DETAILED ACTION
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 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun CN 108054438 A in view of Lee KR 20240021058 A.
In regards to Independent Claim 1, Sun teaches a battery extinguishing device (abstract, figure 1) comprising: a first fire extinguishing unit (unit as shown in figure 1) comprising: a first body (entirety of body shown in figure 1) having a sheet shape (layers 11, 12, 13) and provided between a plurality of battery cells (figure 2 shows a sheet around each battery core 20, such that the unit is between each battery when batteries are installed next to each other); and a first plurality of fire extinguishing portions provided on one side of the first body and configured to accommodate a fire extinguishing substance that vaporizes by heat (capsules 15 in side 11); and a first heat blocking portion made of aluminum provided on the first body opposite the first plurality of fire extinguishing portions and configured to block heat transfer from the plurality of battery cells (aluminum layer 12 opposite layer 11 as shown in figure 1). However, Sun does not teach that the first body is separated from the plurality of battery cells. Lee teaches a fire extinguishing sheet (50b) that is spaced (paragraph [0063]) from a battery (1, with bus bar module 30 at its end as shown in figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to space the fire extinguishing sheet of Sun from the batteries of Sun, as taught by Lee, in order to prevent the fire extinguishing agent from being exposed to heat from the battery during charging and discharging of the battery (paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 2, Sun in view of Lee teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Sun further teaches the first heat blocking portion (12) is formed in a form of a substrate or film (aluminum layer 12 is a film).
Regarding Dependent Claim 3, Sun in view of Lee teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Sun further teaches the first heat blocking portion has a size corresponding to the plurality of battery cells or is provided in plural pieces (the size of 12 is sized such to cover each battery of a plurality of batteries, where neither relative or actual sizes of the portion is being claimed).
Regarding Dependent Claim 5, Sun in view of Lee teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Sun further teaches the first plurality of fire extinguishing portions is formed in a form of a plurality of capsules in a matrix form (capsules 15 in matrix 11 as shown in figure 1), and wherein the plurality of capsules is configured to be destroyed when the first plurality of fire extinguishing portions is exposed to a flame or reaches a predetermined temperature or higher (paragraph [0080]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fu CN 102013461 A.
Regarding Dependent Claim 4, Sun in view of Lee teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. However, Sun in view of Lee does not teach that the first heat blocking portion is blackened. Fu teaches blackening aluminum (paragraph [0011]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to blacken the aluminum of Sun in view of Lee, as taught by Fu, in order to improve the heat conduction of the aluminum (paragraph [0011]).
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gu CN 210897374 U.
Regarding Dependent Claims 6-8, Sun in view of Lee teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. However, Sun in view of Lee does not teach a second fire extinguishing unit comprising: a second body having a sheet shape; and a second plurality of fire extinguishing portions provided on one side of the second body and configured to accommodate a fire extinguishing substance that vaporizes by heat; wherein the first fire extinguishing unit is coupled to the second fire extinguishing unit via a coupling portion such that the first plurality of fire extinguishing portions faces the second plurality of fire extinguishing portions. Gu teaches a collection of battery cells (2) with surrounding insulating sleeves (4, which act as battery extinguishing devices) connected together by a frame (1) formed of an insulating material (foam concrete, claim 8, which discloses the material of the sleeve, which also may be the material of the bracket, paragraph [0045]), where the sleeves around the outer batteries face outward relative to the coupling portion (4 faces outward relative to 1 as shown in figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to organize the batteries and surrounding fire extinguishing devices of Sun in view of Lee into the package with mounting bracket of Gu such that at least some of the plurality of batteries comprise sheets facing outward relative to the mounting bracket, in order to allow all of the plurality of battery cells in a pack to be isolated and avoid heat splashing in the case of thermal runaway of one of the battery cells, where the bracket improves the structural integrity of the package (paragraphs [0030]-[0032]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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 STEVEN M SUTHERLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-1902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270 - 1814. 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.
/STEVEN M SUTHERLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752