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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/1/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wedlake (5607787) in view of Sprakel (7032681) and Golubkov (EP 3333932 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wedlake discloses a battery pack fire extinguishing system (10, fig 1) comprising: one or more battery cells (22, fig 1); a fire extinguishing pipe (42, fig 1) located above the one or more battery cells, the fire extinguishing pipe holding a first fire extinguishing agent (col 2, lines 65-67); and a fire extinguishing agent supply unit (44, fig 1) connected to the fire extinguishing pipe, the fire extinguishing agent supply unit holding a fire extinguishing agent at a pressure higher than the atmospheric pressure (col 3, lines 20-31, pressurized fire extinguishing unit), wherein the fire extinguishing agent supply unit is configured to supply the second fire extinguishing agent to the fire extinguishing pipe at a pressure higher than the atmospheric pressure (col 4, lines 37-40), wherein the fire extinguishing pipe comprises: a first fire extinguishing pipe (42, fig 1) located above the one or more battery cells; and a second fire extinguishing pipe (43, fig 1) connecting the first fire extinguishing pipe to the fire extinguishing agent supply unit.
Wedlake does not disclose storing extinguishing agent at atmospheric pressure, wherein the first fire extinguishing pipe comprises: one or more spray holes corresponding to one or more vent holes in the one or more battery cells, wherein the one or more vent holes are configured to open to discharge vent gas from the one or more battery cells; and a film over the spray holes, wherein a melting point of the film is lower than a melting point of the first fire extinguishing pipe, wherein the film is configured to melt responsive to vent gas from the battery cells
Sprakel teaches a fire extinguisher with a supply line (7, fig 1) and a storage unit (2, fig 1) wherein the first fire extinguishing fluid is stored at ambient pressure in the supply line (col 4, lines 14-24), while the storage unit is configured to supply a second fire extinguishing fluid at a higher pressure (col 4, lines 24-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pressurized extinguishing pipe disclosed by Wedlake by having the first extinguishing agent stored in the supply pipes be stored at atmospheric pressure in the supply pipe while the second is stored at a higher pressure based on the teachings of Sprakel. Doing so would reduce expenditures associated with maintaining a pressurized pipe system (col 2, lines 45-52), as suggested by Sprakel.
Golubkov teaches a fire extinguishing pipe (62, fig 4) for a battery system (82, fig 5), the fire extinguishing pipe comprising: one or more spray holes (par. 0014, “one opening that is filled with a plug”) corresponding to one or more vent holes (88, fig 4, the conduit is located directly over the vent holes to be triggered by them), wherein the one or more vent holes are configured to open to discharge vent gas from the one or more battery cells (par. 0016, the vent holes comprise an “overpressure valve”); and a film over the spray holes (par. 0014 “at least one opening that is filled with a plug”, applicants spec. par. 0059 states the film “may be formed as plugs”), wherein a melting point of the film is lower than a melting point of the first fire extinguishing pipe (par. 0014, the plug can be a separate material which is designed to melt before the conduit, thus meaning that the melting point of the film would be lower than the conduit), wherein the film is configured to melt in response to the vent gas discharged through the one or more vent holes (par. 0012 “configured to be melted by the vent-gas jet”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fire extinguishing pipe where the entire pipe can be melted in the case of a fire disclosed by Wedlake by having a spray hole located at the vent hole of the cell with a film that melts based on the teachings of Golubkov. Having the conduit have points be melted by the vent gas would reduce false triggers by allowing the conduit to be spaced far enough away that normal operation won’t generate enough heat to trigger the fire extinguisher (par. 0013), as suggested by Golubkov.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wedlake in view of Sprakel and Golubkov as evidenced by Cordani (9993672).
Regarding claim 2, Wedlake discloses wherein at least one of the first fire extinguishing agent or the second fire extinguishing agent comprises ammonium phosphate (col 3, lines 30-40, Wedlake says the fire extinguishing agent comprises a phosphate, of which ammonium phosphate is a known subset, as evidenced by Cordani (col 8, lines 5-20) which lists ammonium phosphate as a known fire extinguishing agent for use in electrical fires.
Claims 6 and 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wedlake as modified by Sprakel and Golubkov as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ren (US-Pub 2022/0123427).
Regarding claim 6, Wedlake as modified by Sprakel and Golubkov does not disclose a gas intake sensor configured to detect a vent gas from the battery cells; and a controller configured to drive a cylinder trigger of the fire extinguishing agent supply unit based on receiving a gas intake signal from the gas intake sensor.
Ren teaches a battery pack (200, fig 12) with a gas intake sensor configured to detect a vent gas from the battery cells; and a controller configured to drive a cylinder trigger of the fire extinguishing agent supply unit based on receiving a gas intake signal from the gas intake sensor (par. 0090).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack disclosed by Wedlake as modified by Sprakel and Golubkov by having a gas intake sensor which activates a trigger of the fire extinguishing agent based on the teachings of Ren. Doing so would allow the fire suppression system to start early and improve safety performance (par. 0090), as suggested by Ren.
Regarding claim 7, Wedlake as modified by Sprakel, Golubkov and Ren discloses wherein, based on detecting operation of the cylinder trigger, the first fire extinguishing agent charged in the fire extinguishing pipe is configured to be sprayed to the battery cells at a first point in time, and the second fire extinguishing agent charged in the fire extinguishing agent supply unit is configured to be sprayed to the battery cells through the fire extinguishing pipe at a second point in time later than the first point in time (the first fire extinguishing agent is already in the pipe, while the second fire extinguishing agent is within the pressure vessel which is connected to the far end of the pipe, thus when operating the first agent would be released first, while the second would push on the first until it has been cleared from the pipe, at which point it would be expelled).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN V MEILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-9229. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-5pm.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at 571-272-7118. 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 V MEILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights