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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 2, 2025, has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-6, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knobloch et al. (“Fabrication of Multimeasurand Sensor for Monitoring of a Li-Ion Battery,” Journal of Electronic Packaging 104(3), 031002, September 2018) in view of Lim et al. (US Patent 10,355,319 B1), Yebka et al. (US 2017/0170672 A1), and Laguna et al. ("Failure Detection and Prediction through Metrics," https://engineering.purdue.edu/dcsl/a2i2/failure-detection-and-prediction-through-metrics/, March 2015; retrieved February 10, 2026).
Regarding claim 1, Knobloch teaches a battery (a 5 A-h Li-ion pouch cell, which necessarily includes an electrode assembly, electrolyte, case/pouch, and terminals) with a deformation sensor attached to the outer surface of the case and configured to measure deformation of the cell (Knobloch Pack Integration and Measurement Locations, Fig. 6), and a controller configured to determine whether the battery is swelled based on the measured deformation (Knobloch Figs. 5 and 10, and Three-Cell Validation, final paragraph; the sensor sends information to the data acquisition system, which determines expansion/swelling).
Knobloch does not teach that the battery includes an impedance sensor, or that measured impedance is used to determine whether the battery is swelled. Lim teaches that measuring internal impedance in addition to deformation provides additional information on the condition of the battery (Lim 13:63 – 14:9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to include an impedance sensor to the battery of Knobloch in order to provide additional information on the condition of the battery.
Lim does not teach that swelling is determined based on the measured impedance. Yebka teaches that impedance measurements provide information about the swelling of a battery (Yebka [0042]-[0043]), and that using impedance-based swelling measurements can improve safe operation of the battery by providing a cutoff threshold (Yebka [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use impedance data to determine swelling in order to improve safe operation of the battery.
Modified Lee teaches that the cutoff impedance threshold is based on current operating conditions (Yebka [0050]). The simplest possible method of taking both impedance and deformation into account is two fixed thresholds. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to incorporate all available information, including deformation, in order to accurately set the threshold.
Modified Knobloch does not teach that the controller is configured to determine whether the measured impedance is increasing, or to give a warning to a user when an increase is detected. Laguna teaches that using recent measurements of a failure metric to forecast values in the future allows for more accurate failure prediction and gives time for the recovery mechanism before the failure occurs (Laguna Summary, (2) Failure Prediction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to configure the controller to determine when impedance is increasing in order to predict when failure will occur to give time for the recover mechanism (i.e. disabling/replacing the failing battery; Yebka [0058] and Lim 14:63-66), and warning the user to do so (Yebka [0058]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Knobloch teaches that swelling is determined based on comparison of impedance measurement to reference values, and does not include deformation measurements in that determination (Yebka, [0048]). I.e., the cutoff of modified Knobloch is based on impedance and not deformation.
Regarding claim 3, modified Knobloch teaches that the prediction is used to give time for the recovery mechanism (Laguna Summary, (2) Failure Prediction), which includes the controller disabling the failing battery (Yebka [0058]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Knobloch teaches that impedance is measured after the deformation measurement (Lim Fig. 6). This would necessarily require the controller to perform the measurement in response to receiving a deformation measurement, including when the measured deformation values are above a reference amount.
Regarding claim 5, the sensor of Knobloch includes a temperature sensor. Yebka teaches that the swelling cutoff may incorporate temperature measurements (Yebka [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use the temperature measurements to improve the swelling cutoff consideration.
Regarding claim 6, modified Knobloch teaches that the cutoff impedance threshold is based on current operating conditions (Yebka [0050]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to incorporate all available information, including deformation and temperature, in order to accurately set the impedance threshold.
Regarding claim 10, Knobloch teaches that the sensor is designed for use in a vehicle battery (specifically a Ford Focus; see Knobloch Conclusions). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use the battery of Knobloch for its intended purpose.
Regarding claim 11, modified Knobloch teaches that the battery may be shorted to ground or rendered inoperable upon reaching the threshold, which would necessarily interrupt charging or discharging, for safety reasons (Yekbka [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to disable the battery upon reaching the threshold when necessary for safety.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2007/0264535 A1) in view of Knobloch, Lim, Yebka, and Laguna.
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a battery pack comprising a pouch type battery cell (Lee Abstract) with an electrode assembly 30 comprising an electrolyte, a case 20, and terminals 40 and 41 (Lee Fig. 1 and [0007]).
Lee does not teach that the battery includes a deformation sensor. Knobloch teaches a deformation sensor attached to the outer surface of a battery case and configured to measure deformation of the cell (Knobloch Pack Integration and Measurement Locations, Fig. 6), and a controller configured to determine whether the battery is swelled based on the measured deformation (Knobloch Figs. 5 and 10, and Three-Cell Validation, final paragraph; the sensor sends information to the data acquisition system, which determines expansion/swelling). Knobloch teaches that this may be used on a pouch battery (Knobloch Expansion Sensor Design), and that its use may improve battery utilization and decrease system cost (Knobloch Conclusions). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use the sensor of Knobloch on the battery of Lee in order to improve battery utilization and decrease system cost.
Modified Lee does not teach that the battery includes an impedance sensor, or that measured impedance is used to determine whether the battery is swelled. Lim teaches that measuring internal impedance in addition to deformation provides additional information on the condition of the battery (Lim 14:10-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add an impedance sensor to the battery of Lee in order to provide additional information on the condition of the battery.
Modified Lee does not teach that swelling is determined based on the measured impedance. Yebka teaches that impedance measurements provide information about the swelling of a battery (Yebka [0042]-[0043]), and that using impedance-based swelling measurements can improve safe operation of the battery (Yebka [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use impedance data to determine swelling in order to improve safe operation of the battery.
Modified Lee teaches that the cutoff impedance threshold is based on current operating conditions (Yebka [0050]). The simplest possible method of taking both impedance and deformation into account is two fixed thresholds. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to incorporate all available information, including deformation, in order to accurately set the threshold.
Modified Lee does not teach that the controller is configured to determine whether the measured impedance is increasing, or to give a warning to a user when an increase is detected. Laguna teaches that using recent measurements of a failure metric to forecast values in the future allows for more accurate failure prediction and gives time for the recovery mechanism before the failure occurs (Laguna Summary, (2) Failure Prediction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to configure the controller to determine when impedance is increasing in order to predict when failure will occur to give time for the recover mechanism (i.e. disabling/replacing the failing battery; Yebka [0058] and Lim 14:63-66), and warning the user to do so (Yebka [0058]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Lee teaches that swelling is determined based on comparison of impedance measurement to reference values, and does not include deformation measurements in that determination (Yebka [0048]). I.e., the cutoff of modified Lee is based on impedance and not deformation.
Regarding claim 3, modified Lee teaches that the prediction is used to give time for the recovery mechanism (Laguna Summary, (2) Failure Prediction), which includes the controller disabling the failing battery (Yebka [0058]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Lee teaches that impedance is measured after the deformation measurement (Lim Fig. 6). This would necessarily require the controller to perform the measurement in response to receiving a deformation measurement, including when the measured deformation values are above a reference amount.
Regarding claim 5, the sensor of Knobloch includes a temperature sensor. Yebka teaches that the swelling cutoff may incorporate temperature measurements (Yebka [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use the temperature measurements to improve the swelling cutoff consideration.
Regarding claim 6, modified Lee teaches that the cutoff impedance threshold is based on current operating conditions (Yebka [0050]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to incorporate all available information, including deformation and temperature, in order to accurately set the threshold.
Regarding claim 7, modified Lee teaches a pouch battery comprising an accommodation portion (Lee Fig.1, receiving part 23) and a sealing portion around the accommodation portion (Lee case body 21). The sensor of Knobloch is made to be attached to the flat face of a battery (Knobloch Fig. 6), which corresponds to the accommodation portion of Lee.
Modified Lee does not teach that the impedance sensor should be on a sealing portion of a battery. Modified Lee teaches that the impedance sensor may be embedded in a protection circuit (Lim 14:3-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to embed the impedance sensor in the protection circuit in order to simplify the device. Lee teaches that the protection circuit (Lee 400) is on a sealing portion (Lee 120) of the battery (Lee Fig. 8). Embedding the impedance sensor in this protection circuit would necessarily result in an impedance sensor on the sealing portion.
Regarding claim 8, the sealing portion of Lee is folded toward the accommodation portion (Lee Fig. 8). The protection circuit (400) and, therefore, an embedded impedance sensor, is between the sealing portion and the accommodation portion.
Regarding claim 11, modified Lee teaches that the battery may be shorted to ground or rendered inoperable upon reaching the threshold, which would necessarily interrupt charging or discharging, for safety reasons (Yekbka [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to disable the battery upon reaching the threshold when necessary for safety.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Lee, Knobloch, Lim, Yebka, and Laguna as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Henrici et al. (US 2015/0132621 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the sensor of modified Lee is elongated, with one end attached to a printed circuit board and the other attached to face of the battery (Knobloch Fig. 5 and 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to embed this protection circuit in the protection circuit as with the impedance sensor. Since the protection circuit of Lee is perpendicular to the face of the battery (Lee Fig. 8) and the attachment component of Knobloch is co-planar with the circuit, the deformation sensor would necessarily have to be bent. In addition, bending a force sensor to conform to the shape of a pouch cell is a known method to allow the sensor to be attached to the face of the cell while still being connected to leads at the side of the battery. See Henrici, Fig. 8. Force sensor 430 is applied to the face of the accommodation portion of pouch cell 400 and bent to allow connection with the sealing portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to bend the force sensor of modified Lee as necessary to allow a sensor applied to the accommodation portion to be connected to leads on the sealing portion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A CORNO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0745. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/J.A.C/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722