Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/510,655

DEVICE MODULE AND CHANGE MEMBER-EQUIPPED POWER STORAGE DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 16, 2023
Priority
Jan 17, 2023 — JP 2023-005003
Examiner
RICKMAN, HOLLY C
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Prime Planet Energy & Solutions Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
408 granted / 576 resolved
+10.8% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
601
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
82.9%
+42.9% vs TC avg
§102
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
§112
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 576 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1-12 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Pechan et al. (US 2023/0187774). Pechan et al. disclose a battery module including a power storage device (20 and 22), with a safety valve (24) which ejects a fluid volume in the case of a thermal escalation (see [0252]). The safety valve includes an ejection direction portion and a direction change part that are integral with the storage device (see [0162]) as shown in the following annotated figure: PNG media_image1.png 447 572 media_image1.png Greyscale With regard to claim 2, the group of direction change parts (guide elements-32), shown in annotated Fig 3, correspond to the claimed “dispersion part” because they serve to disperse a fluid stream 26 that is ejected from any of the safety valves (24). With regard to claim 3, it is noted that Figure 3 shows a fluid (26) being ejected from the safety valve in a plurality of advancing directions in a path through the openings being two adjacent guide elements (32). One of ordinary skill in the art would expect the fluid to exit the two guide elements in a plurality of advancing directions given the width of the spacing between guide elements (32) and the different entry angles of the fluid. See also paragraph [0074], which describes the preferred exit angles of the gas/fluid, and the annotated portion of Figure 3 below: PNG media_image2.png 160 265 media_image2.png Greyscale With regard to claims 4-6, the guide elements (32) corresponding to the claimed direction change part are designed to redirect the flow of an elected fluid. Therefore, they are necessarily formed from a material that is capable of not deteriorating at the temperature of ejection. Furthermore, Pechan et al. teaches that the guide parts are made of materials to improve their head resistance (see para [0062]). With regard to claims 7-12, direction change parts 932) are provided integrally with the power storage device in the form of a covering on the safety valves (see Figure 3-4). Claims 16-20 are met for the foregoing reasons. 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(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pechan et al. (US 2023/0187774) in view of Aldrich (US 2020/0251703). Pechan et al. teaches all of the limitations of the claims, as detailed above, including a rupture safety valve having a thin part that is a part of the battery case wall and is configured to rupture in the case of thermal runaway (see [0052]-[0053]). The reference fails to teach that the device includes a metal case forming a case wall part. Aldrich teaches a similar structure with a battery pack (104) in a housing structure (106) having a rupture valve (114) therein – see Fig 1. The reference teaches that the battery pack housing is formed from metal (see para [0042]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use metal for the battery casing surrounding the battery cells taught by Pechan et al. in view of Aldrich’s teaching that metal was known to be suitable for this purpose. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li et al. (US 2016/0133901) and WO 2018/138226 are cited as art of interest. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY RICKMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1514. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Tues, and Thurs, from 9am-3pm 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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. /Holly Rickman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 16, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679070
MULTILAYER STRUCTURE FOR A BATTERY ENCASEMENT
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676306
LITHIUM METAL COMPOSITE OXIDE, POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERIES, POSITIVE ELECTRODE AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY
5y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12676374
CYLINDRICAL BATTERY MODULE
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12658515
COMPOSITE COVER AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE COVER
4y 5m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12658501
BATTERY MODULE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
4y 5m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+23.2%)
2y 11m (~3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 576 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month