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 § 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.
The term “substantially smooth” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smooth” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term smooth does not provider a degree of permissible roughness of a surface.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Villanueva et al. (US2021/0391627A1), in view of Plessner et al. (US2014/0242896A1).
As to claim 1, Villanueva discloses a venting device (venting system [0080]) for an energy storage system (Battery pack [Abstract]) comprising: a fluid flow path (Vent system fluidly connects the first region and the second region in a direct fluid path [0089]) including at least one outlet duct (Outlet (1810) [0117]); a burst disc (The burst membranes 112 can include any suitable geometry. A burst membrane 112 can be a disc, oval, panel (e.g., rectangular), and/or have any other suitable geometry, which encloses/covers any suitable area [0087]);
Flexible coupling (2108) comprising a sleeve of elastomeric material (Elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between first ring (2110) and second ring (2110) [0125] fig. 21) substantially coaxial with the outlet duct (outlet (1810) fig. 21),
Villanueva does not explicitly teach a flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc. However in the same field of endeavor Plessner discloses ventilation system for an rechargeable battery [0030] and teaches a vent valve (520) may be a rupturable diaphragm [0036] located at an opening in the wall (512) of the battery enclosure (510) to prevent cycling with ambient airplane pressures between takeoff and cruise altitudes (e.g., sea level and 40,000 feet). Such cycling can decrease the life of the battery. [0033]
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify Villanueva with the location of the rupturable diaphragm as taught by Plessner to reduce atmospheric pressure cycling and decrease the life of the battery. In the combination of Villanueva and Plessner would place flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc.
It would be obvious the end of the elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114) of the flexible coupling (2108) to have a cross-sectional dimension substantially the same as the outlet (1810) as shown in fig. 21 to seal and prevent leaks. Further It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
As to claim 2, Villanueva discloses an interior surface of the sleeve is substantially smooth through the sleeve. The elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114) of flexible coupling (2108) [0125] fig. 21 being made of a elastomer would provide a substantially smooth interior surface of the sleeve, as exemplified by paragraph [0029] of the instant specification.
As to claim 4, modified Villanueva discloses the outlet duct comprises a first portion between the burst disc and the flexible coupling (first ring (2110) [0125] fig. 21); and a second portion downstream of the flexible coupling (second ring (2112) [0125] fig. 21).
As to claim 5 and 6, modified Villanueva discloses the flexible coupling (The flexible coupling 2108 comprises a first ring 2110 that is fixed to the vent 2106, a second ring 2112 coupled to the wing 1804, and an elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between the first ring 2110 (or flange) and second ring 2112 (or flange). [0125] fig. 21) further comprises at least one flange ((2110, 2112 flanges) arranged to support an end portion of the sleeve (End of elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114), (2110) fixed to the vent [0125] fig. 21 and end of (2112) fixed to the wing (1804) [0125] fig. 21, as applied to claim 6).
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated, modified Villanueva the sleeve (elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114) connected to the at least one flange (first ring 2110 and second ring 2112) by fasteners [0046]. Paragraph [0046] discloses the battery pack may be mounted with fasteners and the elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 (sleeve) is part of the battery pack.
As to claim 8, modified Villanueva discloses the sleeve is circular in cross section. (The elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between the first ring 2110 and second ring 2112. [0125] The portion (2114) is frustoconical meaning cone or truncated cone shape. Where a cone would have a circular cross section.
As to claim 9, Villanueva does not explicitly teach the sleeve is rectangular in cross section. However this is an obvious design choice based on geometry of the wing and the use of a single vent or manifold vents [0085]. It should be noted the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
As to claim 10, modified Villanueva discloses the energy storage system (battery modules (104) [0125]) includes a housing (enclosure (2104) with an outlet (fig. 21) to the burst disc. (Vent valve (520) [Plessner, 0033] fig. 5)
As to claim 11, Villanueva discloses an energy storage system comprising (energy storage system (100) [39]): a battery in a housing (enclosure [Abstract]) , and a venting device (venting system [0080]) for an energy storage system (Battery pack [Abstract]) comprising: a fluid flow path (Vent system fluidly connects the first region and the second region in a direct fluid path [0089]) including at least one outlet duct (Outlet (1810) [0117]); a burst disc (The burst membranes 112 can include any suitable geometry. A burst membrane 112 can be a disc, oval, panel (e.g., rectangular), and/or have any other suitable geometry, which encloses/covers any suitable area [0087]);
Flexible coupling (2108) comprising a sleeve of elastomeric material (Elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between first ring (2110) and second ring (2110) [0125] fig. 21) substantially coaxial with the outlet duct (outlet (1810) fig. 21),
Villanueva does not explicitly teach a flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc. However in the same field of endeavor Plessner discloses ventilation system for an rechargeable battery [0030] and teaches a vent valve (520) may be a rupturable diaphragm [0036] located at an opening in the wall (512) of the battery enclosure (510) to prevent cycling with ambient airplane pressures between takeoff and cruise altitudes (e.g., sea level and 40,000 feet). Such cycling can decrease the life of the battery. [0033]
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify Villanueva with the location of the rupturable diaphragm as taught by Plessner to reduce atmospheric pressure cycling and decrease the life of the battery. In the combination of Villanueva and Plessner would place flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc.
It would be obvious the end of the elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114) of the flexible coupling (2108) to have a cross-sectional dimension substantially the same as the outlet (1810) as shown in fig. 21 to seal and prevent leaks. Further It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Also see MPEP 2144.
As to claim 12, Villanueva discloses a an energy storage system (energy storage system (100) including battery packs (102) [39]) comprising: a housing (enclosure [Abstract]) batteries (battery module 104 including cells (106) [0039]) each in a respective one of the housings [0036], and each of the housings includes the venting device [0036] as claimed in claim 1, and a venting device (venting system [0080]) for an energy storage system (Battery pack [Abstract]) comprising: a fluid flow path (Vent system fluidly connects the first region and the second region in a direct fluid path [0089]) including at least one outlet duct (Outlet (1810) [0117]); a burst disc (The burst membranes 112 can include any suitable geometry. A burst membrane 112 can be a disc, oval, panel (e.g., rectangular), and/or have any other suitable geometry, which encloses/covers any suitable area [0087]);
Flexible coupling (2108) comprising a sleeve of elastomeric material (Elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between first ring (2110) and second ring (2110) [0125] fig. 21) substantially coaxial with the outlet duct (outlet (1810) fig. 21),
Villanueva does not explicitly teach a flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc. However in the same field of endeavor Plessner discloses ventilation system for an rechargeable battery [0030] and teaches a vent valve (520) may be a rupturable diaphragm [0036] located at an opening in the wall (512) of the battery enclosure (510) to prevent cycling with ambient airplane pressures between takeoff and cruise altitudes (e.g., sea level and 40,000 feet). Such cycling can decrease the life of the battery. [0033]
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify Villanueva with the location of the rupturable diaphragm as taught by Plessner to reduce atmospheric pressure cycling and decrease the life of the battery. In the combination of Villanueva and Plessner would place flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc.
It would be obvious the end of the elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114) of the flexible coupling (2108) to have a cross-sectional dimension substantially the same as the outlet (1810) as shown in fig. 21 to seal and prevent leaks. Further It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Also see MPEP 2144.
As to claim 13, Villanueva discloses a vehicle (an aircraft energy-storage system 100, [0039]) comprising the energy storage system as claimed in claim 11. Energy storage system (100) [39]: a battery in a housing (enclosure [Abstract]) , and a venting device (venting system [0080]) for an energy storage system (Battery pack [Abstract]) comprising: a fluid flow path (Vent system fluidly connects the first region and the second region in a direct fluid path [0089]) including at least one outlet duct (Outlet (1810) [0117]); a burst disc (The burst membranes 112 can include any suitable geometry. A burst membrane 112 can be a disc, oval, panel (e.g., rectangular), and/or have any other suitable geometry, which encloses/covers any suitable area [0087]);
Flexible coupling (2108) comprising a sleeve of elastomeric material (Elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between first ring (2110) and second ring (2110) [0125] fig. 21) substantially coaxial with the outlet duct (outlet (1810) fig. 21),
Villanueva does not explicitly teach a flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc. However in the same field of endeavor Plessner discloses ventilation system for an rechargeable battery [0030] and teaches a vent valve (520) may be a rupturable diaphragm [0036] located at an opening in the wall (512) of the battery enclosure (510) to prevent cycling with ambient airplane pressures between takeoff and cruise altitudes (e.g., sea level and 40,000 feet). Such cycling can decrease the life of the battery. [0033]
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify Villanueva with the location of the rupturable diaphragm as taught by Plessner to reduce atmospheric pressure cycling and decrease the life of the battery. In the combination of Villanueva and Plessner would place flexible coupling downstream of the burst disc.
It would be obvious the end of the elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114) of the flexible coupling (2108) to have a cross-sectional dimension substantially the same as the outlet (1810) as shown in fig. 21 to seal and prevent leaks. Further It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Also see MPEP 2144.
As to claim 14, modified Villanueva discloses the vehicle as claimed in claim 13, further comprising a venting system comprising at least one duct ((2106) [0125] fig. 21) between the venting device (Plessner, vent valve (520)) and an exterior surface of the vehicle ((2102) fig. 21).
As to claim 15, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated, modified Villanueva discloses the vehicle is an aircraft (an aircraft energy-storage system 100, [0039]).
As to claim 16, Villanueva discloses. An energy storage and vent assembly in an aircraft (an aircraft energy-storage system 100, [0039], venting system [0040]), the energy storage and vent comprising: a battery (cells (106) of battery module (104) of battery packs (102) [0039]); a housing containing the battery ((enclosure (2104) [0125]); a venting system configured to vent gas from the housing (A vent 2106 is coupled to the enclosure 2104 [0125]), wherein the venting system includes a burst disc (burst membrane (1812) [0126]) and a flow path (vent path (2116) [0126] fig. 21);
Villanueva does not explicitly teach a the burst disc is aligned within an opening the housing and adjacent the housing. However in the same field of endeavor Plessner discloses ventilation system for an rechargeable battery [0030] and teaches a vent valve (520) may be a rupturable diaphragm [0036] located at an opening in the wall (512) of the battery enclosure (510) to prevent cycling with ambient airplane pressures between takeoff and cruise altitudes (e.g., sea level and 40,000 feet). Such cycling can decrease the life of the battery. [0033]
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify Villanueva with the location of the rupturable diaphragm as taught by Plessner to reduce atmospheric pressure cycling and decrease the life of the battery. In the combination of Villanueva and Plessner would place the burst disc on the opening in wall of the housing, meeting the limitation of the burst disc is aligned within an opening the housing and adjacent the housing;
the flow path extends from the housing (vent path (2116) fig. 21) and in fluid communication with an exit port (vent outlets(1810) [0117] fig. 21) on an outer surface of the aircraft ((wing skin (2102) [0125] fig. 21), wherein an inlet to the flow path (2116) is aligned with the burst disc (Plessner vent valve (520));
the flow path including a first outlet duct (vent (2106) fig. 21) and a flexible coupling attached to the first outlet (flexible coupling 2108 comprises a first ring 2110 that is fixed to the vent 2106, a second ring 2112 coupled to the wing 1804, and an elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between the first ring 2110 and second ring 2112 [0125] fig. 21), wherein the first outlet duct (Plessner vent valve (520)) has a first cross-sectional shape of a flow passage extending through the first outlet duct (fig. 21),
wherein the flexible coupling includes a deformable elastomeric sleeve (elastomeric frustoconical portion (2114) [0125] fig. 21) having a third cross-sectional shape of a flow passage extending through the deformable elastomeric sleeve that is substantially the same as the first cross-sectional shape. (Villanueva discloses a frustoconical portion (2114) or cone like shape and fig. 21 illustrates the cone like shape is marginal in slope meeting the limitation the first and the third cross-section are substantially the same.)
As to claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated, modified Villanueva discloses the flow path (2116) further includes a second outlet duct (first ring (2110) of (2114) fixed to vent (2106) of flexible coupling (2108) [0125] fig. 21) and the flexible coupling (2108) joins an outlet of the first outlet duct (Plessner vent valve (520)) to an inlet of the second outlet duct (first ring (2110) fig. 21), wherein the second outlet duct has a second cross-sectional shape of a flow passage (2116) extending through the second outlet duct, wherein the second cross-sectional shape is substantially the same as the first cross-sectional shape. (As shown in fig. 21 first ring (2110), second outlet duct and second cross-sectional shape, connects to vent path (2116), first cross-sectional shape, which would necessitate the cross-sectional shapes to be the same to prevent gas leakage as shown in fig. 21)
As to claim 18, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated, modified Villanueva discloses the first cross-sectional shape and the third cross-sectional shape each have substantially the same cross-sectional area. (Villanueva discloses a frustoconical portion (2114) or cone like shape and fig. 21 illustrates the cone like shape is marginal in slope meeting the limitation the first and the third cross-section are substantially the same.)
As to claim 19, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated, modified Villanueva discloses the first outlet duct, the second outlet duct and the deformable elastomeric sleeve are aligned along a straight common axis. (A vent 2106 is coupled to the enclosure 2104 at one end thereof. [0125] First outlet duct… the flexible coupling 2108 comprises a first ring 2110 that is fixed to the vent 2106 [0125] Second outlet duct… an elastomeric frustoconical portion 2114 between the first ring 2110 and second ring 2112. [0125] Sleeve… a flexible coupling 2108, which permits a degree of relative movement between the battery pack 1600 and the wing 1804 if and when the wing 1804 bends or twists [0125] as illustrated in fig. 21, however without any degree of movement the flexible coupling (sleeve) would be inline with a common axis of the vent (2106), and first ring (2110) Further the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
As to claim 20, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated, modified Villanueva discloses a cross-sectional shape of the burst disc is substantially the same as the first cross-sectional shape. (Modified Villanueva teaches the location of burst membrane (1812) may be on the wall of the battery enclosure (Plessner vent valve (520)), Villanueva discloses the burst membrane closes vent (2106) [0126], and a vent 2106 is coupled to the enclosure 2104 [0125] fig. 21. Villanueva teaches the burst membrane may be any suitable geometry which enclosures any suitable area [0087]. Where the burst membrane closes vent (2106) and is a suitable geometry for enclosing the vent, and located at the battery enclosure provides cross-sectional shape of the burst disc is substantially the same as the first cross-sectional shape.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Villanueva et al. (US2021/0391627A1), in view of Plessner et al. (US2014/0242896A1), and in further view of Lim et al. (US2012/0094156A1).
As to claim 3, Villanueva discloses a rubber [0120] but does not explicitly teach the elastomeric material comprises a fluoro-elastomer.
In the same field of endeavor Lim discloses vents for a battery module and teaches the insulating member 130 may be made of silicon or a fluoride resin rubber. [0041]…defining a gas channel…providing a heat resistant insulating member substantially minimizing melting thereby reducing gas leakage [0042]
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify Villanueva with the fluoride resin rubber.as taught by Lim to reduce gas leakage. Further the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Dittmar et al. (US2015/0325827A1) Battery venting with burst disc.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BART A HORNSBY whose telephone number is (313)446-6637. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-6:00 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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
BART HORNSBY
Examiner
Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights