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 .
This is a first action on the merits of the application. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informality:
Claim 20: “generated by an energy storage device” appears to be a misstatement of “generated by [[an ]]the energy storage device.” See line 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 17 and 18 recite, “placing the obtained gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member in a coating agent in a liquid phase . . . removing the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member from the coating agent and forming a cladding layer after cooling.” Since Applicant means to claim that the coating agent is used for the cladding layer ([0078]), these limitations are interpreted as reciting that the obtained gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member is placed in a body of a coating agent in a liquid phase, and that the cladding layer is formed when residual coating agent on the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, after removal from the body, cools.
Examiner’s Note
In claim 18, Applicant is respectfully advised to remove “after the step 8” in line 1 since the claim depends from claim 16, which itself is “after step 8,” noting that “the obtained gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member” in claim 18 refers to the antecedent in claim 16 of “to obtain the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member,” so that the steps of claim 18 must be sequenced after the steps of claim 16.
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 1-20 are 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 1: The claim recites “alloy-type particles” in line 3. The addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(b)(III)(E).
The claim recites, “a first particle layer . . . being used for treating at least one of hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device.” It is unclear whether or not an energy storage device is being positively recited as a component of the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, and it is unclear if “being used for treating at least one of hazardous gases” recites a method step, and if it does not, it is unclear how this language limits the claimed gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member. In other words, on the latter issue, the claim appears to simultaneously claim an apparatus and a method step for the use of the apparatus. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(p)(II). For the purposes of examination only, the “energy storage device” is interpreted as a positively recited feature of the claimed member.
The claim recites, “a breathable cushion, disposed on both sides of the second particle layer along a thickness direction thereof.” It is unclear if Applicant means to claim that a single breathable cushion is somehow simultaneously disposed on opposite sides of the second particle layer, as the claim appears to state, or if Applicant means that a respective breathable cushion is disposed on each side[[s]] of the second particle layer, as the disclosure otherwise indicates (Figs. 2; [0047]; [0082]: “first breathable cushion”; [0086]: “second breathable cushion”). For the purposes of examination only, in view of the specification, the latter interpretation will be applied. Applicant is respectfully advised that claim 12 recites, “the breathable cushion.”
Claims 2-19 are rejected because of their dependence from claim 1.
Claim 15: The claim recites, “removing the first mould to obtain a sandwich-structured treatment member and use it as the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member” in step 8. It is unclear what the metes and bounds of “use it as the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member,” i.e., it is unclear what actions are considered “use” and which are not. It is noted that steps 16-18 are recited as being applied after step 8, i.e., after the claimed “use.”
Claim 16: It is unclear how the steps of claim 16 are to be sequenced with the steps of claim 15, step 8. For example, it is unclear if “placing the obtained sandwich-structured treatment member into the cavity” occurs before or after it is used in step 8, and it is unclear if “sealing the opening of the cavity with the baffle” with the obtained sandwich-structured treatment member therein corresponds to “use it” in step 8.
Claim 17: The claim recites, “the obtained gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation, noting that what is obtained in claim 15 is the sandwich-structured treatment member (step 8).
Claim 19: The claim is indefinite for the following reasons:
(i) The claim recites, “wherein the step 4 comprises: step 4A, providing a chimney-shaped third mould and placing it on the first sub-particle layer.” The claim depends from claim 14, which recites, “step 4, providing a chimney-shaped second mould and placing it on the first sub-particle layer.” It is unclear how these steps are to be sequenced, and it is unclear if the second mould cavity and the third mould cavity which result from step 4 are separate from one another, or if one is inside the other.
(ii) The claim recites, “step 4C, providing a chimney-shaped second mould . . . forming a second mould cavity with an opening.” These limitations are indefinite because the claim depends from claim 14 but does not acknowledge the corresponding antecedent terms in “providing a chimney-shaped second mould . . . forming a second mould cavity with an opening,” further exposing the uncertainty discussed in point (i) above.
(iii) In step 6B, line 3, “a second sub-particle layer” does not acknowledge the antecedent of “a second sub-particle layer” (claim 15, step 6, line 3), and “a second particle layer” does not acknowledge the antecedent of “a second particle layer” (claim 15, step 6, line 4). In the latter case, stated another way, it is unclear if “a second particle layer wrapping the third particle layer” is a different feature from “second particle layer wrapping the first particle layer” (claim 15, step 6), as claim 19 is recited as a further limitation of the same step 6 of claim 15.
Claim 20: The claim recites “alloy-type particles” in line 3. The addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(b)(III)(E).
The claim recites, “a breathable cushion, disposed on both sides of the second particle layer along a thickness direction thereof.” It is unclear if Applicant means to claim that a single breathable cushion is somehow simultaneously disposed on opposite sides of the second particle layer, as the claim appears to state, or if Applicant means that a respective breathable cushion is disposed on each side[[s]] of the second particle layer, as the disclosure otherwise indicates (Figs. 2; [0047]; [0082]: “first breathable cushion”; [0086]: “second breathable cushion”). For the purposes of examination only, in view of the specification, the latter interpretation will be applied. Applicant is respectfully advised that claim 12 recites, “the breathable cushion.”
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 16: The claim recites, “wherein after the step 8, the method further comprises . . . placing the obtained sandwich-structured treatment member into the cavity; sealing the opening of the cavity with the baffle to obtain the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member.” The claim depends from claim 15, which recites in step 8, “removing the first mould to obtain a sandwich-structured treatment member and use it as the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member.” Therefore, claim 16 does not appear to include the limitations of claim 15, since step 8 includes using the obtained sandwich-structured treatment member as the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, so that the obtained sandwich-structured treatment member is no longer identified as such after step 8, and the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member has already been obtained, as is implicit from its use in step 8.
Claim 19: In step 4B, the claim recites, “a third sub-particle layer disposed on the first sub-particle layer,” but claim 15 recites, “a first particle layer disposed on the first sub-particle layer” (step 5). Since the claim does not acknowledge the above limitation of claim 15, the claim does not appear to include this limitation of claim 15. In addition, the claim recites (step 4C), “providing a chimney-shaped second mould and placing it on the third sub-particle layer,” which does not appear to acknowledge the limitation of “providing a chimney-shaped second mould and placing it on the first sub-particle layer” (step 4), so the claim does not appear to include that limitation of claim 15. Furthermore, the claim recites, “the second mould and the third sub-particle layer forming a second mould cavity,” without acknowledging the antecedent of “the second mould and the first sub-particle layer forming a second mould cavity,” so the claim does not appear to include that limitation of claim 15.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
A thorough search for pertinent prior art did not locate any prior art that discloses or suggests the invention recited in claims 1-20.
The concept of a gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, comprising: a first particle layer, comprising metal or alloy containing particles, the metal-containing or alloy-type particles being used for treating at least one of hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device; a second particle layer, wrapping the first particle layer and comprising carbonaceous particles, the carbonaceous particles being used for treating at least one of the hazardous gases; and a breathable cushion, disposed on both sides of the second particle layer along a thickness direction thereof (claim 1)
is considered to define patentable subject matter over the prior art.
In addition, the concept of a preparation method of a gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, for preparing a gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, the method comprising:
step 1. providing a chimney-shaped first mould and placing it on a carrier plate, the first mould and a surface of the carrier plate cooperatively forming a first mould cavity with an opening;
step 2, making a first breathable cushion and placing the first breathable cushion at a bottom of the first mould cavity through the opening of the first mould cavity;
step 3, filling the first mould cavity with carbonaceous particles and compacting the carbonaceous particles to obtain a first sub-particle layer disposed on the first breathable cushion;
step 4, providing a chimney-shaped second mould and placing it on the first sub-particle layer, the second mould and the first sub-particle layer forming a second mould cavity with an opening;
step 5, filling the second mould cavity with metal or alloy containing particles through the opening of the second mould cavity, and compacting the metal or alloy containing particles to obtain a first particle layer disposed on the first sub-particle layer;
step 6, removing the second mould and continuing to fill the first mould cavity with the carbonaceous particles through the opening of the first mould cavity, and compacting the carbonaceous particles to obtain a second sub-particle layer, the first sub-particle layer and the second sub-particle layer constituting a second particle layer wrapping the first particle layer;
step 7, making a second breathable cushion and placing the second breathable cushion into the first mould cavity through the opening of the first mould cavity to cover the second sub-particle layer;
step 8, removing the first mould to obtain a sandwich-structured treatment member and use it as the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member (claim 15)
is considered to define patentable subject matter over the prior art.
Lastly, the concept of an energy storage device, comprising: a case, comprising an accommodation cavity having an opening; an electrode assembly, accommodated within the accommodation cavity; a top lid, sealing the opening of the accommodation cavity; a gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member, disposed within the accommodation cavity and for treating hazardous gases within the accommodation cavity, wherein the gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member comprises: a first particle layer, comprising metal or alloy containing particles, the metal-containing or alloy-type particles being used for treating at least one of hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device; a second particle layer, wrapping the first particle layer and comprising carbonaceous particles, the carbonaceous particles being used for treating at least one of the hazardous gases; and a breathable cushion, disposed on both sides of the second particle layer along a thickness direction thereof (claim 20)
is considered to define patentable subject matter over the prior art.
The closest prior art appears to be Sebastian et al. (WO2014023511A1), which discloses a package 28 (i.e., gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member) containing a protective material 30 (Fig. 1a; [0055]) such as salt and/or activated carbon (metal containing particles; carbonaceous particles) ([0021]) for neutralizing and adsorbing gases ([0058]) produced by the decomposition of the electrolyte and/or the cathode ([0008]) of a galvanic cell 10 ([0052]) (i.e., hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device). However, Sebastian does not suggest first and second particle layers, or a breathable cushion.
Other close prior artis Toia et al. (US 2010/0183914 A1), which discloses a multilayer polymeric sheet formed of an inner layer of a polymeric material containing particles of one or more getter materials for sorption of gaseous harmful substances (claims 1, 25) from batteries ([0008]) (i.e., a gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member; hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device), wherein the getter materials may be copper oxides ([0039]), palladium oxide, cobalt oxide, or ternary alloys like zirconium, vanadium and iron ([0040]) (i.e., metal or alloy containing particles), or carbon nanotubes ([0045]) (i.e., carbonaceous particles). However, Toia does not suggest distinct layers of particles of these kinds, or a breathable cushion.
Related prior art is Sweeney et al. (US 2004/0107833 A1), which discloses an apparatus for abating at least one acid or hydride gas component (i.e., a gas-phase hazardous substance treatment member) comprising layers of particle shaped sorbent materials 218 and 220 in discrete bed zones (Fig. 2; [0075]: “particle,” [0082], [0083]), one including a “fast” sorbent layer material such as carbon ([0074]) and the other including a high capacity “slow” sorbent material such as an oxidized form of copper ([0087]). However, Sweeney does not disclose hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device or one particle layer wrapping another or hazardous gases generated by an energy storage device. Furthermore, Sweeney teaches screen or grid members 214 and 216 ([0081]) which would not be interpreted by the skilled practitioner to be breathable cushions.
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL E GITMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7934. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:15-5:45pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at 571-272-3471. 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.
/GABRIEL E GITMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
