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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/31/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 10/31/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1 and 8 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1 and 8 have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 5. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 16 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 6. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 20 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 7. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6 and 16-19 include the limitation “wherein reference is made to a state of the battery of the vehicle.” It is unclear and indefinite what or who is making the reference to the state of the battery of the vehicle.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS. —Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 12, 14, and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to reference a claim previously set forth and then specifying a further limitation of the subject matter. Claims 12, 14, and 17 are all dependent upon claim 3 which is canceled. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7-9, 11, and 15 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claims 1 and 8,
Schmitt (US 20190135126 A1) teaches,
A warning method for a high-voltage battery of a motor vehicle, with which, in the case of an accident of the motor vehicle, emergency responders can be provided details on the state of the high-voltage battery of the motor vehicle after the accident. (Abstract) They further teach sending a combined acoustic signal with coded items of information regarding the state of the battery. Where some of the acoustic signals are audible. (Para. [0014]) Lastly, they teach that different levels of temperature amount to different levels of danger and a multistep scale. (Para. [0016]) However they do not explicitly teach, that the combined acoustic signals include perceptible sounds that have frequencies that are proportional to a temperature of the battery or that the frequencies shift to a continuous tone after the temperature of the battery exceeds a threshold.
Freitas (US 20180238994 A1) teaches,
A system and method for location positioning with steganographic encoded data streams in audible-frequency range audio. (Abstract) They further teach modulating two acoustic signals together to transmit coded information in an audible signal. They later teach receiving and decoding said information. (Claim 3) However, they teach that the transmitted signals were designed to be the most acoustically imperceptible possible to people while allowing good performance in identification. () This teaches away from both signals in the combined signal being perceptible by human as taught in the claim. They also do not teach that the combined acoustic signals include perceptible sounds that have frequencies that are proportional to a temperature of the battery.
Abreu (US 20150148681 A1) teaches,
Support structures for positioning sensors on a physiologic tunnel for measuring physical, chemical and biological parameters of the body and producing an action according to the measured value of the parameters. (Abstract) They further teach that the temperature signal from a sensor can be converted to an audio signal emitted by a piezoelectric device with said audio frequency proportional to the temperature level measured. (Para. [0480]) However, the temperature is of the skin of the patient and not of the battery of the device. Furthermore, they do not explicitly teach that the frequencies of the combined acoustic signal shift to a continuous tone after the temperature of the battery exceeds a threshold.
Reihlen (US 20140377598 A1) teaches,
A battery with two temperature sensors where the first temperature sensor is outside of the battery cell housing and the second sensor is inside the housing. They further teach a temperature proportional frequency signal. (Para. [0036]) However, there is only one signal and it is a digital signal not an acoustic signal. Furthermore, they do not explicitly teach that the frequencies of the combined acoustic signal shift to a continuous tone after the temperature of the battery exceeds a threshold.
Therefore, as seen above, the known prior art does not explicitly teach,
“both the primary acoustic signals and the secondary acoustic signals are audible by a human, and the combined acoustic signals include perceptible sounds that have frequencies that are proportional to a temperature of the battery, and the frequencies shift to a continuous tone after the temperature of the battery exceeds a threshold,”
and it would be non-obvious to combine the known references to teach the above limitations. Therefore, claims 1 and 8 are allowed. Claims 4, 5, 7, 11, and 15 are allowed due to their dependency on claim 1 and claim 9 is allowed due to their dependency on claim 8.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Prior Art Analysis
Claims 6 and 16-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and claims 12, 14, and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) however none of the known prior art could be applied to the claims for the following reasons.
Claims 6, 12, 14, and 16-19 are dependent upon claim 1 which contains allowable subject matter as seen above and therefore prior art cannot be applied to the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to JOSHUA L FORRISTALL whose telephone number is 703-756-4554. The examiner
can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM- 5 PM.
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, Andrew Schechter can be reached on 571-272-2302. 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.
/JOSHUA L FORRISTALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ANDREW SCHECHTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857