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 .
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikaido, et. al. (US2019312240A1), in view of Sheeks, et. al. (US2025392198A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Nikaido teaches a battery pack including: a battery pack housing (holder 1) operably connectable to a power tool (“[0002] The present technology generally relates to a battery pack, and more particularly to a battery pack, a vehicle, an electric storage system, an electric power tool, and an electronic device”); a cell holder (holder 2; “[0069] The battery cell 13 is housed in the holder 2”) comprising at least a front wall and a rear wall (side surface members 2-2, 2-3); at least two pouch-type battery cells disposed in the cell holder (pouch type batteries are defined by being held within a laminate material instead of a rigid shell; Nikaido teaches “[0018] the battery cell provided in the battery pack according to the present technology may be a laminate type battery” and battery cells 9, 13), the at least two pouch-type battery cells including a first battery cell and a second battery cell (cells 9, and 13 respectively), each of the first battery cell and the second battery cell has a first tab and a second tab (see Fig. 6 below, wherein two tabs protrude from each to connect to the connection tab 10; “[0113] The connection tab 10 is connected to electrode tabs”); and a lead collection printed circuit board (LCPCB) (circuit board 6, also referred to as substrate 6). Nikaido at [0002, 18, 69, 113], Fig. 5-6.
Nikaido teaches the LCPCB extends to the front of the pack through the integral connection member 7, which collects the electrode tabs via the connection tab 10; these are, within Fig. 5-6, disposed “ ahead” of the battery cell holder 3, indicating that the openings 3-6 permit the tabs to meet the connection tab 10 and the connection member; these are “LPCB slots” because they accept tabs extending towards the LPCB. This indicates Nikaido reads upon “the LCPCB having an array of LCPCB slots extending from a first side of the LCPCB to a second side of the LCPCB, wherein the tabs of the first battery cell and the second battery cell are received in the array of LCPCB slots, and wherein the LCPCB is configured to be disposed forward of the front wall of the cell holder.” Nikaido at Fig. 5-6.
The PCB components “load connection terminals 1208 a and 1208 b attached to the PCB 1202,” have a distance along the longitudinal axis from the from the PCB that is effectively zero because they are disposed upon the PCB; however, these are positioned at a predetermined distance, along a longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the front portion of the PCB, i.e. connection member 7. Because the connection member 7 is an extending portion of a larger PCB which collects electrode tabs, the connection member 7 may be designated as a “LCPCB,” such that the new LPCB 7 is “positioned at a predetermined distance, along a longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the set of battery pack terminals [1208].”
However, Nikaido teaches a set of load connection terminals 1208, as well as a power tool, but does not disclose power tool terminals or their relative distance; thereby, Nikaido is silent as to “a set of battery pack terminals electrically connectable to a set of power tool terminals of the power tool and electrically connected to the first battery cell and the second battery cells.”
PNG
media_image1.png
460
397
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
525
387
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5 – 6 of Nikaido.
Sheeks teaches “[0014] In one independent embodiment, an electrical combination may generally include an electrical device, a battery pack and a controller. The electrical device may generally include a device housing, a load supported by the device housing, the load being operable to output at least about 1800 watts (W) (about 2.4 horsepower (hp)), and a device terminal electrically connected to the load. The battery pack may include a pack housing, battery cells supported by the pack housing, the battery cells being electrically connected and having a nominal voltage of up to about 20 volts, and a pack terminal electrically connectable to the device terminal to transfer current between the battery pack and the electrical device.” Further, Sheeks teaches “[0135] As explained in greater detail below, the high power DC tool system 14 achieves a high power output with a DC power source within the packaging restrictions (e.g., weight, volume, etc.) of a hand-held power tool.” Further, “[0166] In some embodiments, where the power circuit board 248 is located elsewhere within the power tool 10 as described above, the coil contact plates 190 may be connected to the power circuit board 248 by lead wires. Lead wires may be connected to the second terminals 198 (e.g., to holes in the second terminals 198 ) and routed to the power circuit board 248 within the power tool housing.” Taken together, [0135] and [0165] indicate a benefit to utilizing a design in which a power tool having power tool terminals meet battery pack terminals mounted upon the top of the battery pack, namely allowing permitting the combination to fit within the limitations of a hand-held device while maintaining the “[0007] deliverable power of the battery power source.” Id. at [0004 – 8, 135, 165].
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the battery of Nikaido, such that it comprises “a set of battery pack terminals electrically connectable to a set of power tool terminals of the power tool and electrically connected to the first battery cell and the second battery cells” wherein the power tool terminals are the terminals of Sheeks, and wherein these meet top mounted- battery pack terminals as in Sheeks, because Sheeks teaches this configuration provides a benefit to meeting volume and weight considerations while maintaining deliverable power.
Claim 1 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the “pre-determined distance” is approximately 3.7 mm to 4.5 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208) of modified Ogura would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 2 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 relies upon Claim 2. Claim 2 is obvious over modified Ogura.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the “pre-determined distance” is in a range from approximately 3.9 mm to approximately 4.3 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208) of modified Ogura would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 3 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks.
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 relies upon Claim 3. Claim 3 is obvious over modified Ogura.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the predetermined distance is approximately 4.1 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208) of modified Ogura would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 4 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks.
Claims 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, and further in view of Palich, et. al. (EP 3162513 A2).
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Modified Nikaido is silent as to a batter management system printed circuit board (BMSPCB).
Palich teaches a battery receptacle for a power tool ([0005]), wherein the battery pack comprises “[a] battery management control module comprises a second printed circuit board (PCB) on which the second controller is mounted.” Palich at [0005,8]. While Palich does not limit the shape of the battery management control module or the second PCB, the substantially rectangular shape of the sides of the module, and the shape of the overall battery management control module implies a “first end portion,” (one side of a rectangle or rectangular prism) and a “second end portion” (another opposite side of a rectangle or rectangular prism or rectangular section). Palich at Fig. 6.
PNG
media_image3.png
675
593
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Palich, depicting the substantially rectangular battery management control module 300.
The battery management control module of Palich provides a benefit of being able to host “[0007] a power supply regulator configured to output a power line having a lower voltage than the battery pack to the first and second controllers.” Palich at [007 - 8].
Palich reads upon a battery management system printed circuit board (BMSPCB) (“battery management control module”) that is configured to control the operation (the second controller configured to manage an operation, wherein “managing” reads upon “controlling”) of the battery pack, wherein the BMSPCB includes a first end portion and a second end portion opposing the first end portion (see above note re: Fig. 6 of Palich), and wherein the set of battery pack terminals are disposed on the first end portion of the BMSPCB (see the below modification).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify the battery pack of modified Nikaido, such that the battery pack comprises a battery management system printed circuit board (BMSPCB) that is configured to control the operation of the battery pack, wherein the BMSPCB includes a first end portion and a second end portion opposing the first end portion, and wherein the set of battery pack terminals are disposed on the first end portion of the BMSPCB, because Palich teaches the use of two PCBs as well as a benefit to allowing regulation and control of the voltage and power supply.
Claim 5 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 relies upon Claim 5. Claim 5 is obvious over modified Nikaido. As previously articulated, “positioned at . . . a predetermined distance,” is an arbitrary distance because any location upon the longitudinal axis is at “a distance,” and this distance is determined upon selecting the location of the LCPCB. Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, reading upon “wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a second predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.”
Claim 6 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 7, Claim 7 relies upon Claim 6. Claim 6 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a second predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the second predetermined distance is in a range from approximately 3.7 mm to approximately 4.5 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 7 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 8, Claim 8 relies upon Claim 7. Claim 7 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a second predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido such that the second predetermined distance is in a range from approximately 3.9 mm to approximately 4.3 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 8 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 9, Claim 9 relies upon Claim 8. Claim 8 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a second predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, wherein the second predetermined distance is approximately 4.1 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 9 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 10, Claim 10 relies upon Claim 9. Claim 9 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a second predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido such that the second predetermined distance is different from the predetermined distance because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 10 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, and further in view of Louis, et. al. (US2018145445A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Claim 11 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido is silent as to a state of charge printed circuit board.
Louis teaches a battery pack for a cordless power tool, which comprises a core pack having a SOC subassembly 134. Louis at [0004]. “The SOC subassembly 134 may include a PCB, a plurality of LEDs, an actuator button and a set of lead wires coupled to the PCB 128.” Id. at [0005]. This “plurality of LEDs” is implied to be the SOC display / indicator 116, which is shown in Fig. 1, 2 and 8b. See id at Fig. 1-2, 8b. Louis teaches the PCB 128 has “various components for monitoring and controlling the operation and status of the battery pack 100 and the battery cells 122.” Id. Louis at least suggests a benefit to battery performance as a result of this monitoring. Id. This SOC subassembly is a “state of charge printed circuit board (SOCPCB) that is configured to determine a state of charge of one or more battery cells in the battery pack.”
PNG
media_image4.png
469
641
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Louis, showing the SOC display / indicator 116 along the front of the battery pack.
PNG
media_image5.png
811
661
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Louis; [0004-5] of Louis teach a PCB upon which a “plurality of LEDs” is disposed, and 116 is disposed upon what appears to be a larger PCB (see below at Fig. 8B for a zoomed in version).
PNG
media_image6.png
355
301
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 8B of Louis. Here, as above, the circuit board at the front of the battery is a PCB hosting the plurality of LEDs.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Ogura, such that a state of charge printed circuit board (SOCPCB) that is configured to determine a state of charge of one or more battery cells in the battery pack, and wherein the SOCPCB is configured to be disposed forward of the LCPCB and the front wall of the cell holder, because Louis teaches a benefit to performance when utilizing a SOCPCB.
Claim 11 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Louis.
Regarding Claim 12, Claim 12 relies upon Claim 11. Claim 11 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.” Because there is a distance between the two and this distance is determined at assembly, this is “a predetermined distance” from each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the predetermined distance between the SOCPCB and the LCPCB is in a range from approximately 11.9 mm to approximately 14.5 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the SOCPCB and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 12 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Louis.
Regarding Claim 13, Claim 13 relies upon Claim 12. Claim 12 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.” Because there is a distance between the two and this distance is determined at assembly, this is “a predetermined distance” from each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that wherein the predetermined distance between the SOCPCB and the LCPCB is in a range from approximately 12.6 mm to approximately 13.9 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the SOCPCB and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 13 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Louis.
Regarding Claim 14, Claim 14 relies upon Claim 13. Claim 13 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.” Because there is a distance between the two and this distance is determined at assembly, this is “a predetermined distance” from each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the predetermined distance between the SOCPCB and the LCPCB is approximately 13.2 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the SOCPCB and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 14 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Louis.
Claims 15 - 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Palich, and Louis.
Regarding Claim 15, Nikaido teaches a battery pack including: a battery pack housing (holder 1) operably connectable to a power tool (“[0002] The present technology generally relates to a battery pack, and more particularly to a battery pack, a vehicle, an electric storage system, an electric power tool, and an electronic device”); a cell holder (holder 2; “[0069] The battery cell 13 is housed in the holder 2”) comprising at least a front wall and a rear wall (side surface members 2-2, 2-3); at least two pouch-type battery cells disposed in the cell holder (pouch type batteries are defined by being held within a laminate material instead of a rigid shell; Nikaido teaches “[0018] the battery cell provided in the battery pack according to the present technology may be a laminate type battery” and battery cells 9, 13), the at least two pouch-type battery cells including a first battery cell and a second battery cell (cells 9, and 13 respectively), each of the first battery cell and the second battery cell has a first tab and a second tab (see Fig. 6 below, wherein two tabs protrude from each to connect to the connection tab 10; “[0113] The connection tab 10 is connected to electrode tabs”); and a lead collection printed circuit board (LCPCB) (circuit board 6, also referred to as substrate 6). Nikaido at [0002, 18, 69, 113], Fig. 5-6.
Nikaido teaches the LCPCB extends to the front of the pack through the integral connection member 7, which collects the electrode tabs via the connection tab 10; these are, within Fig. 5-6, disposed “ ahead” of the battery cell holder 3, indicating that the openings 3-6 permit the tabs to meet the connection tab 10 and the connection member; these are “LPCB slots” because they accept tabs extending towards the LPCB. This indicates Nikaido reads upon “the LCPCB having an array of LCPCB slots extending from a first side of the LCPCB to a second side of the LCPCB, wherein the tabs of the first battery cell and the second battery cell are received in the array of LCPCB slots” Nikaido at Fig. 5-6.
However, Nikaido teaches a set of load connection terminals 1208, as well as a power tool, but does not disclose power tool terminals or their relative distance; thereby, Nikaido is silent as to “a set of battery pack terminals electrically connectable to a set of power tool terminals of the power tool and electrically connected to the first battery cell and the second battery cells.”
PNG
media_image1.png
460
397
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
525
387
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5 – 6 of Nikaido.
Sheeks teaches “[0014] In one independent embodiment, an electrical combination may generally include an electrical device, a battery pack and a controller. The electrical device may generally include a device housing, a load supported by the device housing, the load being operable to output at least about 1800 watts (W) (about 2.4 horsepower (hp)), and a device terminal electrically connected to the load. The battery pack may include a pack housing, battery cells supported by the pack housing, the battery cells being electrically connected and having a nominal voltage of up to about 20 volts, and a pack terminal electrically connectable to the device terminal to transfer current between the battery pack and the electrical device.” Further, Sheeks teaches “[0135] As explained in greater detail below, the high power DC tool system 14 achieves a high power output with a DC power source within the packaging restrictions (e.g., weight, volume, etc.) of a hand-held power tool.” Further, “[0166] In some embodiments, where the power circuit board 248 is located elsewhere within the power tool 10 as described above, the coil contact plates 190 may be connected to the power circuit board 248 by lead wires. Lead wires may be connected to the second terminals 198 (e.g., to holes in the second terminals 198 ) and routed to the power circuit board 248 within the power tool housing.” Taken together, [0135] and [0165] indicate a benefit to utilizing a design in which a power tool having power tool terminals meet battery pack terminals mounted upon the top of the battery pack, namely allowing permitting the combination to fit within the limitations of a hand-held device while maintaining the “[0007] deliverable power of the battery power source.” Id. at [0004 – 8, 135, 165].
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the battery of Nikaido, such that it comprises “a set of battery pack terminals electrically connectable to a set of power tool terminals of the power tool and electrically connected to the first battery cell and the second battery cells” wherein the power tool terminals are the terminals of Sheeks, and wherein these meet top mounted- battery pack terminals as in Sheeks, because Sheeks teaches this configuration provides a benefit to meeting volume and weight considerations while maintaining deliverable power.
However, modified Nikaido is silent as to “a state of charge printed circuit board (SOCPCB) configured to determine a state of charge of one or more battery cells in the battery pack.”
Louis teaches a battery pack for a cordless power tool, which comprises a core pack having a SOC subassembly 134. Louis at [0004]. “The SOC subassembly 134 may include a PCB, a plurality of LEDs, an actuator button and a set of lead wires coupled to the PCB 128.” Id. at [0005]. This “plurality of LEDs” is implied to be the SOC display / indicator 116, which is shown in Fig. 1, 2 and 8b. See id at Fig. 1-2, 8b. Louis teaches the PCB 128 has “various components for monitoring and controlling the operation and status of the battery pack 100 and the battery cells 122.” Id. Louis at least suggests a benefit to battery performance as a result of this monitoring. Id. This SOC subassembly is a “state of charge printed circuit board (SOCPCB) that is configured to determine a state of charge of one or more battery cells in the battery pack.”
PNG
media_image4.png
469
641
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Louis, showing the SOC display / indicator 116 along the front of the battery pack.
PNG
media_image5.png
811
661
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Louis; [0004-5] of Louis teach a PCB upon which a “plurality of LEDs” is disposed, and 116 is disposed upon what appears to be a larger PCB (see below at Fig. 8B for a zoomed in version).
PNG
media_image6.png
355
301
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 8B of Louis. Here, as above, the circuit board at the front of the battery appears to be a PCB hosting the plurality of LEDs.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the battery pack of Nikaido comprises a state of charge printed circuit board (SOCPCB) of Louis that is configured to determine a state of charge of one or more battery cells in the battery pack, because Louis teaches or suggests a benefit to performance when utilizing a SOCPCB.
However, modified Nikaido does not teach a battery management system printed circuit board (BMSPCB) configured to control the operation of the battery pack.
Palich teaches a battery receptacle for a power tool ([0005]), wherein the battery pack comprises “[a] battery management control module comprises a second printed circuit board (PCB) on which the second controller is mounted.” Palich at [0005,8].
PNG
media_image3.png
675
593
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Palich at Fig. 6.
The battery management control module of Palich provides a benefit of being able to host “[0005] the second controller configured to manage an operation of the battery pack. [0006] In an embodiment, battery control wires are provided connecting the battery receptacle to the battery management control module, and motor drive wires are provided connecting the motor control and power module to the motor. [0007] In an embodiment, the battery management control module further includes a power supply regulator configured to output a power line having a lower voltage than the battery pack to the first and second controllers.” Palich at [0005 - 8].
This reads upon a battery management system printed circuit board (BMSPCB) (“battery management control module”) that is configured to control the operation (the second controller configured to manage an operation, wherein “managing” reads upon “controlling”) of the battery pack.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find obvious to further modify the battery pack of modified Nikaido, such that it comprises “a battery management system printed circuit board (BMSPCB) configured to control the operation of the battery pack.” because Palich teaches the use of two PCBs as well as a benefit to allowing regulation and control of the voltage and power supply.
Claim 15 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 16, Claim 16 relies upon Claim 15. Claim 15 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.” Because there is a distance between the two and this distance is determined at assembly, this is “a predetermined distance” from each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the predetermined distance between the SOCPCB and the LCPCB is in a range from approximately 11.9 mm to approximately 14.5 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the SOCPCB and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 16 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 17, Claim 17 relies upon Claim 16. Claim 16 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.” Because there is a distance between the two and this distance is determined at assembly, this is “a predetermined distance” from each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that wherein the predetermined distance between the SOCPCB and the LCPCB is in a range from approximately 12.6 mm to approximately 13.9 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the SOCPCB and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 17 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 18, Claim 18 relies upon Claim 17. Claim 17 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.” Because there is a distance between the two and this distance is determined at assembly, this is “a predetermined distance” from each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the predetermined distance between the SOCPCB and the LCPCB is approximately 13.2 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the SOCPCB and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 18 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 19, Claim 19 relies upon Claim 15. Claim 15 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Fig. 8B indicates the relative location of the SOCPCB is on the front of the battery pack, disposed generally parallel to the front face of the battery. Louis at Fig. 8B. Modified Nikaido teaches the LCPCB (connection member 7) is also on the front face of the battery, generally parallel to the front face of the battery. The previous modification above locates the SOCPCB in front of Nikaido; as such, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are “generally parallel to each other.
Fig. 6 of Palich depicts the battery management control module 300, wherein “[a] battery management control module comprises a second printed circuit board (PCB) on which the second controller is mounted.” Palich at [0005,8], Fig. 6. This module 300 is generally upon the top part of the battery enclosure, indicating the BMSPCB as modified is disposed upon the top plane of the battery pack of modified Nikaido. Because as previously discussed the SOCPCB and LCPCB are disposed on the front of the battery cell, the SOCPCB and the LCPCB are generally parallel to each other and are perpendicular to the BMSPCB.
Claim 19 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 20, Claim 15 relies upon Claim 15. Claim 15 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Palich teaches a battery receptacle for a power tool ([0005]), wherein the battery pack comprises “[a] battery management control module comprises a second printed circuit board (PCB) on which the second controller is mounted.” Palich at [0005,8]. While Palich does not limit the shape of the battery management control module or the second PCB, the substantially rectangular shape of the sides of the module, and the shape of the overall battery management control module implies a “first end portion,” (one side of a rectangle or rectangular prism) and a “second end portion” (another opposite side of a rectangle or rectangular prism or rectangular section). Palich at Fig. 6. Further, Palich supports the location of the BMSPCB is the top face of the device. This is relevant because modified Nikaido teaches that the battery pack terminals are disposed upon the upper portion of the battery pack.
PNG
media_image3.png
675
593
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Palich, depicting the battery management module 300.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify modified Nikaido, such that the BMSPCB includes a first end portion and a second end portion opposing the second end portion, and wherein the set of battery pack terminals are disposed on the first end portion of the BMSPCB, because the rearrangement of parts is obvious where shifting the position of the starting switch would have modified the operation of the device, and locating the terminals upon the board would not change the connectivity with the power tool.
Claim 20 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 21, Claim 21 relies upon Claim 20. Claim 20 is obvious over modified Nikaido. As previously articulated, “positioned at . . . a predetermined distance,” is an arbitrary distance because any location upon the longitudinal axis is at “a distance,” and this distance is determined upon selecting the location of the LCPCB. Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, reading upon “wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a predetermined distance, along a longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.”
Claim 21 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, Louis, and Palich.
Regarding Claim 22, Claim 22 relies upon Claim 21. Claim 21 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, such that the predetermined distance is in a range from approximately 3.7 mm to approximately 4.5 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 22 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 23, Claim 23 relies upon Claim 22. Claim 22 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido such that the predetermined distance is in a range from approximately 3.9 mm to approximately 4.3 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 23 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Regarding Claim 24, Claim 24 relies upon Claim 23. Claim 23 is obvious over modified Nikaido.
Nikaido teaches the connection member 7 has a predetermined distance from the battery pack terminals 1208 as this distance is arbitrary, but is silent as to the precise distance.
Palich teaches a rectangular BMSPCB, indicating a first and second end, wherein the LCPCB is positioned at a predetermined distance, along the longitudinal axis of the battery pack, from the first end portion of the BMSPCB.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to further modify Nikaido, wherein the predetermined distance is approximately 4.1 mm, because where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Here, there is no indication that the distance between the LCPBCB of modified Nikaido (connection member 7) and the battery pack terminals (load connection terminals 1208), or the distance between the BMSPCB’s first end and the LPCB of modified Nikaido would modify the operation of a battery pack.
Claim 24 is obvious over Nikaido, in view of Sheeks, further in view of Palich.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNA RAJAN HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-9997. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:30 PM M-F.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/K.R.H./Examiner , Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights