spring provides the force which keeps the valve 100 closed during normal operation. See id. at [0022 – 24] (“the inside of the case 10a of the energy storage device 10 is sealed by the plate spring 130”).
PNG
media_image5.png
672
749
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Shin.
One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to further modify the sealed battery of modified Kurokawa, such that it comprises the plate spring 130 of Shin, meeting “a flat-plate-shaped portion located inside the through hole in a plan view of the lid,” because Shin teaches a benefit to keeping a safety valve closed during normal operation.
Claim 1 is obvious over by Kurokawa, in view of Chujo, and further in view of Shin.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Kurokawa.
Kurokawa recites the ring-shaped groove is a circular ring-shaped groove having a circular ring shape in plan view (thin portion 9e, of Fig. 9), and the ring-shaped thinnest portion is a circular ring-shaped thinnest portion having a circular ring shape in plan view (see above analysis, where the thin portion 9e is provided within the groove 9b to ensure breakage along the thin portion, rather than along the lid and the partitions shown in Fig.12). Kurokawa at Fig. 3, 9, 12.
Claim 2 is anticipated by Kurokawa.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Kurokawa.
Kurokawa recites the groove of the safety valve includes the ring-shaped groove and further a straight groove (thin portion 9d; “[0037] The thin portion 9 d is provided by a plurality of linear grooves 9 a (first grooves) provided on the surface 3 d 1.”) having a straight line shape in plan view (Fig. 9) that bisects a region bounded by the ring-shaped groove in plan view (Fig. 9), and the thinnest portion of the safety valve includes the ring-shaped thinnest portion and further a straight thinnest portion having a straight line shape in plan view including a bottom of the straight groove (thin portions d and e).
Regarding the meaning of the remaining two “thinnest portions,” because both cannot be the “thinnest” portion individually, this is taken to mean they have substantially the same thickness; for this reason, this is met by the two “thin portions” of 9e, 9d.
Claim 3 is obvious over by Kurokawa, in view of Chujo, and further in view of Shin.
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 relies upon Claim 2. Claim 2 is obvious over modified Kurokawa.
Kurokawa recites the groove of the safety valve includes the ring-shaped groove and further a straight groove (thin portion 9d; “[0037] The thin portion 9 d is provided by a plurality of linear grooves 9 a (first grooves) provided on the surface 3 d 1.”) having a straight line shape in plan view (Fig. 9) that bisects a region bounded by the ring-shaped groove in plan view (Fig. 9), and the thinnest portion of the safety valve includes the ring-shaped thinnest portion and further a straight thinnest portion having a straight line shape in plan view including a bottom of the straight groove (thin portions d and e).
Regarding the meaning of the remaining two “thinnest portions,” because both cannot be the “thinnest” portion individually, this is taken to mean they have substantially the same thickness; for this reason, this is met by the two “thin portions” of 9e, 9d.
Claim 4 is obvious over by Kurokawa, in view of Chujo, and further in view of Shin.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Kurokawa.
Shin teaches “[0017] The housing 110 is formed of a metal or plastic material.” This reads upon “the lid further includes a lid body of metal.”
Claim 6 is obvious over by Kurokawa, in view of Chujo, and further in view of Shin.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurokawa, in view of Chujo, and Shin, further in view of Rosal, et. al. (US2007231621A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Kurokawa.
Modified Kurokawa is silent as to the annular seal surface is an annular roughened surface having an uneven shape with pits and protrusions, and the safety valve is hermetically joined to the annular roughened surface by a part of the resin of the safety valve in which the part of the resin enters into the pits of the annular roughened surface to form the annular joined portion.
Rosal teaches “[0138] FIG. 35 shows an isometric cross section view of the valve stem cover 606 of a device valve 600, showing a conical end 630, an internal conical and annular chamber 631, a valve stem cover neck 632, a valve stem cover flange 633, and a ridge 634. Because the valve stem cover 606 may reside external to a fuel consuming device 100 and may be therefore exposed to various forces as well as repeated connections and disconnections with a cartridge valve, the valve stem cover 606 may be constructed of a strong or resilient material. For example, the design considerations taken into account for the design of the valve stem cover 606 may include passing a preliminary connection cycling test that may include more than 1000 connections between the device valve 600 and a fuel cartridge 300. Because of the aforementioned strength and durability concerns, the valve stem cover 606 may be constructed of stainless steel 304 or stainless steel 316 or another comparably inert and durable material. In addition, the valve stem cover 606 described herein may physically create a seal condition when it is connected to and disconnected from a variation of a cartridge valve 700.” Rosal also discloses a “barbed fitting O-ring 618,” which establishes a substantially sealed condition between the barbed fitting 610 and the valve stem guide 608. Id. at [0137 – 138]. Rosal, in other words, teaches screw-like protrusions and depressions described variously, which permit the valve components to be assembled for strength and durability.
PNG
media_image6.png
165
238
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 35 of Rosal.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to further modify the sealed battery of modified Kurokawa, such that “the annular seal surface is an annular roughened surface having an uneven shape with pits and protrusions [as in Rosal], and the safety valve is hermetically joined to the annular roughened surface [i.e., a hermetic seal as in Chujo’s annular seal] by a part of the resin of the safety valve in which the part of the resin enters into the pits of the annular roughened surface to form the annular joined portion [i.e., interlocking ridged, barbed, or threaded portions as in a conventional screw-type connection taught by Rosal],” because Rosal teaches a benefit to durability and strength of the valve.
Claim 5 is obvious over Kurokawa, in view of Chujo, and Shin, further in view of Rosal.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference 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 KRISHNA RAJAN HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-9997. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:30 PM 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/K.R.H./Examiner , Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights