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 .
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "200", “300”, and "500" have all been used to designate "fire extinguishing pad". Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "12" and "120" have both been used to designate "case". Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the "separator" must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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:
In paragraph [0082] there is an improper symbol (check mark).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 8-9, 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al (KR 20210093636 A), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a battery cell comprising ([0003], [0038]):
a positive electrode plate (Background art/Description of embodiments; [0003]; [0038]);
one negative electrode plate(Background art/Description of embodiments; [0003]; [0038]);
separator (Background art/Description of embodiments; [0003]; [0038]);
a case accommodating the electrode assembly (Background art/Description of embodiments; [0003]; [0038]);
electrode tab connected to positive or negative protruding out of the case (Description of embodiments; [0046]);
fire extinguishing pad on the outer surface of the case (Description of embodiments; Fig. 3; [0038]).
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 1, and a fire extinguishing pad (Part 235; [0069]) comprising:
a fire extinguishing agent that vaporizes when overheated and is sprayed out of the fire extinguishing pad (Part 230; [0069]);
a carrier which maintains fire extinguishing pad and supports fire extinguishing pad and supports the fire extinguishing agent on one side (Part 210; [0071]);
a sealing member connected to one side of the carrier to enclose the fire extinguishing agent and seals fire extinguishing agent (Part 210; [0071]).
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 2, and a carrier (Fig. 4, 5, 6; Part 235; [0069], [0081]) comprising:
a bottom plate (Fig. 4, 5, 6; [0081-0083])
a pillar which is formed to extend to one side of the bottom plate and is disposed in a plurality to be space apart along a surface direction of a bottom plate (Fig. 4, 5, 6; [0081-0083]);
a fire extinguishing agent is between pillar and neighboring pillar (Fig. 4, 5, 6; [0081-0083]).
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 2, and a carrier (Fig. 4, 5, 6; Part 235; [0069], [0081]) comprising:
A bottom plate which combines sealing member to form fire extinguishing agent space inside (Part 230, 235, 232; extinguishing capsule; [0069]);
A plurality of particles provided in accommodation space where particles are mixed with fire extinguishing agent (Part 230, 235, 232; extinguishing capsule; [0069]).
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 2, and a carrier (Fig. 4, 5, 6; Part 235; [0069], [0081]) that includes one of the following:
incombustible polymer, semi-incombustible polymer, flame retardant polymer, metal, carbon (Part 235, [0069]).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 2, and a fire extinguishing agent ([0069]) comprising:
at least one selected from the group consisting of: halogen-based flame retardants, phosphorus-based flame retardants, nitrogen-based flame retardants, inorganic flame retardants, radical scavengers ([0069]).
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 1, and fire extinguishing pad on a sealing surface which is fused to the electrode assembly accommodation space on case (Part 230, 232; [0070]).
Regarding claim 14, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 1, and a fire extinguishing pad (Part 230; [0033], [0086]) comprising:
an adhesive member on the other surface of the carrier (Part 230; [0033], [0043], [0070], [0086]);
a fire extinguishing pad is attached on the outer surface of the case (Part 230; [0033], [0043], [0070], [0086]).
Regarding claim 15, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 2, and a fire extinguishing pad (Fig. 4, 5, part 230, 226, 210; [0075]) comprising:
one surface of the carrier is coated with fire extinguishing agent (Fig. 4, 5; Part 230, 226, 210; [0075]);
one surface of the carrier is coated with fire extinguishing agent is coated with the sealing member (Part 232; [0075]).
Regarding claim 16, Lee teaches a battery pack (Part 110; [0065]) comprising:
a plurality of battery cells (Part 110; [0065]) including:
an electrode assembly (Part 110; [0065]) including:
one positive electrode plate (Part 110; [0065]);
one negative electrode plate (Part 110; [0065]);
separator (Part 110; [0065]);
a case accommodating the electrode assembly (Part 210; [0065]);
electrode tab connected to positive or negative protruding out of the case (Part 111a, 111b; [0044-0045]);
a lower case having a space formed in which a plurality of battery cells is accommodated (Part 240; [0055]);
an upper cover which seals a surface of the case (Part 220; [0055]);
a fire extinguishing pad on an outer surface of the case (Part 230, [0086]).
Regarding claim 17, Lee teaches a battery pack as claimed in claim 16, and a battery cell accommodated in a plurality in the lower case (Part 240, 100, [0056]).
Regarding claim 18, Lee teaches a battery pack as claimed in claim 17, and a fire extinguishing pad on one surface of a sealing surface where electrode tab is sealed on the case respectively (Part 111a, 111b, 230; Figs. 4-5; [0075], [0099-0100]).
Regarding claim 19, Lee teaches a battery pack as claimed in claim 17, and a fire extinguishing pad in a space between the battery cell and the upper cover (Fig. 4, 5, part 230, 226, 210; [0075]).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, as applied to claim 2 above, in further view of Tsukamoto (US 8227103 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Lee does not explicitly teach a carrier having a porosity greater than 30%.
Tsukamoto teaches a carrier having a porosity greater than 5% (Summary, [006]) for the absorption of an agent. Tsukamoto demonstrates that increasing porosity enhances the ability of the carrier to absorb the agent.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to modify the carrier of Lee, as informed by Tsukamoto, to have a porosity greater than 30%, as such a value represents an optimization of a result-effective variable (i.e. porosity) to improve absorption capacity. Increasing porosity beyond 5% to higher values, such as greater than 30% would have been within the routine skill in the art and would have yielded predictable results of enhanced absorption.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 20210093636 A), as applied to claim 2 above, in further view of Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology (NPL).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches a battery cell as claimed in claim 2, comprising:
a fire extinguishing agent (Part 235, [0069]);
a sealing member configured to be broken by vaporization pressure generated by the fire extinguishing agent ([0070]).
Lee further teaches that the fire extinguishing agent may be selected from a variety of agents suitable for fire suppression ([0069]), including halogen-based agents, which generate vapor pressure when heated to rupture the sealing member and release the fire extinguishing agent ([0070]). Bromine is a halogen element, and therefore represents a species within the class of halogen fire extinguishing agents suggested by Lee. Accordingly, Lee suggests the use of bromine as one possible fire extinguishing agent within the disclosed class of materials ([0069]).
Lee, however, does not explicitly disclose the specific temperature-dependent phase behavior of bromine recited in claim 7.
The Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology teaches that bromine has a heat of vaporization of approximately 50 °C (Kirk-Othmer, pg. 296) and is liquid at room temperature, remaining in liquid form at temperatures below its boiling point. Kirk-Othmer further teaches that bromine vaporizes when heated, forming a gas and generating vapor pressure.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to select bromine, a halogen, as the fire extinguishing agent in Lee because Lee specifically suggests halogen-based fire extinguishing agents capable of vaporizing to generate pressure that ruptures the sealing member and releases the agent for fire suppression.
Further, because bromine is known to remain liquid at room temperature and transition to a gaseous state when heated to elevated temperatures, the claimed limitation that the fire extinguishing agent remains liquid at room temperature and changes to gas at 30 °C or higher represents an inherent property of bromine as taught by Kirk-Othmer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to utilize bromine as the fire extinguishing agent in Lee with the known phase change properties taught by Kirk-Othmer in order to provide a predictable vaporization behavior that generates pressure to break the sealing member.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, as applied to claim 9 above, in further view of Gwon et al (KR 20150072236 A), hereinafter Gwon.
Regarding claim 10, Lee does not explicitly teach a fire extinguishing pad on a sealing surface side. Gwon teaches a fire extinguishing pad on a sealing surface side (Abstract, pouch 50). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to modify the fire extinguishing placement of Lee, as informed by Gwon, to position the fire extinguishing pad on the sealing surface where the electrode tab is sealed, as taught by Gwon, in order to localize the fire suppression agent at a critical interface where failure, leakage, or thermal events are most likely to occur. Placing the fire extinguishing pad at the sealing surface would ensure rapid deployment of the extinguishing agent in response to heat or pressure generated by the electrode tab region thereby improving reliability and safety of the battery.
Regarding claim 11, Lee does not explicitly teach the positioning of the fire extinguishing pad on the sealing surface at the electrode tab. Gwon teaches the fire extinguishing pad located where the electrode tab is sealed on the sealing surface (Abstract, sealing surface 51, pouch 50). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lee, as informed by Gwon, in order to localize fire suppression at a known high-risk region of the battery. Such placement would have predictably improved the effectiveness of the fire extinguishing pad by ensuring deployment of the extinguishing agent directly at the source of a potential thermal event.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Choi (KR 20220013603 A).
Regarding claim 12, Lee does not explicitly teach a fire extinguishing pad located on one surface or both surfaces of the battery cell. Choi teaches the fire extinguishing pad located on one surface or both surface of the battery cell (Claim 7). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lee, as informed by Choi, to position the fire extinguishing pad on one surface or both, in order to increase the amount of distribution of the fire extinguishing agent within the battery. Providing the pad on multiple surfaces would enhance the likelihood that the agent is released near the location of a thermal event, thereby improving fire suppression effectiveness and overall safety.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, as applied to claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches a battery module including a fire extinguishing pad disposed relative to battery cells (Part 230, 232; [0070]). Claim 13 further recites that an area of the fire extinguishing pad corresponds to an area of the sealing surface and a thickness of the fire extinguishing pad.
Lee does not explicitly disclose the specific relationship between the area of the fire extinguishing pad and the sealing surface as claimed.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select an appropriate area and thickness of the fire extinguishing pad corresponding to the sealing surface area. Determining suitable dimensions of the pad would have been a matter of routine optimization of result-effective variable, such as ensuring sufficient coverage of the sealing surface and appropriate fire suppression performance while fitting within the battery module structure. Adjusting the area and thickness of the fire extinguishing pad merely involves changing the size of a known component to obtain predictable results, such as adequate coverage and effective fire suppression. Such dimensional optimization is considered an obvious matter of design choice absent a showing of unexpected results.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, as applied to claim 17 above, in further view of Morisato et al. (US 20190341594 A1), hereinafter Morisato.
Regarding claim 20, Lee teaches the limitations of claims 17, as stated above. Claim 20 further recites the battery cell fixed by inserting the sealing surface and electrode tab into an internal busbar, with the tab connected to an external busbar. Lee does not explicitly teach how the battery cell is fixed. Morisato teaches that the battery cell fixed by inserting the sealing surface and electrode tab into an internal busbar, with the tab connected to an external busbar (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lee, as informed by Morisato, to include busbars having connection portions joined to the electrode tab to mechanically and electrically secure the battery cell. Joining the busbars to the electrode tab provides a stable electrical connection while also contributing to fixing the cell in place. Applying this known configuration would have yielded predictable improvements in stability and performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tamara Orduna whose telephone number is (571) 431-1457. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/TAMARA ORDUNA/Examiner, Art Unit 1776 /Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776