Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/625,578

BATTERY FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 03, 2024
Examiner
MEILLER, SEAN V
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hypercraft Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
98 granted / 127 resolved
+7.2% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
164
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 127 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Objections Claims 1, 4, 11, 13 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1: “one or more software modules” should read “comprising one or more software modules” Claim 11: “claim 1” should read “claim 10”. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 4 and 13: the list of sensor types should read “a temperature sensor, a pressure sensor,...”. furthermore there should be an “or” between electrical and current sensor. 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 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. Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-13, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Specht (9960455). Regarding claim 1, Specht discloses a battery fire suppression system, comprising: one or more battery packs (2, fig 1); one or more sensors (5, fig 1) disposed internal to the one or more battery packs; a fire suppressant deployment system (4, fig 1); a controller (7, fig 1), one or more software modules that, when executed by the controller, receive one or more signals from the one or more sensors indicative of one or more conditions internal to the one or more battery packs; actuate the fire suppressant deployment system to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress a fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of a thermal runaway in the one or more battery packs (col 5, lines 12-27). Regarding claim 2, Specht discloses wherein the one or more battery packs are one or more lithium-ion battery packs (col 1, lines 13-16). Regarding claim 3, Specht discloses a vehicle including the one or more battery packs (col 1, lines 17-25). Regarding claim 4, Specht discloses wherein the one or more sensors include a temperature sensor (col 5, lines 12-16). Regarding claim 6, Specht discloses wherein the fire suppressant deployment system includes an electronic valve (col 3, lines 45-50, the valves are activated by the controller, and thus would be electronic as that is the only opening signal the invention has to produce), and the one or more software modules that, when executed by the controller, control the electronic valve to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress the fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of a thermal runaway in the one or more battery packs (col 5, lines 12-27). Regarding claim 7, Specht discloses wherein the one or more sensors include one or more temperature sensors, and the one or more software modules that, when executed by the controller, actuate the fire suppressant deployment system to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress a fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of temperature above a threshold in the one or more battery packs (col 5, lines 12-27). Regarding claim 10, Specht discloses A method of using a battery fire suppression system, comprising: providing the battery fire suppression system of claim 1; receiving via the controller the one or more signals from the one or more sensors indicative of one or more conditions internal to the one or more battery packs; actuating via the controller the fire suppressant deployment system to deploy the fire suppressant to suppress a fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of a thermal runaway in the one or more battery packs (col 5, lines 12-27). Regarding claim 11, Specht discloses wherein the one or more battery packs are one or more lithium-ion battery packs (col 1, lines 13-16). Regarding claim 12, Specht discloses a vehicle including the one or more battery packs (col 1, lines 17-25). Regarding claim 13, Specht discloses wherein the one or more sensors include a temperature sensor (col 5, lines 12-16). Regarding claim 15, Specht discloses wherein the fire suppressant deployment system includes an electronic valve (col 3, lines 45-50, the valves are activated by the controller, and thus would be electronic as that is the only opening signal the invention has to produce), and controller controls the electronic valve to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress the fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of a thermal runaway in the one or more battery packs (col 5, lines 12-27). Regarding claim 16, Specht discloses wherein the one or more sensors include one or more temperature sensors, and the controller actuates the fire suppressant deployment system to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress a fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of temperature above a threshold in the one or more battery packs (col 5, lines 12-27). 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 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. Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Specht in view of Roh (11975615) and Bosch (DE 102013216296A). Regarding claims 5 and 14, Specht discloses wherein the battery pack can have one or more different types of sensors include one or more temperature sensors (col 5, lines 12-16). Speck does not disclose wherein the one or more sensors include one or more pressure or chemical sensors. Roh teaches a vehicle battery fire detection system (300, fig 3), wherein a pressure sensor can be used alongside of a temperature sensor to determine a fire by detecting when pressure in the pack goes above a threshold (col 3, lines 10-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery fire detection system disclosed by Specht by using a pressure sensor based on the teachings of Roh. Doing so would allow for the detection of gas released from a battery in the case of damage (col 1, lines 10-20), as suggested by Roh. Bosch teaches a battery fire detection system (10, fig 1), wherein a chemical sensor can be to determine a fire by detecting when chemical leakage in the pack goes above a threshold (attached translation, page 2, last paragraph- page 3, first paragraph). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery fire detection system disclosed by Specht by using a Chemical sensor based on the teachings of Bosch. Doing so would allow for the detection of a fire risk before the fire has a chance to propagate (page 3, attached translation), as suggested by Bosch. Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Specht in view of Roh (11975615). Regarding claims 8 and 17, Speck discloses the one or more software modules that, when executed by the controller, actuate the fire suppressant deployment system to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress a fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of a sensor above a threshold in the one or more battery packs. Speck does not disclose wherein the sensor is a pressure sensor. Roh teaches a vehicle battery fire detection system (300, fig 3), wherein a pressure sensor can be used alongside of a temperature sensor to determine a fire by detecting when pressure in the pack goes above a threshold (col 3, lines 10-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery fire detection system disclosed by Specht by using a pressure sensor based on the teachings of Roh. Doing so would allow for the detection of gas released from a battery in the case of damage (col 1, lines 10-20), as suggested by Roh. Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Specht in view of Bosch. Regarding claims 9 and 18, Speck discloses the one or more software modules that, when executed by the controller, actuate the fire suppressant deployment system to deploy a fire suppressant to suppress a fire or possible fire in the one or more battery packs if the one or more signals are indicative of a sensor above a threshold in the one or more battery packs. Speck does not disclose wherein the sensor is a chemical sensor. Bosch teaches a battery fire detection system (10, fig 1), wherein a chemical sensor can be to determine a fire by detecting when chemical leakage in the pack goes above a threshold (attached translation, page 2, last paragraph- page 3, first paragraph). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery fire detection system disclosed by Specht by using a Chemical sensor based on the teachings of Bosch. Doing so would allow for the detection of a fire risk before the fire has a chance to propagate (page 3, attached translation), as suggested by Bosch. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bandhauer (9704384) and Jung (9539448) both disclose a battery with an integrated fire sensing and suppression system. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN V MEILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-9229. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-5pm. 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, Devon Kramer can be reached at 571-272-7118. 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. /SEAN V MEILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3741 /DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 03, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595764
DIHYDROGEN CONTROL ASSEMBLY FOR AN AIRCRAFT TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12497917
COUNTER-ROTATING TURBINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12492661
Combined Energy Storage Turbine and Simple Cycle Peaker System
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent 12486802
CYLINDER FOR COMBUSTOR, COMBUSTOR, AND GAS TURBINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Patent 12428991
REVERSE FLOW HYDROGEN STEAM INJECTED TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 30, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.8%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 127 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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