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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/09/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 21 & 34 are amended. Claim 39 is newly added. Claims 21-39 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 34-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onuki (WO 2021/177205 A1 and hereinafter using, for citation purposes, corresponding US 2023/0114956 A1).
Regarding claims 34-38, Onuki teaches a battery comprising a plurality of battery cells comprising a first battery cell (40a) and a second battery cell (40b) that are adjacent to each other and arranged in a first direction (Fig. 1A; [0048]); a heat insulation board (1) provided between a first wall of the first battery cell and a second wall of the second battery cell, and comprising a first heat insulation layer (20+10), which is a polymer matrix composite fiber board, including a plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layers (20 and 10) formed by compositing a fiber material such as a silicon oxide fiber and a resin material such as high-temperature resistant flame-retardant resin like polyester, wherein each fiber-reinforced resin layer of the plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layer comprises a fiber material layer having a plurality of fiber pores (i.e pores formed between adjacent fibers forming the fiber-reinforced resin layers), each fiber-reinforced resin layer has opposed first and second major surfaces, the resin material being infiltrated into the plurality of fiber pores and such that the plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layers are stacked in face-to-face contact with one another along the respective major surfaces thereof to form the composite fiber board as a unitary body (1) in which the plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layers are bonded to one another along the respective major surfaces thereof by the binder and resin material (Figs. 1A; [0052]-[0053], [0072]-[0088], [0101]-[0104] [0107]-[0111] & [0116]-[0119]) but does not explicitly teach the plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layers being hot-pressed to form the polymer matrix composite fiber board. However, the missing limitation regarding the plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layers being hot-pressed constitutes a product by process limitation. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)”. See MPEP 2113 I.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-33 & 39 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art of record (Onuki, as cited above in the rejection of claims 34-38) does not fairly teach or suggest each of the two first heat insulation layers having a greater compressive strength than the second heat insulation layer such that when the heat insulation board is pressed between the fist battery cell and the second battery cell, a dimension of each of the two first heat insulation layers in the first direction remains substantially constant and the second heat insulation layer is protected from being pressed to deform. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 1-3 of Applicant’s remarks, filed 06/22/2026, with respect to claims 21-33 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 21-33 has been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 regarding claims 34-38 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As noted in the above updated rejection of claims 34-38, Onuki discloses each fiber-reinforced resin layer (20 and 10) having opposed first and second major surfaces where the resin layers are stacked in face-to-face contact with one another along the respective major faces thereof to form a unitary body (1) in which the plurality of fiber-reinforced resin layers are bonded to one another along the respective major surfaces thereof by the resin material contained in each layer (figs 1A and 4B). While Onuki is silent as to each layer being hot pressed, it is noted that this limitation constitutes a product-by-process limitation. Accordingly, since Onuki teaches each fiber-reinforced resin layer having substantially the same structure and composition as noted in the above rejection, the method of production (i.e hot pressing) is not found to be materially change the product in view of Onuki disclosing the same unitary body (1) formed from each fiber-reinforced resin layer.
Thus, in view of the foregoing, claims 21-33 & 39 are allowed and claims 34-38 stand rejected.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (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, BARBARA GILLIAM can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights