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 .
Status of Claims and Other Notes
Claims 1–14 are pending.
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 paragraph numbers cited in this Office Action in reference to the instant application are referring to the paragraph numbering of the PG-Pub of the instant application. See US 2024/0413426 A1.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09 April 2024, 31 January 2025, and 23 April 2025 were filed before the mailing of a first Office Action on the merits. The submissions comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The numbers and letters identifying the views are associated with brackets. Numbers and letters identifying the views must be simple and clear and must not be used in association with brackets, circles, or inverted commas. The view numbers must be larger than the numbers used for reference characters. See 37 CFR 1.84 (u)(2).
FIGS. 1–9 do not have satisfactory reproduction characteristics. See US 2024/0413426 A1. All drawings must be made by a process, which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning. See 37 CFR 1.84 (l).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: ENDOTHERMIC POUCH ASSEMBLY INCLUDING RIM FRAME BINDING HEAT-FUSION SEALING PORTION OF ENDOTHERMIC POUCH FOR SECONDARY BATTERIES.
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 2–10 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 2 recites the limitation "a first vulnerable portion." The term "vulnerable" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see vulnerable, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "vulnerable" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "a first vulnerable portion" is indefinite.
Claim 3 is directly dependent from claim 2 and includes all the limitations of claim 2. Therefore, claim 3 is also 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 "a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion." Claim 2, which claim 4 is indirectly dependent, recites the limitation "a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion." It is unclear if "a remainder" recited in claim 4 is further limiting or referencing "a remainder" of claim 2. Claim 2 provides antecedent basis for the term "a remainder." However, claim 4 does not include "the" or "said" indicating the term is further limiting or referencing the previously recited term.
Claim 5 is directly dependent from claim 4, is indirectly dependent from claim 2, and includes all the limitations of claims 2 and 4. Therefore, claim 5 is also 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 6 recites the limitation "a superabsorbent matrix." The term "superabsorbent" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see super-absorbent, Canadian Oxford Dictionary; see extremely, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "superabsorbent" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "a superabsorbent matrix" is indefinite.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "a superabsorbent polymer." The term "superabsorbent" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see super-absorbent, Canadian Oxford Dictionary; see extremely, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "superabsorbent" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "a superabsorbent polymer" is indefinite.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "a superabsorbent fiber." The term "superabsorbent" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see super-absorbent, Canadian Oxford Dictionary; see extremely, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "superabsorbent" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "a superabsorbent fiber" is indefinite.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the surface tension" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the superabsorbent matrix." The term "superabsorbent" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see super-absorbent, Canadian Oxford Dictionary; see extremely, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "superabsorbent" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "the superabsorbent matrix" is indefinite.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "causing a phase change to gas." It is unclear what element is cause to phase change to gas.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the pressure" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the bursting strength" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the first vulnerable portion" in lines 3–4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the first vulnerable portion." The term "vulnerable" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see vulnerable, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "vulnerable" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "the first vulnerable portion" is indefinite.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "allowing gas inside the endothermic pouch" in line 4. Claim 9 has previously recited the limitation "causing a phase change to gas" in line 2 It is unclear if "gas" recited in line 4 is further limiting or referencing "gas" recited in line 2. The term "gas" in line 4 does not include "the" or "said" indicating the term is further limiting or referencing the previously recited term.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the venting induction hole" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "a second vulnerable portion." The term "vulnerable" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see vulnerable, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "vulnerable" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "a second vulnerable portion" is indefinite.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion." Claim 2, which claim 10 is indirectly dependent, recites the limitation "a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion." It is unclear if "a remainder" recited in claim 10 is further limiting or referencing "a remainder" of claim 2. Claim 2 provides antecedent basis for the term "a remainder." However, claim 10 does not include "the" or "said" indicating the term is further limiting or referencing the previously recited term.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "a bursting strength of the first vulnerable portion." Claim 2, which claim 10 is indirectly dependent, recites the limitation "a first vulnerable portion having a lower bursting strength." It is unclear if "a bursting strength" recited in claim 10 is further limiting or referencing "bursting strength" of claim 2. Claim 2 provides antecedent basis for the term "bursting strength." However, claim 10 does not include "the" or "said" indicating the term is further limiting or referencing the previously recited term.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the first vulnerable portion." The term "vulnerable" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see vulnerable, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "vulnerable" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "the first vulnerable portion" is indefinite.
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.
(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 1 and 6–9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ninomiya et al. (US 2022/0006158 A1, hereinafter Ninomiya).
Regarding claim 1, Ninomiya discloses an endothermic pouch assembly (1, [0040]) comprising:
an endothermic pouch (110) with liquid-impregnated absorbent material (130) sealed inside (FIG. 1A, [0045]) and
a heat-fusion sealing portion (121) formed along a rim of the endothermic pouch (110, [0079]); and
a pouch cartridge (110a) comprising a pair of rim frames (110a) that bind the heat-fusion sealing portion (121) of the endothermic pouch (110) at opposite sides of the endothermic pouch (110, [0044]).
Regarding claim 6, Ninomiya discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the absorbent material (130) is a superabsorbent matrix (see porous body, [0070]).
Regarding claim 7, Ninomiya discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the superabsorbent matrix comprises a superabsorbent polymer or superabsorbent fiber (see porous body, [0070]).
Regarding claim 8, Ninomiya discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the liquid is water mixed with additives (see liquid, [0059]), and
wherein the additive is a substance that lowers the surface tension of water, or is a fire extinguishing agent (see liquid, [0059]).
Regarding claim 9, Ninomiya discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the liquid impregnated in the superabsorbent matrix absorbs heat, causing a phase change to gas (see evaporation, [0069]), and
wherein when the pressure of the gas exceeds the bursting strength of the first vulnerable portion (140), the first vulnerable portion (140) fractures, allowing gas inside the endothermic pouch (110) to be inductively ejected through the venting induction hole (FIG. 4, [0081]).
Claims 1–5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maeda et al. (US 2008/0292950, hereinafter Maeda).
Regarding claim 1, Maeda discloses an endothermic pouch assembly (FIG. 10, [0112]) comprising:
an endothermic pouch (52) with liquid-impregnated absorbent material sealed inside (FIG. 10, [0116]) and
a heat-fusion sealing portion formed along a rim of the endothermic pouch (52, [0116]); and
a pouch cartridge (30) comprising a pair of rim frames (30) that bind the heat-fusion sealing portion of the endothermic pouch (52) at opposite sides of the endothermic pouch (52, [0112]).
Regarding claim 2, Maeda discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the heat-fusion sealing portion is provided with a first vulnerable portion (14) having a lower bursting strength than a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion (FIG. 9, [0122]), and
wherein the rim frame (30) is provided with a venting induction hole aligned with the first vulnerable portion (FIG. 10, [0116]).
Regarding claim 3, Maeda discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the pouch cartridge (30) exposes a surface of the endothermic pouch (52) in an interior region of the rim frame (30, [0117]).
Regarding claim 10, Maeda discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the endothermic pouch (53) is provided with a second vulnerable portion (15L) having a lower bursting strength than a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion (FIG. 11, [0131]),
the second vulnerable portion (15L) on a surface of the endothermic pouch not covered by the pouch cartridge (34, [0127]), and
wherein the bursting strength of the second vulnerable portion (15L) is higher than a bursting strength of the first vulnerable portion (15H, [0133]).
Regarding claim 4, Maeda discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the endothermic pouch (53) is provided with a second vulnerable portion (15L) having a lower bursting strength than a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion (FIG. 11, [0131]),
the second vulnerable portion (15L) on a surface of the endothermic pouch (53) not covered by the pouch cartridge (34, [0127]).
Regarding claim 5, Maeda discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the second vulnerable portion (15L) is located directly inside the pouch cartridge (34) at a location of the venting induction hole (FIG. 15, [0127]).
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ninomiya et al. (JP 2020-161290 A, hereinafter Ninomiya '290).
Regarding claim 1, Ninomiya '290 discloses an endothermic pouch assembly (1, [0040]) comprising:
an endothermic pouch (110) with liquid-impregnated absorbent material (130) sealed inside (FIG. 2A, [0029]) and
a heat-fusion sealing portion (121) formed along a rim of the endothermic pouch (110, [0054]); and
a pouch cartridge (110a) comprising a pair of rim frames (110a) that bind the heat-fusion sealing portion (121) of the endothermic pouch (110) at opposite sides of the endothermic pouch (110, [0029]).
Regarding claim 2, Ninomiya '290 discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the heat-fusion sealing portion (110a) is provided with a first vulnerable portion (W) having a lower bursting strength than a remainder of the heat-fusion sealing portion (110a, [0017]), and
wherein the rim frame (110a) is provided with a venting induction hole aligned with the first vulnerable portion (W, [0064]).
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.
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.
Claims 11–14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninomiya (US 2022/0006158 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Binder (US 2022/0115733 A1).
Regarding claims 11–14, Ninomiya discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose an endothermic pouch assembly:
wherein the heat-fusion sealing portion of the endothermic pouch is provided with at least one guide hole, and
wherein at least one of the pair of rim frames is provided with a projection that inserts into the at least one guide hole;
wherein the endothermic pouch and the rim frame are mutually aligned by an insertion of the projection of the rim frame into the at least one guide hole of the endothermic pouch;
wherein the pair of rim frames are each equipped with a pair of hooks, respectively, and
wherein the pair of rim frames are bound together by the engagement of the pair of hooks; and
wherein the heat-fusion sealing portion of the endothermic pouch has an incision formed in a position corresponding to the pair of hooks.
Binder discloses an endothermic pouch assembly (1) comprising an endothermic pouch (30) having a heat-fusion sealing portion provided with at least one guide hole (311, [0132]), and a pair of rim frames (10) is provided with a projection (141) that inserts into the at least one guide hole (311, [0097]); wherein the endothermic pouch (30) and the rim frame (10) are mutually aligned by an insertion of the projection (141) of the rim frame (10) into the at least one guide hole (311) of the endothermic pouch (30, [0097]); wherein the pair of rim frames (10) are each equipped with a pair of hooks (142), respectively, and wherein the pair of rim frames (10) are bound together by the engagement of the pair of hooks (142, [0097]); and wherein the heat-fusion sealing portion of the endothermic pouch (30) has an incision (312) formed in a position corresponding to the pair of hooks (142, [0097]) to improve the efficiency of cell cooling (see thermal control, [0087]). Ninomiya and Binder are analogous because they are directed to endothermic pouch assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the endothermic pouch assembly of Ninomiya with the rim frame of Binder in order to improve the efficiency of cell cooling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean P Cullen, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:00 am to 4:00 pm CT, Friday 6:00 am to 12:00 pm CT.
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, Basia A Ridley can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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 P Cullen, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights