DETAILED ACTION
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
Applicant’s election of Species B in the reply filed on April 28, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Therefore, claims 1-20 are pending, with claims 1-10 withdrawn from consideration as being to the non-elected Species A.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: the reference character (216) in fig.4, the reference characters (316) and (318) in fig.6 and fig.7. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Par.0005, par.0010, and par.0045 teach that formaldehyde is a molecular nitrogen releasing agent.
However, formaldehyde is a compound of formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
104
126
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, it does not comprise any nitrogen, and it is not clear how it can be used as molecular nitrogen releasing agent.
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.
Claims 15 and 16 are 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.
Claims 15 and 16 include the limitation that formaldehyde is a molecular nitrogen releasing agent.
However, formaldehyde is a compound of formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
104
126
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, it does not comprise any nitrogen, and it is not clear how it can be used as molecular nitrogen releasing agent.
Therefore, it is not clear what is the joint inventor claiming as the invention in claims 15 and 16 of the instant application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 11 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aitharaju et al. (US 2023/0142691) in view of Choi et al. (US 2013/0252059).
With regard to claims 11, 15, and 16, Aitharaju et al. teach a battery housing (20) for the battery pack (32), wherein the battery body (20) comprises a lower tray cover (28) and an upper battery pack cover (30) (fig.1, par.0044-0045).
The battery housing (20) of Aitharaju et al. is equivalent to the “enclosure for a battery pack” in claim 11, wherein:
- the lower tray cover (28) of Aitharaju et al. is equivalent to the “body configured to receive a plurality of battery cells” in claim 11; and
- the upper pack cover (30) of Aitharaju et al. is equivalent to the “cover arranged of the body” in claim 11.
The battery housing may be made of an assembly of different materials (par.0058), wherein the assembly includes a composite structure (110) and a metal layer (120) (par.0059-0061, fig.2A). The composite structure is formed of a polymer matrix and reinforcing material, such as fibers distributed therein (par.0046).
The metal layer (120) meets the limitations of claim 11 for “a metallic layer”.
The composite structure (110) formed of a polymer matrix and reinforcing material, such as fibers distributed therein of Aitharaju et al. is equivalent to the “composite layer arranged at an inner surface of the metallic layer and including reinforcing fibers encapsulated in resin” in claim 11.
Aitharaju et al. fail to teach that the resin includes a molecular nitrogen releasing agent.
Choi et al. teach a battery pack case assembly comprising a case body and a cover. The case body is formed from a plastic composite comprising reinforcing fibers in a plastic matrix (abstract). The plastic matrix of the fiber reinforced composite may be thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU)(par.0064).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to include thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) in the polymer matrix of Aitharaju et al., because thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) is taught by Choi et al. to be used in combination with fibers in a composite layer for a battery housing.
Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) is a polyurethane, which is “a molecular nitrogen releasing agent” in claim 11, and meets the limitations of claims 15 and 16 (see the definition in par.0005, par.0010, and par.0045 of the specification of the instant application).
Therefore, the battery housing of Aitharaju modified by Choi is equivalent to the enclosure in claims 1, 15, and 16 of the instant application.
With regard to claim 13, Aitharaju et al. teach that the metal layer may comprise aluminum or steel (par.0062).
With regard to claim 14, Aitharaju et al. teach that the metal layer may have a thickness of 0.02 mm to 0.5 mm (par.0063). This range includes the claimed range.
With regard to claim 17, the battery housing (20) of Aitharaju modified by Choi includes thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) in the matrix resin (see par.0064 of Choi et al.).
Aitharaju et al. further teach that the reinforcing fibers may be carbon fibers, glass fibers, basalt fibers, and aramid fibers (par.0048).
With regard to claims 18 and 19, Aitharaju et al. teach that the composite layer may include a fire-retardant material such as ammonium polyphosphate (APP) or alumina trihydrate (ATH)(par.0056).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aitharaju et al. (US 2023/0142691) in view of Choi et al. (US 2013/0252059) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Pitre et al. (US 2022/0271369).
With regard to claim 12, Aitharaju modified by Choi teach the enclosure of claim 11 (see paragraph 8 above), but fail to teach the claimed metallic mesh layer.
Pitre et al. teach a battery module comprising a housing and a cell stack accommodated in the housing (abstract). The housing (20) is formed from a tube-like enclosure (18) (par.0030, fig.1), wherein the enclosure (18) may be made of a composite material, such as a glass fiber-reinforced polymer (par.0037). A metallic mesh may be provided in the enclosure (par.0038).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to provide a metallic mesh on the inner surface of the composite layer (110) of the battery housing (20) of Aitharaju modified by Choi, in order to improve the structural integrity, impact, and vibration resistance of the battery housing.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aitharaju et al. (US 2023/0142691) in view of Choi et al. (US 2013/0252059) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Ye (CN 205759225 U, with attached machine translation).
With regard to claim 20, Aitharaju modified by Choi teach the enclosure of claim 11 (see paragraph 8 above), but fail to teach the claimed sensor(s) and controller.
Ye teaches a battery enclosure including a battery box (abstract).
Ye teaches that the battery box (2) includes a flame sensor (34)(fig.2 and page 3 of the attached translation). The flame sensor (34) may be an ultraviolet sensor used to detect light with a wavelength of 400nm emitted by a fire. The sensor (34) is in communication with the main controller (31) (fig.1 and page 3 of the attached translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to include an ultraviolet sensor as flame sensor on the battery housing (20) of Aitharaju modified by Choi, and connect the ultraviolet sensor to a controller, in order to improve the safety of the battery assembly of Aitharaju modified by Choi.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Nirmala et al. (“Design Study of Battery System Protection Structure Based on Hybrid Material Fiber Metal Laminate (FML)”) teach that fiber metal laminates (FML) are hydrid materials consisting of metal layers bonded together by intermediate composites. These laminates are light weight and can protect batteries in event of dynamic impact load (abstract). Nirmala et al. teach 1mm-thick aluminum as the top and bottom layer, and carbon fiber-reinforced polymer as the intermediate layer (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANCA EOFF whose telephone number is (571)272-9810. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am-6:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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.
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights