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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-11 and 13 in the reply filed on 6/26/26 is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/26/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Marchio reference still anticipates at least claim 1 but the rejection has been modified to address the new limitations. Applicant’s single assertion that Marchio fails to disclose the claims as amended do not address the modified rejection below. The objection to title has not been addressed. New claim 14 invokes a new USC 112 rejection.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 13 recites that the sealing element comprises a rubber pad that…can expand a volume of the fume collection chamber.” This limitation is not supported by the instant specification. Instant paragraph 74 does recite that the sealing elements may be in the form of rubber; but it also states that they are fixed by bonding to prevent moving and impairing the sealing effect. The only references to expansion are in instant paragraphs 23 and 78 but they relate to ensuring that the size of the fume collecting chamber is large enough to accommodate the vented gas. There is no teaching in the instant specification that the sealing element or rubber pad can expand a volume of the fume collecting chamber.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Marchio (US 2012/0129024 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Marchio discloses an apparatus comprising: a plurality of battery cells 22 (paragraph 48), wherein the battery cells comprise an explosion-proof valve 56 (paragraph 49); a fume collecting component 40 (paragraph 47), disposed on a side of the battery cells on which the explosion-proof valve is disposed (see Figure 1), wherein the fume collecting component 40 comprises a fume collecting chamber 90 (paragraph 55), and the fume collecting chamber 90 is in fluid communication with a pressure relief port of the explosion-proof valve 56 (paragraph 54); and an exhaust pipe 98, fluidly communicating with the fume collecting chamber and configured to guide a gas in the fume collecting chamber to a preset position (paragraph 55). The pipe 98 is smaller than fume collecting chamber 90 (see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 2, Marchio discloses a harness plate, the harness plate 206 is mounted on the plurality of battery cells (paragraph 78), the fume collecting component 220 is connected to the harness plate (see Figure 10), and the harness plate comprises a first through-hole that implements fluid communication between the pressure relief port of the explosion-proof valve and the fume collecting chamber (paragraph 75).
Regarding claim 3, Marchio discloses a connection wire configured to be electrically connected to the battery cells, and the connection wire is fixed to a side of the fume collecting component, the side being away from the battery cells (paragraph 77).
Regarding claim 4, Marchio discloses that a groove is created on the side of the fume collecting component, the side being away from the battery cells; and the connection wire is fixed in the groove (paragraph 79).
Regarding claim 5, Marchio discloses a sealing element disposed between the pressure relief port of the explosion-proof valve and the fume collecting chamber (paragraph 68).
Regarding claim 6, Marchio discloses a first sealing element disposed between the harness plate and the fume collecting component, and the first sealing element comprises a second through-hole that communicates the first through-hole to the fume collecting chamber (paragraph 75).
Regarding claim 7, Marchio discloses that the sealing element comprises a second sealing element disposed between the harness plate and the battery cells, and the second sealing element comprises a third through-hole that exposes the explosion-proof valve (paragraph 75).
Regarding claim 8, Marchio discloses that the plurality of battery cells is arranged side by side along a first direction, and the fume collecting chamber extends along the first direction to cover the explosion-proof valve of the plurality of battery cells (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Marchio discloses that the exhaust pipe is connected to a side of the fume collecting chamber, the side being perpendicular to the first direction; and the exhaust pipe comprises a part parallel to the first direction (see Figure 6).
Regarding claim 10, Marchio discloses a housing, a first feeding pipe, and a second feeding pipe; the fume collecting component and the plurality of battery cells are disposed in the housing; both the first feeding pipe and the second feeding pipe communicate with an inner space of the housing; the first feeding pipe is configured to feed a cooling gas into the inner space of the housing; the second feeding pipe is configured to expel a gas out of the inner space of the housing; and the exhaust pipe is fluidly isolated from the first feeding pipe and the second feeding pipe (paragraph 95).
Regarding claim 11, Marchio discloses that the battery is configured to supply electrical energy to the electrical device (paragraph 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchio as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Fujii (WO 2013/161655 A1).
Marchio discloses vent seals (paragraph 68) but not the use of rubber pads for expansion. Fujii—in an invention for a batter with gas relief means—discloses the use of rubber pad seals that are elastically deforming to allow for expansion while maintaining seals (paragraph 52). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize elastic rubber seals in Marchio to allow for sealed expansion for gas accommodation as suggested by Fujii.
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 IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights