DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restriction
2. Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-14, drawn to a battery pack venting system, classified in H01M50/30.
II. Claims 15-19, drawn to a battery pack venting method, classified in H01M50/242.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as product and process of use. The inventions can be shown to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product or (2) the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product. See MPEP § 806.05(h). In the instant case the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product such as communicating the flow of vent byproducts in a second direction through an area between the structural member and the top cover of the battery pack.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
3. During a telephone conversation with Benjamin Coon on 10/2/26 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-14. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 15-19 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “at least some of the flow of vent byproducts an at least one outlet from the structural member” includes a drafting error. For the purpose of this Office Action, the limitation has been interpreted as “at least some of the flow of vent byproducts in at least one outlet from the structural member”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. Claim(s) 1, 4, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shin et al. (KR20220168919A) with citations from equivalent (US 2023/0318130).
Regarding claim 1, Shin discloses a battery pack venting system(Figs 1-5, [0043]), comprising: a structural member (gas venting member 130, Fig. 2, [0043]) having a first channel (first gas channel 131a, Fig. 2, [0055]) and a second channel (second gas channel 131 b, Fig. 2, [0055]), the first channel configured to communicate a flow of vent byproducts received through at least one first inlet (first gas inlet 132a, Fig. 4, [0067]) in a first direction to a first outlet (first gas outlet 133a, Fig. 2, [0067]) from the structural member, the second channel configured to communicate a flow of vent byproducts received through at least one second inlet (second gas inlet 132b, Fig. 4, [0067]) in a second direction to second outlet (second gas outlet 133b, Fig. 2, [0067]) from the structural member.
Regarding claim 4, Shin discloses the structural member is an extruded structural member(Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 5, Shin discloses the structural member spans a plurality of cell stacks(battery cell groups G1, G2, Fig. 2).
7. Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shin et al. (US 2023/0327278) hereinafter referred to as Shin ‘278.
Regarding claim 6, Shin ‘278 discloses a battery pack venting system([0048], [0093]-[0095], Figs. 1 & 15), comprising: a structural member (gas venting channel 150 & top plate 220A, Fig. 15) having a first channel (see channel in gas venting channel 150 in Fig. 15) and a second channel(see channel in empty space O in top plate 220A in Fig. 15), the first channel configured to communicate a flow of vent byproducts received through at least one inlet in a first direction(see arrows to the right in Fig. 15), the second channel configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts in an opposite, second direction (see arrows to the left in Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 7, Shin ‘278 discloses the structural member spans a plurality of cell stacks(first group battery cells G1 & second group battery cells G2, Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Shin ‘278 discloses further comprising a redirecting member that receives the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel and redirects the flow of vent byproducts into the second channel(mesh 229, Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 9, Shin ‘278 discloses the second channel is configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts in at least one outlet from the structural member(second venting port 221B, Fig. 15).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al. (KR20220168919A) with citations from equivalent (US 2023/0318130) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 2, Shin discloses at least two gas channels 131, and the at least two gas channels 131 are designed to allow the gas entering the gas channels 131 to move in different directions, when gas is generated from the battery cell group G1, it is possible to set the gas movement path of the gas channels 131 of the gas venting member 130 as long as possible while minimizing the influence of the high temperature gas on the battery cell group G2(Fig. 2, [0070]). Shin discloses when gas is generated from the battery cell group G1, the gas enters the adjacent gas inlet 132 and is allowed to move along the movement path that is as long as possible through the gas channels set in different gas movement directions, thereby dissipating the energy of the high temperature gas, spark and flame ([0070]), the structural member extends along a structural member axis(left to right in Fig. 2), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one first inlet is axially closer to the second outlet than the first outlet, wherein the at least one second inlet is axially closer to the first outlet than the second outlet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack venting system of Shin with the structural member extends along a structural member axis, wherein the at least one first inlet is axially closer to the second outlet than the first outlet, wherein the at least one second inlet is axially closer to the first outlet than the second outlet in order to allow to move along the movement path that is as long as possible through the gas channels set in different gas movement directions.
10. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al. (KR20220168919A) with citations from equivalent (US 2023/0318130) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhou et al. (CN218783186U) with citations from machine translation provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 3, Shin does not explicitly disclose the at least one first inlet and the at least one second inlet are each configured to receive a flow of vent byproducts from an area between a pair of cross-member assemblies.
Zhou teaches the lower housing of the battery pack includes a beam structure, at least a portion of which has an exhaust channel formed therein, the exhaust channel being able to connect the cell assembly housing cavity with the external space of the battery pack housing ([n0017], Fig. 3). Zhou teaches the first longitudinal beam 11 and the second longitudinal beam 12 each have a first exhaust channel 100, and each has a first air inlet 101 and an air outlet 102 (Figs. 3 & 5, [n0056]). Zhou teaches the first longitudinal beam 11, the second longitudinal beam 12 and the first cross beam 13 are each provided with a first exhaust channel 100 (Fig. 4, [n0060]). Zhou teaches the inner longitudinal beam 15 is connected to the cross beam 13 and the second exhaust channel 150 in the inner longitudinal beam 15 is connected to the first exhaust channel 100 in the first cross beam 13 (Figs. 4 & 6, [n0060]). Zhou teaches Figure 4 shows a diagram of the gas flow direction in the beam structure 1 ([n0060]). Zhou teaches the at least one first inlet (see arrows near first longitudinal beam 11, Fig. 4) and the at least one second inlet (see arrows near second longitudinal beam 12, Fig. 4) are each configured to receive a flow of vent byproducts from an area between a pair of cross-member assemblies(first cross beam 13 and internal crossbeam 16, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack venting system of Shin with the at least one first inlet and the at least one second inlet are each configured to receive a flow of vent byproducts from an area between a pair of cross-member assemblies as taught by Zhou as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
11. Claim(s) 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al. (US 2023/0327278) hereinafter referred to as Shin ‘278 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Zhou et al. (CN218783186U) with citations from machine translation provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 10, Shin ‘278 does not explicitly disclose further comprising a third channel of the structural member, the third channel configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts that have passed through the first channel to at least one outlet from the third channel of the structural member, the flow of vent byproducts moving in the second direction through the third channel.
Zhou teaches the lower housing of the battery pack includes a beam structure, at least a portion of which has an exhaust channel formed therein, the exhaust channel being able to connect the cell assembly housing cavity with the external space of the battery pack housing ([n0017], Fig. 3). Zhou teaches the first longitudinal beam 11 and the second longitudinal beam 12 each have a first exhaust channel 100, and each has a first air inlet 101 and an air outlet 102 (Figs. 3 & 5, [n0056]). Zhou teaches the first longitudinal beam 11, the second longitudinal beam 12 and the first cross beam 13 are each provided with a first exhaust channel 100 (Fig. 4, [n0060]). Zhou teaches the inner longitudinal beam 15 is connected to the cross beam 13 and the second exhaust channel 150 in the inner longitudinal beam 15 is connected to the first exhaust channel 100 in the first cross beam 13 (Figs. 4 & 6, [n0060]). Zhou teaches Figure 4 shows a diagram of the gas flow direction in the beam structure 1 ([n0060]). Zhou teaches further comprising a third channel (second longitudinal beam 12, Fig. 4) of the structural member(beam structure 1, Fig. 4), the third channel configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts that have passed through the first channel (inner longitudinal beam 15, Fig. 4) to at least one outlet from the third channel of the structural member, the flow of vent byproducts moving in the second direction through the third channel(see arrows with the second longitudinal beam 12 in Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the battery pack venting system of Shin ‘278, a third channel of the structural member, the third channel configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts that have passed through the first channel to at least one outlet from the third channel of the structural member, the flow of vent byproducts moving in the second direction through the third channel as taught by Zhou as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 11, modified Shin ‘278 discloses the first channel (Zhou, inner longitudinal beam 15, Fig. 4) is disposed between the second channel (Zhou, first longitudinal beam 11, Fig. 4) and the third channel (Zhou, second longitudinal beam 12, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, modified Shin ‘278 discloses further comprising a redirecting member that receives the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel and redirects some of the flow of vent byproducts into the second channel and some of the flow of vent byproducts into the third channel(Zhou, third exhaust channel within the internal crossbeam 16, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 13, Shin ‘278 does not explicitly disclose further comprising a third channel and fourth channel, the second channel configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel to the third channel and further configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel to the fourth channel.
Zhou teaches the lower housing of the battery pack includes a beam structure, at least a portion of which has an exhaust channel formed therein, the exhaust channel being able to connect the cell assembly housing cavity with the external space of the battery pack housing ([n0017], Fig. 3). Zhou teaches the first longitudinal beam 11 and the second longitudinal beam 12 each have a first exhaust channel 100, and each has a first air inlet 101 and an air outlet 102 (Figs. 3 & 5, [n0056]). Zhou teaches the first longitudinal beam 11, the second longitudinal beam 12 and the first cross beam 13 are each provided with a first exhaust channel 100 (Fig. 4, [n0060]). Zhou teaches the inner longitudinal beam 15 is connected to the cross beam 13 and the second exhaust channel 150 in the inner longitudinal beam 15 is connected to the first exhaust channel 100 in the first cross beam 13 (Figs. 4 & 6, [n0060]). Zhou teaches Figure 4 shows a diagram of the gas flow direction in the beam structure 1 ([n0060]). Zhou teaches further comprising a third channel (second longitudinal beam 12, Fig. 4) and fourth channel(first crossbeam 13, Fig. 4), the second channel (first longitudinal beam 11, Fig. 4) configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel (inner longitudinal beam 15, Fig. 4) to the third channel and further configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel to the fourth channel(Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the battery pack venting system of Shin ‘278, a third channel and fourth channel, the second channel configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel to the third channel and further configured to communicate at least some of the flow of vent byproducts from the first channel to the fourth channel as taught by Zhou as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 14, modified Shin ‘278 does not explicitly disclose the first channel and the second channel are sandwiched between the third channel and the fourth channel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery pack venting system of modified Shin ‘278 with the first channel and the second channel are sandwiched between the third channel and the fourth channel, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA HOM LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-0489. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/VICTORIA H LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
