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 .
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s specification (“spec”) are to the published application US 2024/0088514-A1, unless stated otherwise. Further, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed 15NOV2023 are in compliance with 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 3-9, 11, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US 2015/0194651-A1; “Urano”), in view of Shelekhin (US 2004/0028995-A1; “Shelekhin”), “PTFE Burst Pressure Theoretical Formula,” and “Young’s Modulus of Elasticity – Values for Common Materials.”
Regarding Claim 1, Urano teaches a gas passage (a degassing unit) for a battery case (battery housing) (Abstract, please see Fig. 1 of Urano below, duplicated from Sheet 1 of 1 of Drawings of Urano). Moreover, Urano teaches a battery can – 4 (main body), labeled below in Fig. 1 of Urano.
[AltContent: textbox (Rim of Housing (Gas Passage is located below (Abstract)))]
PNG
media_image1.png
478
485
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Inner Side)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Outer Side)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1 – Secondary Battery
2 – Battery Case
3 – Battery Cover
4 – Battery Can
11 – Sealing Cap
13 – Safety Valve
20 – Positive Electrode Terminal
22 – External Positive Electrode Terminal
30 – Negative Electrode Terminal
32 – External Negative Electrode)]
[AltContent: textbox (Main Body – Battery Housing)]
Fig. 1 of Sheet 1 of 11 of Drawings of Urano. This shows the battery case and venting hole and associated sealing cap.
Urano states that the substrate 61 is waterproof ([0036]) and that a leakage test is performed to ensure that the battery is completely sealed ([0004], [0045]) (this indicates that the main body is configured to be connected fluid tightly). The concave portion 51 and injection opening 12 (rim of a housing opening of the battery housing) and the outer and inner side of the battery are labeled in Fig. 1 of Urano above. The inner and outer side of the battery face the housing opening in a mounted state toward the battery housing, as seen in Fig. 1 of Urano above. There is at least one gas passage opening surrounded by a rim of the main body, as seen in Fig. 5 of Urano below; the gas passage is labeled or referred to as R in Fig. 5 of Urano. Urano further teaches a pressure sensitive adhesive member (a membrane) with excellent solvent resistance (fluid tight) connected to the rim of the main body surrounding at least one gas passage opening, as seen in Fig. 4 of Sheet 4 of 11 of Urano, and Fig. 6 from Sheet 6 of 11 of Urano. Urano teaches that the membrane may contain a polyolefinic resin such as polyethylene and polypropylene and a fluororesin such as polytetrafluoroethylene ([0052]). One inherent property of these materials is they can burst at a predetermined burst pressure (“PTFE Burst Pressure Theoretical Formula,” first full paragraph of Page 2). Furthermore, Urano teaches that the membrane is a three-part structure (a film composite; the films are arranged on top of each other)([0036]). These layers (films) are depicted in Fig. 5 of Urano below. Urano teaches that the pressure sensitive adhesive layer may be formed entirely on the surface of the substrate 61 ([0037]), forming the second film (the first film comprising in a surface area thereof at least one cutout, the second film covering the cutout to surround the cutout). Urano teaches a double-sided tape 14, composed of a porous film (first film) and a synthetic rubber material (second film)([0036]), adhering to the lower surface 11a of the sealing cap 11 (which may also be considered the second film) (please see Fig. 4 of Urano and Fig. 6 of Urano below), to the case surface portion ([0035]). This indicates that the first and second film are connected to the rim of the main body surrounding the gas passage opening, as illustrated in Fig. 4 of Urano below. Lastly, the second film (the synthetic rubber) is connected to the first film, as the second film is an adhesive (forming a seal).
[AltContent: textbox (1 – Secondary Battery
3 – Battery Cover
4 – Battery Can
11 – Sealing Cap
12 – Injection Opening
13 – Safety Valve
14 – Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Member
14a – Circular Punched Portion
30 – Negative Electrode Terminal
32 – External Negative Electrode
51 – Case Surface Portion
52 – Concave Portion )]
PNG
media_image2.png
447
522
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Outer Side)]
Fig. 4 of Sheet 4 of 11 of Drawings of Urano. This shows how the degassing unit is assembled in Urano.
[AltContent: textbox (3 – Battery Cover
11 – Sealing Cap
11b – Outer circumferential surface
12 – Injection Opening
13 – Safety Valve
14 – Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Member (Double Sided Tape)
14a – Circular Punched Portion
17 – Weld Beads
30 – Negative Electrode Terminal
32 – External Negative Electrode
51 – Case Surface Portion
52 – Concave Portion
52a – Outer circumferential edge
61 – Substrate (coated on both sides with the pressure sensitive adhesive)
61a – Substrate (gas permeability and water proofness – [0036])
62 – Pressure sensitive adhesive layers)]
PNG
media_image3.png
364
433
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5 of Sheet 5 of 11 of Drawings of Urano. This shows the synthetic rubber layers sandwiching the substrate, characterized by gas permeability and water proofness ([0036]).
[AltContent: textbox (11 – Sealing Cap
11a - bottom of the concave portion and opposed at the outer circumferential surface lib to the inner circumferential surface
11b – Outer circumferential surface
15 – Pressure sensitive adhesive member
15a – Circular Punchout
15b – Recesses formed at the circumferential edge)]
PNG
media_image4.png
382
465
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Outer Side of Main Body)][AltContent: arrow]
Fig. 6 of Sheet 6 of 11 of Drawings of Urano.
Urano does not teach that the membrane is areally stretched across and closes at least one gas passage opening, as shown clearly in Fig. 1 of Urano and Fig. 4 of Urano. Urano does not teach a predetermined burst pressure to release the at least one gas opening.
Shelekhin teaches that the vent aperture (degassing opening) is covered by a rupturable membrane (film)(Abstract). Shelekhin further teaches that the membrane ruptures at the threshold pressure (predetermined burst pressure) (Abstract). Shelekhin details membrane properties and reliable rupture pressures (predetermined – [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the battery of Urano with the polymer membrane of Shelekhin covering the entirety of the gas opening. Urano and Shelekhin each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). Urano states that the invention is used to prevent pressure buildup due to released gases from the battery, with adjustable gas permeation ([0049]). If the gas permeation cannot be adjusted due to sudden pressure changes in the battery, and there is an abrupt buildup in hydrogen and accompanying abrupt increase in the cell's internal gas pressure, adding a membrane that bursts at a predetermined design threshold (burst pressure) would prevent a leakage of electrolyte (Shelekhin, [0034]). Shelekhin teaches a leakage of electrolyte is an environmental hazard ([0034]), providing clear motivation for incorporating the rupturable membrane ([0034]) in the battery of Urano. Shelekhin details a design which incorporates the rupturable membrane (a safety feature – [0043]) and provides adequate motivation ([0034]) for incorporating these features readily known in the art.
Regarding Claim 3, Shelekhin teaches that the size of the aperture (cutout) can be adjusted to ensure that membrane ruptures according to the desired threshold pressure (predetermined burst pressure)([0035]). Moreover, Shelekhin teaches that the vent aperture shape (cutout) may be circular, elliptical, or polygonal ([0038]). Other shapes may be considered to arrive at the necessary aperture cross-sectional area for the desired threshold pressure (predetermined burst pressure) ([0038]).
Regarding Claim 4, Urano teaches that the synthetic rubber (the second film), which makes up the top and bottom layer of the pressure sensitive adhesive layer ([0036-0037]) is configured to face toward the outer side of the main body. This is illustrated in Fig. 4 of Urano and 6 of Urano.
Regarding Claim 5, Urano teaches that the sealing cap/battery cover 3 (the first film) is connected to the battery can 4 (main body) and is formed from a metal sheet ([0035]).These are formed, for example, of aluminum, iron, or stainless steel ([0022]). This language suggests they may be formed of the same material. In the alternative, it would be obvious to pick from the finite list of options provided for in in paragraph [0022] and arrive at the combination claimed (MPEP 2143).
Regarding Claim 6, Urano teaches that the second film is a polymer film, such as polyethylene and polypropylene ([0036]).
Regarding Claim 7, Urano teaches that the second film is a rubber (an elastomer) ([0037]).
Regarding Claim 8, Urano teaches that a double-sided adhesive tape – an adhesive layer - is arranged on both sides of the substrate polymer (the first film), which is then glued to the concave portion of the battery case (the main body) and the sealing cap ([0036], [0043]).
Regarding Claim 9, Urano teaches that an adhesive layer that is arranged on the substrate and attached to the sealing cap (the second film). An adhesive layer may also be attached below the substrate, which is linked to the concave portion of the battery case (the main body) ([0036], [0043]).
Regarding Claim 11, Shelekhin teaches a thickness of a polysulfone membrane in the vent aperture is between 0.0254 mm and 0.0381 mm ([0038]). The thickness of the membrane may be adjusted in order to assure that the membrane ruptures when the cell reaches the desired threshold pressure ([0035]).
Regarding Claim 15, Shelekhin teaches that the vent aperture shape (cutout) may be circular, elliptical, or polygonal, and further does not limit the shape to circular in any of the embodiments of the invention described herein ([0038]). Other shapes may be considered to arrive at the necessary aperture cross-sectional area for the desired threshold pressure (predetermined burst pressure) ([0038]).
Regarding Claim 18, Urano teaches that the pressure sensitive adhesive member (composed of the first and second film) are fixedly connected to the concave portion of the battery case (the main body)(please see Fig. 4 of Urano and Fig. 5 of Urano above and [0039]).
Regarding Claim 19, Urano teaches welding (forming weld beads – a seal) to secure the sealing cap to the battery can (housing); Urano teaches that a gas passage R is formed between the case surface portion 51 and the sealing cap ([0033]), shown in Fig. 4 of Urano (for how the sealing cap fits in the housing) and 5 of Urano (for the relation between the gas passage R and the housing seal) below. This seal is formed at the concave portion 52 ([0040])(an inner side of the main body).
Regarding Claim 20, Urano teaches a battery housing to accommodate battery cells ([0022]), with the housing opening comprising a housing wall, and the degassing unit of claim 1 closing the opening (please see Fig. 1 of Urano and Fig. 4 of Urano above).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US 2015/0194651-A1; “Urano”), in view of Shelekhin (US 2004/0028995-A1; “Shelekhin”), “PTFE Burst Pressure Theoretical Formula,” and Chen (CN-110311079-A; “Chen”).
Urano in view of Shelekhin and the PTFE reference teach a degassing unit and battery housing as described above.
Further, Urano teaches that a seal is established between the adhesive member and the sealing cap ([0036]) and as a result of welding the sealing cap to the battery case ([0040]).
Urano is silent on a relationship between the seal parameters and the predetermined burst pressure.
Shelekhin teaches an outer insulating seal circumventing the outer edge of the top cover ([0032]).
Shelekhin is silent on adjusting various parameters of the seal.
Chen teaches that the explosion-proof pressure (predetermined burst pressure) and the coated area of the adhesive layer are proportional (the area is composed of the width and the length (fourth full paragraph of Page 4 of Chen).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cross section of the seal of the battery of Urano in view of Shelekhin to adjust the predetermined burst pressure of the battery of Urano in view of Shelekhin, using the relationship identified by Chen. Urano, Shelekhin and Chen each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). Chen teaches that size of the coated area (the area is directly proportional to a width and length of the seal, along with a cross-section of the seal) and the width of the ventilating film bracket can be adjusted depending on the requirement of the explosion-proof pressure (fourth full paragraph of Page 4 of Chen). This design criteria provides adequate motivation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Urano and Shelekhin with the adjustable seal parameters of Chen.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US 2015/0194651-A1; “Urano”), in view of Shelekhin (US 2004/0028995-A1; “Shelekhin”), “PTFE Burst Pressure Theoretical Formula,” and Philipp (US-2922833-A).
Urano in view of Shelekhin and the PTFE reference teach a degassing unit and battery housing as described above.
Further, Urano teaches that the adhesive layers are superimposed on the substrate (membrane) ([0036]).
Urano does not compare the thickness of the first layer (film) to the second layer (film).
Shelekhin teaches a thickness of a membrane that can be adjusted in order to rupture when hydrogen gas within the cell builds up to the desired threshold pressure ([0035]).
Shelekhin does not teach a first and second film.
Philipp teaches a frangible, harder and thinner membrane (film) superimposed upon a resilient, relatively soft membrane (film) (Col. 5, lines 31-39).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the secondary battery of Urano in view of Shelekhin to incorporate a first thickness of the first film that is larger than a second thickness of the second film as taught by Philipp. Urano, Shelekhin and Philipp each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). Philipp proposes the two membranes of different thicknesses and resiliencies to control the degree of pressure which will cause bursting of the two membranes (Col. 5, lines 53-59). This provides the motivation behind incorporating a first film that is thicker than a second film.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US 2015/0194651-A1; “Urano”), in view of Shelekhin (US 2004/0028995-A1; “Shelekhin”), “PTFE Burst Pressure Theoretical Formula,” and “Young’s Modulus of Elasticity – Values for Common Materials.”
Urano in view of Shelekhin and the PTFE reference teach a degassing unit and battery housing as described above.
Further, Urano teaches that the first film (the polypropylene) has a higher modulus of elasticity than the second film (a rubber) due to the inherent properties of these materials. The Young’s modulus of elasticity of rubber is 10-100 MPa, while the Young’s modulus of elasticity of polypropylene is 1500 to 2000 MPa (“Young’s Modulus of Elasticity – Values for Common Materials,” Page 4, Table)(the first film comprises a first modulus of elasticity higher than a second modulus of elasticity of the second film; the first modulus of elasticity is higher by at least 50% than the second modulus of elasticity; the second modulus of elasticity of the second film is smaller than 1,000 MPa). If the prior art compound does in fact possess a particular benefit, even though the benefit is not recognized in the prior art, applicant’s recognition of the benefit is not in itself sufficient to distinguish the claimed compound from the prior art. In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1991); MPEP 2144.09 VII.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urano (US 2015/0194651-A1; “Urano”), in view of Shelekhin (US 2004/0028995-A1; “Shelekhin”), “PTFE Burst Pressure Theoretical Formula,” and Robert (DE-102012022346-B4; “Robert”).
Urano in view of Shelekhin and the PTFE reference teach a degassing unit and battery housing as described above.
Regarding Claim 16, Urano further teaches the substrate 61 (first film) is water proof ([0036]).
Urano does not teach that the first film and the second film are gas-tight.
Shelekhin teaches that the membrane covering the vent ([0015]) is permeable to hydrogen gas ([0012]).
Shelekhin does not teach a second film and is also silent on a gas-tight first and second film.
Robert teaches a membrane cover part (second film) which covers the membrane support grid webs/the membrane (first film) and allows the membrane composite structure to be air-tight so that no air or no gas can pass through the housing opening into the housing interior ([0011]). This also prevents the ingress of water (and air) from outside to inside ([0013]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to make the first and second film gas-tight by adding the membrane cover part of Robert over the first and second film of Urano in view of Shelekhin in the battery of Urano in view of Shelekhin. . Urano, Shelekhin and Robert each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). Robert states the intrusion of water could lead to a functional restriction or even destruction of the battery ([0013]). Preventing the intrusion of gas would also prevent dirt and other particulates from entering the battery in an application in vehicles, where Robert teaches that the vehicle may function in water environments because of the water tightness of the membrane composite ([0013]).
Regarding Claim 17, Urano further teaches that the double-sided tape, composed of a substrate (membrane – second film) and adhesive (first layer), is permeable to gas ([0042]). The membrane specifically is water proof (prevents liquid media from entering), and, being permeable to gas, is semipermeable. It allows the gas to be evolved inside the battery to be released past the double-sided tape to the outside, so that increase of the pressure inside the battery can be prevented ([0049]). Urano teaches that the amount of gas permeation can be adjusted depending on pore size, thickness and porosity of the substrate for the porous film of the double-sided tape. Moreover, the amount of gas permeation can be adjusted depending on the pressure sensitive adhesive ([0050]).
Urano does not teach that the first film is gas-tight.
Shelekhin teaches that the membrane covering the vent ([0015]) is permeable to hydrogen gas ([0012]).
Shelekhin does not teach a second film and is also silent on a gas-tight first and second film.
Robert teaches a gas passage extending between the inner side of the carrier body and a semipermeable membrane resting over an air-tight membrane cover ([0013]). The membrane cover is gas-tight ([0013]), and the second film is a semipermeable membrane which is waterproof so that substantially no water through the housing opening can reach the housing interior (Abstract). Moreover, Robert states that air (gaseous media) exchange is possible in both directions through the membrane, indicating that gas (gaseous media) can pass from an environment into the battery housing ([0014]). Robert states that the semipermeable membrane is water tight and no water can penetrate through the membrane (if no water can penetrate, then this is bidirectional, such that the reverse applies – the semipermeable membrane prevents liquid media and/or solids from passing through)([0057]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to make the first film of Urano in view of Shelekhin gas-tight by substituting the membrane cover part of Robert with the first film of Urano in view of Shelekhin in the battery of Urano in view of Shelekhin. Urano, Shelekhin and Robert each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to claimed invention (MPEP 2141.01(a)(I)). Robert states the intrusion of water could lead to a functional restriction or even destruction of the battery ([0013]). Preventing the intrusion of gas would also prevent dirt and other particulates from entering the battery in an application in vehicles, where Robert teaches that the vehicle may function in water environments because of the water tightness of the membrane composite ([0013]). This also allows for pressure equalization or degassing the housing interior (Abstract).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-10557561-B2 to Kleinke C teaches a pressure-compensation device for a housing with a gas-permeable membrane composite with multiple layers covering the opening and is watertight; teaches a pressure relief valve made of an elastomer (impermeable to gas and liquid) and a cage made of a polymer material
PNG
media_image5.png
327
846
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Kleinke, duplicated from Sheet 1 of 1 of Drawings of Kleinke
[AltContent: textbox (8, 10 – Gas-Permeable Membranes
3 – Cage
9 – Pressure-Relief Valve )]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM FADDOUL SAVAGE whose telephone number is (571)270-0315. The examiner can normally be reached 8a.m.-5p.m..
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/WILLIAM FADDOUL SAVAGE/
Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights