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
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 19, line 1: “protecting part” should be “protecting component”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 4 is 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the fire fighting pipeline is arranged corresponding to the pressure relief mechanisms of the plurality of battery cells” in lines 1-2. It is unclear what “corresponding” means in regard to this claim, and the specification does not disclose what “corresponding” means in regards to the structural relationship between the fire fighting pipeline and the pressure relief mechanism. For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted “corresponding” as “in close proximity”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-6, 9, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zeng et al. (CN 112086605 A, cited in the IDS, machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Zeng teaches a battery, comprising:
a plurality of battery cells arranged in a first direction (Fig. 2, 3, [0010]),
wherein a first wall of each of the battery cells is provided with a pressure relief mechanism configured to actuate to relieve a pressure inside the battery cell when the pressure or a temperature inside the battery cell reaches a threshold (Fig. 2, 33 [0103]);
and a protecting component, wherein the protecting component covers the pressure relief mechanisms of the plurality of battery cells outside the plurality of battery cells (Fig. 2, 2, [0107]) and forms an exhaust passage with the first walls of the plurality of battery cells, and the exhaust passage is configured to discharge emissions discharged by the pressure relief mechanisms from both ends of the exhaust passage in the first direction when the pressure relief mechanisms actuate (Fig. 5, 26 [0132]).
Furthermore, any limitation defined by functional language, such as “configured to”, will be examined based on the structure imparted by the limitation.
Regarding claim 2, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 1, further comprising: a fire fighting pipeline, configured to accommodate a fire fighting medium and to discharge the fire fighting medium when the pressure relief mechanisms actuate (Fig. 5, 25, [0136]).
Regarding claim 3, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 2, wherein the protecting component is further configured to limit a position of the fire fighting pipeline (Fig. 2, 2). The protecting component surrounds the fire fighting pipeline, so it limits the position of the fire fighting pipeline.
Regarding claim 4, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 2, wherein the fire fighting pipeline is arranged corresponding to the pressure relief mechanisms of the plurality of battery cells and extends in the first direction [0088].
Regarding claim 5, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 2, further comprising: a wire harness segregation board, arranged on a surface, facing an exterior of the battery cell, of the first wall (Fig. 3, 22, [0111]).
Regarding claim 6, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 5, wherein the protecting component comprises a top wall (Fig. 3, 21), a first side wall, and a second side wall (Fig. 3, 212); the top wall is arranged opposite to the pressure relief mechanisms of the plurality of battery cells; the top wall is configured to connect the first side wall and the second side wall (Fig. 3, 2); and the first side wall and the second side wall are connected to the wire harness segregation board, respectively ([0112]isolation component connected to side plate by welding).
Regarding claim 9, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 6, wherein the fire fighting pipeline is arranged on a side, close to the battery cells, of the top wall (Fig. 5, 25; Fig. 4, 3).
Regarding claim 18, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 1, wherein a length of the protecting component in the first direction is greater than or equal to a total length of the plurality of battery cells in the first direction [0109]. The protecting component encapsulates the battery module, so the length is greater.
Regarding claim 19, Zeng teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein a material of the protecting part comprises a metal ([0108] aluminum).
Regarding claim 20, Zeng teaches an electricity consumption device, comprising: the battery according to claim 1, the battery being configured to provide electric energy [0035].
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) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al.
Regarding claim 14, Zeng et al teaches the battery according to claim 6, but does not specifically teach that the fire fighting pipeline is the top wall.
However, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to modify the Zeng et al battery so that the fire fighting pipeline is the top wall because the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (MPEP 2144.04).
Claim(s) 7-8,10-13, and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al in view of Höfner (DE 102019207084 A1, cited in the IDS, machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 7, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 6, but does not specifically teach that the first side wall and/or the second side wall are provided with a plurality of first through holes, and the first through holes are configured to relieve the pressures inside the battery cells when the pressure mechanisms actuate.
However, Höfner teaches of a battery module that includes a plurality of battery cells with pressure relief mechanisms. Above each pressure relief mechanism is an atomizing device with a top wall and side walls [0011]. Höfner also teaches that the first side wall and/or the second side wall are provided with a plurality of first through holes, and the first through holes are configured to relieve the pressures inside the battery cells when the pressure mechanisms actuate (Fig. 3, 22 [0035]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to modify the Zeng battery module so that the walls of the protecting component are substituted with the Höfner protecting component walls. This is because the walls prevent the abrasive flame from directly passing through to a battery cover arranged above the battery module (Höfner [0040])
Regarding claim 8, modified Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 7, but does not specifically teach that a pore diameter of the first through holes is less than or equal to 10 mm. However, in Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit 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 (MPEP 2144.04).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the modified Zeng battery so that the pore diameter of the first through holes is less than or equal to 10 mm because the modified Zeng through holes perform the same function as the claimed through holes of allowing for sufficiently rapid pressure equalization in the event of a battery cell failure (Höfner [0011]; [0006] of the instant specification).
Regarding claim 10, Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 6, wherein the fire fighting pipeline is arranged on a side of the top wall away from the battery cells, but does not specifically teach that the top wall is provided with a plurality of pressure relief areas;
the plurality of pressure relief areas are in one-to-one correspondence to the pressure relief mechanisms of the plurality of battery cells;
and the pressure relief areas are configured to enable the emissions from the battery cells to destroy the fire fighting pipeline through the pressure relief areas when the pressure relief mechanisms actuate.
Höfner, however, does teach that the top wall is provided with a plurality of pressure relief areas (Fig. 3, 22 [0035]) and
the plurality of pressure relief areas are in one-to-one correspondence to the pressure relief mechanisms of the plurality of battery cells ([0035] one or more flame passage openings in the area of the emergency degassing opening).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to modify the Zeng battery module so that the walls of the protecting component are substituted with the Höfner protecting component walls. This is because the walls prevent the abrasive flame from directly passing through to a battery cover arranged above the battery module (Höfner [0040])
Furthermore, the modified Zeng battery teaches the pressure relief areas are configured to enable the emissions from the battery cells to destroy the fire fighting pipeline through the pressure relief areas when the pressure relief mechanisms actuate (Zeng et al. [0136]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 10, wherein each of the pressure relief areas is a weak area on the top wall, and the weak area is configured to be destroyed by the emissions from the battery cells when the pressure relief mechanisms actuate (Höfner [0014]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 10, wherein the pressure relief area is a second through hole in the top wall (Höfner Fig. 3, 22 flame passage openings).
Regarding claim 13, modified Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 10, wherein a length of the pressure relief area in a second direction is less than or equal to that of the fire fighting pipeline in the second direction, the second direction being perpendicular to the first direction and parallel to the first wall. Since Höfner teaches that the area of the pressure relief area is smaller than the area of the pressure relief mechanism (Höfner [0035]) and Zeng teaches that the length of the pressure relief mechanism (Zeng et al. Fig. 5, 33) is less than the fire fighting pipeline (Zeng et al. Fig. 5, 25), then modified Zeng teaches the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 15, Zeng et al teaches the battery according to claim 6, but does not specifically teach that an end, close to the wire harness segregation board, of the first side wall is provided with a first connecting portion, the first connecting portion is parallel to the wire harness segregation board, and the first side wall is fixed to the wire harness segregation board through the first connecting portion; and/or an end, close to the wire harness segregation board, of the second side wall is provided with a second connecting portion, the second connecting portion is parallel to the wire harness segregation board, and the second side wall is fixed to the wire harness segregation board through the second connecting portion.
Höfner, however, teaches of an end, close to the wire harness segregation board, of the first side wall is provided with a first connecting portion, the first connecting portion is parallel to the wire harness segregation board, and the first side wall is fixed to the wire harness segregation board through the first connecting portion (Fig. 3, see figure below).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to modify the Zeng battery module so that the walls of the protecting component are substituted with the Höfner protecting component walls that include the first connecting portion. This is because the walls prevent the abrasive flame from directly passing through to a battery cover arranged above the battery module (Höfner [0040]).
PNG
media_image1.png
600
621
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, modified Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 15, but does not specifically teach that first connecting portion is connected to the wire harness segregation board by way of at least one of the following modes: buckle connection, threaded connection and welding; and/or the second connecting portion is connected to the wire harness segregation board by way of at least one of the following modes: buckle connection, threaded connection and welding. Höfner only teaches that the connecting portion is connected with a clip [0039].
However, Zeng teaches that the side wall is connected to the wire harness segregation board through welding [0112].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to use any form of connection for connecting the first connecting portion with the wire harness segregation board, such as welding.
Regarding claim 17, modified Zeng teaches the battery according to claim 15, wherein the first wall is provided with a first electrode terminal and a second electrode terminal, the first electrode terminal and the second electrode terminal are located on both sides of the pressure relief mechanism in the second direction, respectively, the second direction being perpendicular to the first direction and parallel to the first wall (Zeng et al. Fig. 1D, 32 [0099]) and
the first connecting portion corresponds to an area between the pressure relief mechanism and the first electrode terminal (Höfner Fig. 1, 14).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim et al. (US 20210075075 A1) teaches of a battery module that includes a plurality of battery cells, each battery cell comprising a pressure relief mechanism and a protecting component (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YVONNE WEI whose telephone number is (571)270-0870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5pm, Friday 7:30am-4pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/YVONNE WEI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights