www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/439,237
`
`09/14/2021
`
`TAKEAKI WAKABAYASHI
`
`P220246US00
`
`1426
`
`WHDA,LLP
`8500 LEESBURG PIKE
`SUITE 7500
`TYSONS, VA22182
`
`CHMIELECKI, SCOTT J
`
`1729
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/10/2024
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`patentmail @ whda.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-12 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)(C The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s)filed on 14 September 2021 is/are: a)(¥| accepted or b)L) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)(¥) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)Y) All
`1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. |
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`*“ See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20240506
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/439,237
`WAKABAYASHI et al.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`SCOTT J CHMIELECKI
`1729
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)™) Responsive to communication(s)filed on 14 September 2021.
`C) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)() This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013,
`
`is being examined
`
`underthefirst inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 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-AlA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis
`
`(i.e., Changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`1.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b):
`
`(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall concludewith one or more claims particularly
`pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a jointinventor
`regards as the invention.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AlA), second paragraph:
`
`The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing outand distinctly
`claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`2.
`
`Claims 11 and 12 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-AlA 35 U.S.C. § 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
`
`3.
`
`Claim 11 recites the limitation "the support ribs" in line 4. There is insufficient
`
`antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Particularly, Applicant claims a singular
`
`“support rib” in line 3 of the claim. This term does not provide support for more than one
`
`support rib as recited in line 4 of claim 11 and again in line 1 of claim 12. The claims are
`
`further indefinite becauseit is also unclear if Applicant is claiming a structure with a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`single “support rib” or more than one such structure.
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 102
`
`that form the basis forthe rejections under this section made in this Office action:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless —
`
`(a)(1) the claimed invention waspatented, described in a printed publication, orin public use,
`on sale, or otherwise available to the public beforethe effectivefiling date of the claimed
`invention.
`
`(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patentissued under section 151, orinan
`application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the
`patentor application, as the case may be, names another inventor and waseffectively filed
`beforethe effectivefiling date of the claimed invention.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4-6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as
`
`being anticipated by Shimizu et al. (US 2016/0204404 A1), hereinafter “Shimizu.”
`
`6.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Shimizu discloses a power source device comprising:
`
`a plurality of batteries ({ [0031] & [0056]; Fig. 4, reference no. 2), each
`
`including a discharge valve that opens when a pressurein the battery becomes
`
`higher than a set pressure and jets emission gas from the battery (4 [0031]);
`
`an outer case that houses the plurality of batteries,
`
`in this case the module
`
`case (§ [0028]; Fig. 4, reference no. 30), and including a discharge opening that
`
`discharges the emission gas from the discharge valveto the outside,
`
`in this case
`
`the through-hole dispersed part ( [0024] & [0048]-[0049]; Fig. 4, reference no.
`
`54); and
`
`a heat-resistance plate that is disposed inside the outer case and faces an
`
`exhaust surface including the discharge opening,
`
`in this case the intercepting
`
`plate (4 [0056]; Fig. 4, reference no. 60);
`
`wherein the heat-resistance plate:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 4
`
`is disposed with an energy attenuation gap between the heat-
`
`resistance plate and an inner surface of the outer case and along an outer
`
`peripheral edge, in this case the space through which gas passes through
`
`({ [0057]; Fig. 4, reference no. y);
`
`is disposed with a planar heat radiation gap between the heat-
`
`resistant plate and an inner surface of the exhaust surface,in this case the
`
`fine hole side space (¥ [0056]; Fig. 4, reference no. S2); and
`
`causes the emission gas jetted from the discharge valve of each of
`
`the plurality of batteries to pass through the energy attenuation gap and
`
`the planar heat radiation gap before being discharged from the discharge
`
`opening to the outside (4 [0057]; Fig. 4, reference nos. B & y).
`
`
`
`7. Regarding claim 2, Shimizu further discloses that the attenuation gapisaslit
`
`between the outer case’s inner surface and the outer peripheral edge of the heat-
`
`resistance plate, in this case the space through which gas passes through (4 [0057];
`
`Fig. 4, reference no. y).
`
`8.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Shimizu further discloses that:
`
`the energy attenuation gap is provided on anentirety of the peripheral
`
`outer edge of the heat-resistant plate (see Fig. 4, reference no. y).
`
`the discharge opening is provided in a central region of the exhaust
`
`surface (see Fig. 2 & 4, reference no. 54).
`
`9.
`
`Regarding claim 5, Shimizu further discloses that:
`
`the energy attenuation gap is provided on a part of the outer peripheral
`
`edgeof the heat-resistant plate (see Fig. 4, reference no. y).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 5
`
`The limitation “the discharge opening is opened while being unevenly distributed
`
`opposite to the energy attenuation gap with respect to a central region of the exhaust
`
`surface”is a functionallimitation. Applicant is reminded that “[a] claim containing a
`
`‘recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be
`
`employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus’ if the
`
`prior art apparatus teachesall the structurallimitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2
`
`USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).” M.P.E.P. § 2114 Il. Here, Shimizu teaches
`
`all of the positively-recited structural limitations necessary to perform the functional
`
`limitations. Specifically, the through-holes remain open to gasflow atall times, and are
`
`therefore meets the functional limitation of “is opened while being unevenly
`
`distributed...” Thus, the claim is anticipated.
`
`10.|Regarding claim 6, Shimizu further discloses that the heat intersects the energy
`
`attenuation gap and includesa plurality of lines coupling slits coupled to the energy
`
`attenuation gap,
`
`in this case the gas intercepting plate is placed within the gap (see Fig.
`
`4, reference no. 60) which forces gasto travel through the coupling slits connecting the
`
`battery cell side space and the fine hole side space (see Fig. 4, reference nos. $1, S2,
`
`B, & y).
`
`11.
`
`Regarding claim 8, Shimizu further discloses that the heat-resistant plate is a
`
`metal plate ({ [0055]).
`
`12.|Regarding claim 9, Shimizu further discloses that:
`
`the outer case has a square shape (see, e.g. Fig. 1); and
`
`the exhaust surfaceis a surface plate portion with a maximum area (see
`
`Fig.
`
`1 & 2, reference no. 54).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 6
`
`13.|Regarding claim 10, Shimizu further discloses that:
`
`the plurality of batteries are cylindrical ({ [0030]; Fig. 4, reference no. 2);
`
`and
`
`the plurality of the cylindrical batteries are located in a plane parallel to the
`
`surface plate portion,
`
`in this case the plane of the positive electrodes (Fig. 4,
`
`reference no. 11) is parallel to the surface plate portion (Fig. 4, reference no. 54).
`
`14.|Regarding claim 11, Shimizu further discloses that the power source device
`
`comprises:
`
`a support rib that protrude to the inner surface of the outer case and
`
`support the heat-resistant plate,
`
`in this case the upper holder ({ [0028]; Fig. 4,
`
`reference no. 34); and
`
`the heat-resistant plate is mounted on the support ribs and providing the
`
`energy attenuation gap along the outer peripheral edge (see Fig. 4, reference
`
`nos. 4 &y).
`
`Thelimitation “integrally molded” is a product-by-process limitation. Applicant is
`
`reminded that “[t]he patentability of a product does not depend onits method of
`
`production.
`
`If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious
`
`from a productof the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product
`
`was made bya different process.” Here, Shimizu discloses the positively-recited
`
`structural limitation, namely the support rib, and therefore anticipates the claim.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`15.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 103 which forms the basis forall
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`A patent fora claimed invention may notbe obtained, notwithstanding thatthe claimed
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 7
`
`invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the
`claimed invention and the prior artare such that the claimed invention as a whole would have
`been obvious beforethe effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having
`ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall notbe
`negated by the mannerin whichthe invention was made.
`
`16.
`
`Claims 3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Shimizu.
`
`17.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Shimizu is silent as to the energy attenuation gap’s size.
`
`However, Wherethe only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation
`
`of the claimed device’s relative dimensions and the claimed device would not perform
`
`differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from
`
`that of the prior art. See M.P.E.P. § 2144.04 IV. A. Here, one having ordinary skill in the
`
`art would have understood to select the appropriate gap size for the battery module.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to have made the gap less than or equal to 3
`
`mm.
`
`18.
`
`Regarding claim 7, Shimizu further discloses that the power source device
`
`includes a planar heat radiation gap, in this case the opening above the positive
`
`electrodes where high-temperature gas is ejected (see Fig. 4, reference nos. 11 & ).
`
`Shimizu is silent as to the interval between the heat-resistant plate and the
`
`exhaust surface. However, Wherethe only difference betweenthe prior art and the
`
`claims is a recitation of the claimed device's relative dimensions and the claimed device
`
`would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed deviceis not
`
`patentably distinct from that of the prior art. See M.P.E.P. § 2144.04 IV. A. Here, one
`
`having ordinary skill in the art would have understood to select the appropriate spacing
`
`between components such asthe heat-resistant plate and the exhaust surface for the
`
`battery module. Therefore, it would have been obvious to have madethe gap less than
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`or equal to 3 mm.
`
`Page 8
`
`19.
`
`Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu
`
`as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of Campbell et al. (US 201 7/0036604
`
`A1), hereinafter “Campbell.”
`
`20.
`
`Regarding claim 12, Shimizu does not discloses the step parts. However,
`
`Campbell discloses a supporting rib comprising step parts (4 [0027]; Fig. 1, reference
`
`nos. 42 & 16). One having ordinary skill in the art would have realized that providing
`
`such step portions or parts would have provided the necessary structural support to
`
`secure the heat-resistant plate without additional brackets or securing components (see
`
`q [0027]), therefore simplifying the design. Therefore,
`
`it would have been obvious to
`
`have included the step parts in order to simplify the design.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to SCOTT J CHMIELECKI whose telephone numberis
`
`(571)272-7641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am to 5 pm.
`
`Examinerinterviews 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 AutomatedInterview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Avwww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Ula Ruddock can be reached on 5712721481. The fax phone numberfor
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/439,237
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 9
`
`obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Centeris
`
`available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center,
`
`visit: httos://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 aboutfiling 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.
`
`/SCOTT J. CHMIELECKI/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
`
`