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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/15/23 is considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on 8/15/23 has been accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claim limitation, “ “the battery module according to claim 1 4,” is unclear. Appropriate corrections are required.
For purpose of compact prosecution and as best understood, the claim limitations will be interpreted as “the battery module according to claim 1.”
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.
(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) 1-3, 5, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kwak et al. (US Publication 2021/0074975).
Regarding claim 1, the Kwak et al. reference discloses a battery module comprising a housing and a battery cell inside the housing, wherein a fire extinguishing sheet (fire extinguisher sheet and agent) is disposed on an upper surface side or a side surface side of the battery cell.
Regarding claim 2, the Kwak et al. reference discloses wherein a plurality of the battery cells are arranged inside the housing, and a fire extinguishing sheet is disposed on the upper surface side of the plurality of battery cells.
Regarding claim 3, the Kwak et al. reference discloses wherein the battery cell is a lithium-ion battery cell, a nickel-cadmium battery cell, a nickel-hydrogen battery cell, or a sodium-sulfur battery cell (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, the Kwak et al. reference discloses wherein a plurality of the battery cells are arranged inside the housing, the fire extinguishing sheet covers only a portion of upper surfaces of the plurality of battery cells, and a path through which gas or smoke flows is formed in a region that is not covered with the fire extinguishing sheet on the upper surfaces of the plurality of battery cells inside the housing (Fig. 6, 150, 151).
Regarding claim 8, the Kwak et al. reference discloses a battery package comprising a rack and a plurality of the battery modules disposed in the rack, according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, the Kwak et al. reference discloses wherein the rack has a top cover, and the fire extinguishing sheet is disposed on a back side of the top cover, and the fire extinguishing sheet is disposed on or above the battery cell in the housing over a plurality of modules.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US Publication 2021/0074975) in view Yamamoto et al. (US Publication 2009/0098443).
Regarding claim 4, the Kwak et al. reference discloses the claimed invention above and further incorporated herein. The Kwak et al. reference further does not explicitly disclose the fire extinguishing sheet to which a potassium or sodium compound is applied. However, the Yamamoto et al. reference disclose that it is well known to incorporate fire extinguishing agents such as sodium or potassium compounds to a battery. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate known fire extinguishing agents such as sodium or potassium compounds disclosed by the Yamamoto et al. reference for the fire extinguishing agents in the Kwak et al. reference. The substitution of known equivalent structures involves only ordinary skill in the art. In re Fout 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); In re Susi 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971); In re Siebentritt 152 USPQ 618 (CCPA 1967); In re Ruff 118 USPQ 343 (CCPA 1958). When a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result. KSR v. Teleflex
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US Publication 2021/0074975) in view Lee (KR1020200125884) in further view of Takumi et al. (JP2020083297).
Regarding claim 6, the Kwak et al. reference discloses the claimed invention above and further incorporated herein. The Kwak et al. reference further discloses wherein the plurality of battery cells are arranged inside the housing, and the fire extinguishing sheet covers the upper surfaces of the plurality of battery cells and coupled to the battery housing but is silent in disclosing the fire extinguishing sheet also covers side surfaces around the plurality of battery cells and attached to the housing. However, the Lee reference discloses a fire extinguisher material on the top and to the sides around the plurality of battery and the Takumi reference discloses a fire extinguisher material (refrigerant) and structure that covers a top and extends to the side of the battery that is coupled to the battery housing for temperature control functions (12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the fire extinguisher material on top and on the sides of the battery cells disclosed by the Lee et al. reference for the fire extinguisher structure that is coupled to the battery housing disclosed by the Takumi reference for battery that requires fire extinguishing functions disclosed by the Kwak et al. reference to prevent hazardous temperatures in a battery.
Regarding claim 7, the modified Kwak et al. reference discloses wherein the fire extinguishing sheet is attached to an inner top surface of the housing and an inner side surface of the housing (P99).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN OI CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5162. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at 5712728760. 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.
/Helen Oi K CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752