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 .
Summary
This is a non-final office action for application 18/576,877 filed on 01/05/2024. Claims 1-15 are pending.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copies have been filed in parent Application Nos. KR10-2022-0081164 filed on 07/01/2022 and PCT/KR2023/009179 filed on 06/29/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS)s submitted on 01/05/2024, 01/30/2025, 07/22/2025 and 08/25/205 are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 15 recites “wherein the blocking plate is” but previously refers to a plural amount of blocking plates. Claim 15 should recite “wherein each blocking plate is” for the sake of singular/plural consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-9, 11 and 12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 and 14 of copending Application 18/774,228.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding Claim 1, claim 1 of copending Application ‘228 recites a battery pack comprising at least one battery module and a pack housing accommodating the at least one battery module, wherein the module receiving portion includes an opening/closing member configured to vent gas or flame out of the module receiving portion in the event of thermal runaway. The instant application claim 1 recites substantially the same battery pack arrangement including at least one battery module, a pack housing, and an opening/closing member configured to discharge venting gas or flame to the outside. While the instant claim recites that the opening and opening/closing member are provided at the rear side of the battery module, this represents an obvious variation of the venting member in the same battery pack venting structure. Accordingly, claim 1 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 2, claim 2 of the instant application depends from claim 1 and recites that the pack housing includes a side frame forming a side of the pack housing so that at least a part of the side frame faces the rear side of the at least one battery module. This limitation is fully disclosed in claim 2 of the copending application, which recites a side frame forming a side of the pack housing, wherein at least a portion of the side frame faces the opening/closing member. Accordingly, claim 2 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 3, claim 3 of the instant application recites a first cover over the opening/closing member and arranged to face the side frame, wherein a passage hole through which the venting gas or flame passes is formed between the side frame and the first cover. Claim 2 of the copending application recites a flow path formed between the module receiving portion and the side frame and communicating with the module receiving portion to vent gas or flame out of the pack housing. The recited first cover and passage hole define the same type of flow path between the venting region and the side frame. Accordingly, claim 3 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 4, claim 4 of the instant application recites that an end of the opening/closing member is configured to contact the first cover when the opening/closing member opens. Claim 3 of the copending application recites that a first end of the opening/closing member contacts the side frame when opened. Providing the first cover as the contact surface rather than the side frame is an obvious variation that performs the same function of limiting or guiding the opened position of the opening/closing member. Accordingly, claim 4 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 5, claim 5 of the instant application recites a second cover spaced apart from the first cover and placed above the first cover, wherein a flow path communicating with the passage hole is formed between the first cover and the second cover. Claim 2 of the copending application recites a flow path communicating with the module receiving portion and configured to vent gas or flame toward an exit port. The use of first and second covers to define the flow path represents an obvious variation of the same venting flow path arrangement. Accordingly, claim 5 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 6, claim 6 of the instant application recites a discharge hole communicating with the flow path and configured to discharge the venting gas or flame to the outside of the pack housing. This limitation is fully disclosed in claim 2 of the copending application, which recites an exit port communicating with the flow path and configured to vent the gas or flame out of the pack housing. Accordingly, claim 6 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 7, claim 7 of the instant application recites that the discharge hole is located in the pack housing at a position after the venting gas or flame changes direction one or more times. This limitation is fully disclosed in claim 5 of the copending application, which recites that the exit port is formed at a location so that the flow path bends one or more times. Accordingly, claim 7 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 8, claim 8 of the instant application recites that the discharge hole is located at a side of the pack housing above the first cover. Claim 2 of the copending application recites an exit port disposed in the side frame and communicating with the flow path. Locating the discharge hole at the side of the pack housing above the cover is an obvious variation of the exit port in the same side frame venting arrangement. Accordingly, claim 8 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 9, claim 9 of the instant application recites that the discharge hole is provided at a side of the pack housing opposite to the front side of the at least one battery module. Claim 2 of the copending application recites the side frame facing the opening/closing member and an exit port disposed in the side frame. Providing the discharge hole at the rear/opposite side of the battery module is an obvious arrangement for discharging gas or flame through the side frame facing the opening/closing member. Accordingly, claim 9 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 11, claim 11 of the instant application recites that the pack housing further includes a barrier connected to the side frame, wherein a plurality of battery modules are arranged along a longitudinal direction and configured to be sealed to each other by the barrier. Claim 6 of the copending application recites a plurality of battery modules received in respective module receiving portions, wherein each of the plurality of module receiving portions is configured to be air tightly closed by a partition. The recited barrier corresponds to the partition used to air tightly close and separate the battery module receiving portions, and therefore does not patentably distinguish over the copending claims. Accordingly, claim 11 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
Regarding Claim 12, claim 12 of the instant application recites a vehicle comprising one or more battery packs according to claim 1. This limitation is fully disclosed in claim 14 of the copending application, which recites a vehicle comprising at least one battery pack according to claim 1. Accordingly, claim 12 does not recite a patentably distinct invention.
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.
Claims 1-13 are 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.
Regarding Claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation “the venting gas or flame” but “a venting gas or flame was never properly introduced” thus there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding Claim 7, claim 7 recites the limitation “at a position after the venting gas or flame changes direction one or more times” this limitation fails to clearly define the structural location of the discharge hole. The claim does not clearly identify the structural reference points or flow path used to determine when the venting gas or flame has changed direction, or where the discharge hole must be located.
Regarding Claim 11, claim 11 recites the limitation “wherein the plurality of battery modules are configured to be sealed to each other by the barrier when viewed in the longitudinal direction of the pack housing.” The phrase “sealed to each other by the barrier” is unclear because it is unclear whether the plurality of battery modules are sealed together, sealed from each other, or separated by the barrier.
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 1-2 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoon et al. (KR 10-2280326 B1 - see provided translation).
Regarding Claim 1, Hoon discloses a battery pack (see e.g. "battery pack 9" in paragraph [91] and part number 9 in FIG. 10), comprising:
at least one battery module (see e.g. " battery module 1" in paragraph [13] and part number 1 in FIG. 9) having a front side (see .g. "front cover" in paragraph [119] and part number 25 in FIGs. 1 and 2)and a rear side (see e.g. "The rear cover 26" in paragraph [119] and part number 26 in FIG. 2), a module terminal at the front side of the at least one battery module (see e.g. "plurality of first bus bars 4 ... and third bus bars 6 is attached to the cell monitoring unit 2 coupled to the front cover 25 . may be electrically connected, and the cell monitoring unit 2 may be electrically connected to an ECU (not shown)" in paragraph [114] and part numbers 4, 6 and 2 in FIG. 2), and an opening (see e.g. "exhaust hole 61" in paragraph [13] and part number 61 in FIG. 2) and an opening/closing member at the rear side of the at least one battery module (see e.g. " a plurality of exhaust covers 70" in paragraph [13] and part number 70 in FIGs. 2 and 9), the opening/closing member configured to discharge the venting gas or flame to an outside of the at least one battery module through the opening (see e.g. "When a thermal runaway phenomenon occurs in the battery cell 11 , the cell monitoring unit 2 or the ECU opens the exhaust cover 70 located above the battery cell 11 , and gas generated from the battery cell 11 is exhausted. It may be discharged to the outside of the battery module 1 through the hole 61 ." in paragraph [18]); and
a pack housing configured to accommodate the at least one battery module therein (see e.g. the housing accommodating the battery modules and part number 1 in FIG. 10).
Regarding Claim 2, Hoon discloses the battery pack of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the pack housing includes a side frame forming a side of the pack housing so that at least a part of the side frame faces the rear side of the at least one battery module (see e.g. annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
409
698
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Hoon, figure 10, annotated for illustration)
Regarding Claim 13, Hoon discloses a battery module (see e.g. "battery module 1" in paragraph [72] and part number 1 in FIG. 1), comprising:
a cell assembly (see e.g. " battery unit 10" in paragraph [13] and part number 10 in FIG. 2); and
a module case accommodating the cell assembly therein (see e.g. " a housing 20" in paragraph [13] and part number 20 in FIG. 1), the module case having a front side and a rear side (see .g. "front cover" and "The rear cover 26" in paragraph [119] and part numbers 25 and 26 in FIG. 2), a module terminal at the front side of the module case (see e.g. "plurality of first bus bars 4 ... and third bus bars 6 is attached to the cell monitoring unit 2 coupled to the front cover 25 . may be electrically connected, and the cell monitoring unit 2 may be electrically connected to an ECU (not shown)" in paragraph [114] and part numbers 4, 6 and 2 in FIG. 2), and an opening (see e.g. "exhaust hole 61" in paragraph [13] and part number 61 in FIG. 2) and an opening/closing member at the rear side of the module case (see e.g. " a plurality of exhaust covers 70" in paragraph [13] and part number 70 in FIGs. 2 and 9), the opening/closing member configured to discharge the venting gas or flame to an outside of the module case through the opening (see e.g. "When a thermal runaway phenomenon occurs in the battery cell 11 , the cell monitoring unit 2 or the ECU opens the exhaust cover 70 located above the battery cell 11 , and gas generated from the battery cell 11 is exhausted. It may be discharged to the outside of the battery module 1 through the hole 61 ." in paragraph [18]).
Regarding Claim 14, Hoon discloses the battery module of claim 13 (see e.g. claim 13 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the opening is in an upper part at the rear side of the module case (see e.g. part number 61 in FIG. 2), and
wherein the opening/closing member is configured to open and close the opening at the rear side according to a discharge pressure of the venting gas or the flame (see e.g. " a plurality of exhaust covers coupled to the upper cover to close the exhaust hole and opening the exhaust hole when the gas exceeds a predetermined pressure" in paragraph [37]).
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoon et al. (KR 10-2280326 B1).
Regarding Claim 12, Hoon discloses the battery pack of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Hoon does not explicitly disclose a vehicle comprising one or more battery packs according to claim 1.
However, Hoon teaches that secondary batteries are used as power sources for electric vehicles (EVs) and hybrid vehicles (HEVs), and that battery modules may be connected in series or parallel with other components to form a battery pack (see e.g. paragraphs [23]-[26] of Hoon). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide one or more of the battery packs of Hoon in a vehicle in order to power the vehicle as suggested by Hoon.
Claims 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoon et al. (KR 10-2280326 B1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Nobuyoshi (JP 2015-133266 A - see attached translation).
Regarding Claim 3, Hoon discloses the battery pack of claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above).
Hoon does not explicitly disclose that the pack housing further includes a first cover over the opening/closing member and arranged to face the side frame, and wherein a passage hole through which the venting gas or flame passes is formed between the side frame and the first cover.
Nobuyoshi, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery packs with internal venting, discloses a pack housing (see e.g. "battery module 1" in paragraph [45] and part number 1 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi) that further includes a first cover (see e.g. "partition plate 33" in paragraph [62] and part number 33 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi) over the opening/closing member (see e.g. "valve 13 " in paragraph [60] and part number 13 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi) and arranged to face the side frame (see e.g. "side surfaces 31a" in paragraph [62] and part number 31a in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi), and
wherein a passage hole through which the venting gas or flame passes is formed between the side frame and the first cover (see e.g. "communication part 34" in paragraph [66] and part number 34 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi).
Nobuyoshi further teaches that guiding the gas through the bypass passage lowers the temperature of the gas before discharge and helps prevent foreign matter from reaching electrical components such as bus bars (see e.g. paragraphs [70]-[71] of Nobuyoshi). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pack housing of Hoon et al. such that the pack housing further includes a first cover over the opening/closing member and arranged to face the side frame, and wherein a passage hole through which the venting gas or flame passes is formed between the side frame and the first cover as taught by Nobuyoshi in order to lower the temperature of the gas before discharge as suggested by Nobuyoshi.
Regarding Claim 4, Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi discloses the battery pack of claim 3 (see e.g. claim 3 rejection above).
Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi does not explicitly disclose that an end of the opening/closing member is configured to contact the first cover when the opening/closing member opens.
However, Hoon discloses an opening/closing member configured to open in response to gas pressure to discharge gas from the battery module (see e.g. exhaust cover 70, opening/closing part 74, and FIG. 9 of Hoon). Nobuyoshi teaches arranging a cover/partition structure over a gas discharge valve to define a bypass discharge passage for guiding vent gas to a discharge portion (see e.g. cover 31, partition plate 33, communication portion 34, discharge portion 35, and paragraphs [66]-[71] of Nobuyoshi). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to configure the opening/closing member of Hoon such that an end of the opening/closing member contacts the first cover of the modified structure when opened, in order to direct venting gas into the passage hole/bypass discharge passage and reduce leakage of venting gas back toward the battery module interior or electrical components. Regarding Claim 5, Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi discloses the batter pack of claim 3 (see e.g. claim 3 rejection above).
Hoon does not disclose that the pack housing further includes a second cover spaced apart from the first cover and placed above the first cover, and wherein a flow path communicating with the passage hole and configured to guide the discharge of the venting gas or flame to the outside of the pack housing is formed between the first cover and the second cover.
Nobuyoshi, however, discloses that the pack housing further includes a second cover spaced apart from the first cover and placed above the first cover (see e.g. " cover 31" in paragraph [62] and part number 31 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi), and
wherein a flow path communicating with the passage hole and configured to guide the discharge of the venting gas or flame to the outside of the pack housing is formed between the first cover and the second cover (see e.g. "The gas discharged into the space S11 moves toward the communication part 34. Then, the gas passes through the communication part 34 and enters the space S12. The gas that has entered the space S12 moves toward the discharge unit 35 and then passes through the discharge unit 35." in paragraph [69] and part numbers 34 and 35 and S12 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi).
Nobuyoshi further teaches that guiding the gas through the bypass passage lowers the temperature of the gas before discharge and helps prevent foreign matter from reaching electrical components such as bus bars (see e.g. paragraphs [70]-[71] of Nobuyoshi). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pack housing of Hoon et al. such that that the pack housing further includes a second cover spaced apart from the first cover and placed above the first cover, and wherein a flow path communicating with the passage hole and configured to guide the discharge of the venting gas or flame to the outside of the pack housing is formed between the first cover and the second cover as taught by Nobuyoshi in order to lower the temperature of the gas before discharge as suggested by Nobuyoshi.
Regarding Claim 6, Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi discloses the battery pack of claim 5 (see e.g. claim 5 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the pack housing further includes a discharge hole communicating with the flow path and configured to discharge the venting gas or flame to the outside of the pack housing (see e.g. paragraph [152] and gas venting lines in FIG. 10).
Regarding Claim 7, Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi discloses the battery pack of claim 6 (see e.g. claim 6 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the discharge hole is located in the pack housing at a position after the venting gas or flame changes direction one or more times (see e.g. paragraph [152] and gas venting lines in FIG. 10 and annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
406
604
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Hoon, figure 10, annotated for illustration)
Regarding Claim 8, Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi discloses the battery pack of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above).
Hoon does not explicitly disclose that the discharge hole is located at a side of the pack housing above the first cover.
Nobuyoshi, however, discloses that the discharge hole is located at a side of the pack housing above the first cover (see e.g. " discharge unit 35" in paragraph [69] and part number 35 in FIG. 3).
Nobuyoshi further teaches that guiding the gas through the bypass passage lowers the temperature of the gas before discharge and helps prevent foreign matter from reaching electrical components such as bus bars (see e.g. paragraphs [70]-[71] of Nobuyoshi). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pack housing of Hoon et al. such that the discharge hole is located at a side of the pack housing above the first cover as taught by Nobuyoshi in order to lower the temperature of the gas before discharge as suggested by Nobuyoshi.
Regarding Claim 9, Hoon in view of Nobuyoshi discloses the battery pack of claim 8 (see e.g. claim 8 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the discharge hole is provided at a side of the pack housing opposite to the front side of the at least one battery module (see e.g. paragraph [152] and gas venting lines in FIG. 10 and annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
435
665
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Hoon, figure 10, annotated for illustration)
Regarding Claim 10, Hoon discloses the battery pack of claim 2 (see e.g., claim 2 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the pair of battery modules are arranged so that the front sides of the pair of battery modules face each other within the pack housing (see e.g. annotated figure below).
Hoon does not disclose that the pack housing further includes a reinforcing wall connected to the side frame, wherein the at least one battery module is a pair of battery modules on either side of the reinforcing wall.
Nobuyoshi, however, discloses that the pack housing further includes a reinforcing wall connected to the side frame (see e.g. " holder 20" in paragraph [47] and part number 20 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi), wherein the at least one battery module is a pair of battery modules on either side of the reinforcing wall (see e.g. " unit cell 10" in paragraph [47] and part number 10 in FIG. 3 of Nobuyoshi).
Nobuyoshi further teaches that the holder is used to support the battery cells and also insulate the plurality of cells (see e.g. paragraphs [46]-[47] of Nobuyoshi). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pack housing of Hoon et al. such that the pack housing further includes a reinforcing wall connected to the side frame, wherein the at least one battery module is a pair of battery modules on either side of the reinforcing wall as taught by Nobuyoshi in order to lower the temperature of the gas before discharge as suggested by Nobuyoshi.
PNG
media_image4.png
450
541
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(Hoon, figure 10, annotated for illustration)
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoon et al. (KR 10-2280326 B1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Rawlinson et al. (US-20130153317-A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Hoon discloses the battery pack according to claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above).
Hoon further discloses that the at least one battery module is plurality of battery modules along a longitudinal direction of the pack housing (see e.g. part number 1 in FIG. 10).
Hoon does not disclose that the pack housing further includes a barrier connected to the side frame, wherein the plurality of battery modules are configured to be sealed to each other by the barrier when viewed in the longitudinal direction of the pack housing.
Rawlinson, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery packs in vehicles, discloses a battery pack housing (see e.g. " battery pack 101" in paragraph [0034] and part number 101 in FIG. 6 of Rawlinson) that includes a barrier connected to the side frame (see e.g. "multiple cross-members 601A-601H" and part numbers 601A-601H connected to the side frame in FIG. 6 of Rawlinson), wherein the plurality of battery modules are configured to be sealed to each other by the barrier when viewed in the longitudinal direction of the pack housing (see e.g. "cross-members 601A-601H help to segregate thermal events by providing a thermal barrier between groups of batteries as well as minimizing gas flow between sections 605" in paragraph [0037] of Rawlinson).
Rawlinson also teaches that the barriers segregate groups batteries and that by segregating thermal events within smaller groups of batteries, thermal runaway propagation is limited as is the potential for battery pack damage (see e.g. paragraph [0037] of Rawlinson). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the pack housing of Hoon et al such that the pack housing further includes a barrier connected to the side frame, wherein the plurality of battery modules are configured to be sealed to each other by the barrier when viewed in the longitudinal direction of the pack housing as taught by Rawlinson in order to limit thermal runaway propagation within the battery pack as suggested by Rawlinson.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoon et al. (KR 10-2280326 B1) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of DeKuester et al. (US-20160036023-A1).
Regarding Claim 15, Hoon discloses the battery module of claim 14 (see e.g. claim 14 rejection above).
Hoon does not disclose that the opening/closing member includes blocking plates formed at both side ends, and wherein the blocking plate is configured to block the flow of the venting gas or the flame toward a side of the module case when the opening/closing member opens the opening.
DeKeuster, however, in the same field of endeavor, battery modules for vehicles, discloses a battery module (see e.g. " battery module 20 " in paragraph [0035] and part number 20 in FIG. 3 of DeKuester) with an opening/closing member (see e.g. "vent 66" in paragraph [0042] and part number 66 in FIG. 6 of DeKuester) that includes blocking plates formed at both side ends (see e.g. "vent shield channel 56" in paragraph [0042] and part number 56 in FIG. 6 of DeKuester), and
wherein the blocking plate is configured to block the flow of the venting gas or the flame toward a side of the module case when the opening/closing member opens the opening (see e.g. "the vent shield channel 56 may include features to contain and guide vent gas such that it does not merely contact the vent shield channel 56 and then immediately contact sensitive electronic components being protected" in paragraph [0045] of DeKuester).
DeKuester also teaches that a general direction of the vent path may cause vented gases (e.g., heated CO2, heated vaporized solvent) to contact heat sensitive electronic components in the battery module , thereby causing the sensitive electronic components to degrade and the blocking plates (vent shield channel) mitigates this (see e.g. paragraph [0045] of DeKuester). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the opening/closing member of Hoon et al. such that it includes blocking plates formed at both side ends, and wherein the blocking plate is configured to block the flow of the venting gas or the flame toward a side of the module case when the opening/closing member opens the opening as taught by DeKuester et al. in order to mitigate the vent gas from impacting sensitive components within the battery module as suggested by DeKuester.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure:
Shin et al. (US-20230299415-A1)
Reinprecht et al. (US-20210359374-A1)
He et al. (US-20210175572-A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSE EFYMOW whose telephone number is (571)270-0795. ----The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 10:30 am - 8:30 pm 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, TONG GUO can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/J.J.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights