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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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. Applicant's amendment filed 12/30/2025 have been fully considered. The prior art of Lee teaches an exhaust channel (13) of a bare cell (10) that aligns with a protective covering exhaust hole (121a), however Lee teaches the exhaust to be GAS. Instant claim is recited to be configured to exhaust LIQUID. Based on applicant’s arguments and the amended scope change, prior art features which are directed to exhausting gas are not considered to be within the scope of the instant claim as recited.
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 –
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-12, 16-21is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al (WO 2018/056628).
Claim 1: Lee teaches applicant’s battery cell (100) comprising a housing (120) and first end wall (130) and a protective member (140) covering the outer surface of the first end wall having a first opening (141a) corresponding to the cell’s terminal (160) and a second through hole (141c) corresponding to the cell’s drainage channel (134) [Fig 1-2; Abstract; Best-mode]. The feature 134 operates to break when the internal pressure of the sealed case is broken and therefore is capable of operating in a manner to allow liquid to flow between the feature 140 and 130.
Claim 2: Lee teaches applicant’s features of a housing having a sidewall (120) whereby the protective member includes a first and second part that cover the outer surface of the first end wall and the outer surface of the sidewall (150) [Fig 2].
Claim 3: Lee shows the drainage channel to be located between applicant’s recited first part and first end wall [Fig 1-2].
Claim 4: Lee teaches applicant’s features of a first end wall and side wall connected to form a first connection portion wherein the protective member covers the first connection portion [Fig 1-2].
Claim 5: Lee teaches applicant’s feature of a drainage channel that comprises a first sub-channel provided along an edge of the first end wall of the first connection portion whereby the first connection portion is connected to and disposed around the first sub-channel [Fig 1-2].
Claim 9: Lee teaches applicant’s pressure release mechanism (134) located on a first end wall. Lee teaches a covering feature over the first wall that comprises the pressure relief mechanisms [Fig 1-2].
Claim 10: Lee teaches an assembly that reads on applicant’s view of the thickness direction to comprise the pressure relief mechanism to at least partially overlap with the second through hole of the outer protective element [Fig 1-2].
Claim 11: Lee teaches a cross-sectional view Fig 3 of assembly that showcases a view through the thickness direction of what applicant defines as their first end wall; it is observed that a gap exists between the features of the pressure release mechanism and the protective member [Fig 3].
Claim 12: Lee teaches a liquid injection hole (131). In one interpretation, the claim is met because the protective member covers the first end wall and therefore covers the features associated with such element; in a second interpretation, the plug (132) in interpreted to be a protective element and therefore associated with protective layer assembly and thus covers the liquid injection hole [Fig 3].
Claim 16: Lee teaches first and second insulating tapes 140 and 150 are formed of an insulating layer and an adhesive layer applied to one surface of the insulating layer [Best Mode]. The adhesive layer is not disposed in a region of the drainage channel [Fig 2-3]. The claim is met by the features of the assembly [Fig 1-3].
Claim 17: Lee teaches element 120 which is disposed around the first end wall and the side wall are connected to form the first connection portion whereby when viewing the thickness direction of the first end wall [Fig 3], at least a portion of the first end wall and at least a portion of the first connection portion overlap with the drainage channel.
Claim 18-19: Lee teaches a covering element 140 and 150 which read on the covering of the instant claim [Fig 1-3; Best Mode].
Claim 20: Lee teaches the utilization of the assembly in a battery [abstract].
Claim 21: Lee teaches that batteries are well known in the art to operate driving motors [Background Art].
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 (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 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) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (WO 2018/056628) as applied to claim 1 above.
Claim 6-7: Instant claim pertain to the specific measurements of distances between the first connection portion and the first sub-channel. This relationship is directly dependent on the size of the battery and it’s intended use. Scale of battery from an electronic device to a vehicle to a power storage bank are well known in the art and each require a different scale of measurements between features. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would find it obvious to discover workable ranges for the desired battery capacity and size of casing. The distance depends on the size of the battery and is obvious to discover through routine experimentation.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (WO 2018/056628) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Xiong et al (PGPUB 2024/0275006).
Claim 8: Lee teaches a simple exhaust channel connected through the end plate to the cover [Fig 1-2], but is silent to teach additional features thereof.
Xiong teaches a battery with a housing having an opening provided with a n accommodating cavity configured to store fluid and its connection to a lower plastic assembly to distribute material of a reflux tank [Abstract]. Xiong teaches a first sub-channel and second sub-channel that communicates the first sub-channel with the second through hole of Lee. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would have modified the exhaust port of Lee to include a first and second sub-channel and communication to the reflux tank as taught by Xiong in order to collect fluid flowing out of the accommodating cavity and distribute the fluid into the accommodating cavity to immerse the electrode assembly [0006] since it is observed decomposition rate of electrolyte in a middle region is greater than a decomposition rate of electrolyte at the edge region [0028].
Claim(s) 5-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (WO 2018/056628) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Liang et al (CN 111933833)
Claim 5: *NOTE* this rejection is made in order to advance prosecution by more closely aligning the prior art rejection to the inventive concept presented in the instant filed specification.
Lee teaches an exhaust hole, applicant’s first sub-channel (13), which is provided along an edge of the first end wall [Fig 2]. Separately and without nexus to the first sub-channel, the first connection portion is disposed in a manner such that it is around the first sub-channel in the periphery of the battery [Fig 2]. Additionally, Liang teaches an end cover assembly for a battery having a pressure release component (2) located between two terminals (5) and capable of actuating when the internal pressure of the battery reaches a threshold value to discharge the internal pressure of the battery [Abstract; Fig 2]. The feature of Liang (2) comprises an outside ring between the pressure release mechanism and the plate (1). One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to cover the exhaust hole of Lee with a pressure release mechanism as shown by Liang in order to control the actuation pressure of the release of internal reactants [Abstract].
Claim 6-7: Instant claim pertain to the specific measurements of distances between the first connection portion and the first sub-channel. This relationship is directly dependent on the size of the battery and it’s intended use. Scale of battery from an electronic device to a vehicle to a power storage bank are well known in the art and each require a different scale of measurements between features. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would find it obvious to discover workable ranges for the desired battery capacity and size of casing. The distance depends on the size of the battery and is obvious to discover through routine experimentation.
Claim 8: Lee teaches a simple exhaust channel connected through the end plate to the cover [Fig 2], but is silent to teach additional features thereof.
Liang teaches a drainage channel to comprise a first and second sub-channel [Fig 3-4, Contents of Invention]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to modify the battery of Lee to include an electrolyte injection port with the pressure release component in order to reduce the occupied area of components on the end cover main body [Contents of Invention].
Claim 9: Lee teaches an exhaust hole (13) capable of discharging a gas generated by the cell through a channel [0047; Fig 2]. Lee is silent to teach a cover and pressure release mechanism covering this hole.
Liang teaches an end cover assembly for a battery having a pressure release component (2) located between two terminals (5) and capable of actuating when the internal pressure of the battery reaches a threshold value to discharge the internal pressure of the battery [Abstract; Fig 2]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to cover the exhaust hole of Lee with a pressure release mechanism as shown by Liang in order to control the actuation pressure of the release of internal reactants [Abstract].
The protective member of Lee is positioned over the exhaust port and covers but has a separation channel between the cover and the port and pressure release member thereof.
Claim 10: Lee is silent to teach the specifics of the exhaust port cover.
Liang is relied upon to teach the exhaust port cover. This element, when viewed along a thickness direction of the first end wall, at least partially overlaps with the second through hole. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to cover the exhaust hole of Lee with a pressure release mechanism as shown by Liang in order to control the actuation pressure of the release of internal reactants [Abstract].
Claim 11: Lee teaches a gap which exists between features 125 [Fig 5b].
Claim 12: Lee is silent to teach the mechanism to add electrolyte to the battery.
Liang teaches the pressure release component is provided with a first through hole for injecting electrolyte [Contents of Invention]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to modify the battery of Lee to include an electrolyte injection port with the pressure release component in order to reduce the occupied area of components on the end cover main body [Contents of Invention].
Claim 13: Lee is silent to teach the specifics of the drainage holes and its relationship to the liquid injection hole.
Liang teaches a drainage channel to comprise a first sub-channel, second sub-channel, and third sub-channel [Fig 3-4, Contents of Invention]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to modify the battery of Lee to include an electrolyte injection port with the pressure release component in order to reduce the occupied area of components on the end cover main body [Contents of Invention].
Claim 14: Lee teaches a protective member that operates to cover the features of the exhaust port. Lee is silent to teach the specifics of the drainage holes and its relationship to the liquid injection hole.
Liang teaches a groove capable of operating as a drainage groove located on the outer surface of the first end wall [Fig 3-4, Contents of Invention]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to modify the battery of Lee to include an electrolyte injection port with the pressure release component in order to reduce the occupied area of components on the end cover main body [Contents of Invention].
Claim 15: Lee teaches a protective member that operates to cover the features of the exhaust port. Lee is silent to teach the specifics of the drainage holes and its relationship to the liquid injection hole.
Liang teaches aa pressure relief mechanism deposited on the first end wall that has a groove on the outer surface of the first end wall and the pressure relief mechanism is disposed in the groove whereby the drainage groove is in communication with the groove through at least physical connection [Fig 3-4, Contents of Invention]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to modify the battery of Lee to include an electrolyte injection port with the pressure release component in order to reduce the occupied area of components on the end cover main body [Contents of Invention].
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J YANCHUK whose telephone number is (571)270-7343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-8p.
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, Nick Smith can be reached at 571-272-8760. 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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752