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
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garelli et al. (US 2020/0076014) in view of Apostolos et al. (US 2019/0381902).
Regarding independent claim 1, Garelli et al. disclose a battery cell monitoring system (abstract; paragraphs [0003]-[0013] and [0019]-[0041]; and Figures 1-3), in which the battery cell monitoring system includes the following features:
a battery cell monitoring unit (30), including a controller (electronic control unit (ECU), or host computer (25) serving as a battery controller), a battery monitoring sensor that senses a plurality of battery cells (14C) of one or more battery modules (14) via a cell sense circuit (35) (see paragraphs [0020], [0030], [0031], and [0036]; and Figures 2 and 3), and a radiofrequency (RF) signal manager that is electrically connected to an RF antenna via a transmission link (as a portion of an RF communications circuit (32) or (132)) and is operable to generate a signal having a parametric component and a control component (see Figures 1-3); and
a battery management system (battery system manager (BSM) – see paragraph [0025]) in communication with either the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas), wherein the battery monitoring sensor (cell sense circuit (35)) is arranged to monitor a parameter of a battery cell (14C) of each battery module (14), and wherein the RF signal manager wirelessly communicates the signal between the battery cell monitoring unit (30) and the battery management system (battery system manager (BSM)) via the RF antennas, which includes operation of wireless transceiver (R) configured to request transmission of RF battery data (19) from a rechargeable energy storage system (12) (see paragraphs [0019], [0023], [0025], and [0028]-[0030]; and Figures 2 and 3).
Although not explicitly disclosed by Garelli et al., one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas) would be utilized in the battery cell monitoring system of Garelli et al., which would be optimized to have (at least) first and second RF antennas, as claimed. In this instance, one of ordinary skill in the art would have readily determined the number of required RF antennas based on design choice upon conducting routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve characteristics of the battery cell monitoring system, including enabling selective battery data collection and local storage of battery data during extended periods of dormancy of the battery module (see paragraph [0003]). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (in this instance, the number of RF antennas) of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Garelli et al. do not disclose that the transmission link includes an adaptive tuning circuit that is dynamically controlled by the control component.
However, Apostolos et al. disclose a charging station and monitoring system (paragraphs [0026], [0027], [0031]-[0033], [0036], [0038]-[0046]; and Figure 1-4), in which the charging station and monitoring system includes a charging station (200) having adaptive tuning circuits (219) that are dynamically controlled by a controller (230) as a control component, wherein each adaptive tuning circuit (219) feeds a transmit wire loop (RF) antenna (210) as part of a transmission link (see paragraphs [0036] and [0038]), in which the features of the transmission link with an adaptive tuning circuit that is dynamically controlled by the control component are advantageous for monitoring and allowing for dynamic changes in operation and data communications (see paragraphs [0041] and [0046]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicant’s invention was made to modify the battery cell monitoring system disclosed by Garelli et al., by including that the transmission link includes an adaptive tuning circuit that is dynamically controlled by the control component, as taught by Apostolos et al., in order to monitor and allow for dynamic changes in operation and data communications (Apostolos et al.; paragraphs [0041] and [0046]).
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the battery cell monitoring system of Figure 2 includes diodes (see paragraph [0030] of Garelli et al.), in which Apostolos et al. disclose that the adaptive tuning circuit comprises a varactor diode (see paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, and in referring to the rejection of claim 2 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the varactor diode would be arranged in series between the RF signal manager and an RF antenna, wherein the varactor diode would be selectively electrically connected to ground (see paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, and in referring to the rejection of claim 2 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the control component of the signal generated by the RF signal manager controls the varactor diode of the adaptive tuning circuit, wherein the signal generated by the RF signal manager would be based upon the control component of the signal generated by the RF signal manager (see paragraph [0030] and Figure 2 of Garelli et al.; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.).
Regarding claim 7, and in referring to the rejection of claim 2 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the adaptive tuning circuit comprises at least one varactor diode that would be arranged in series between the RF signal manager and an RF antenna, wherein the varactor diode(s) would be selectively electrically connected to ground (see paragraph [0030] and Figure 2 of Garelli et al.; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.). Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that varactor diode would be selectively electrically connected to ground (see paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.), and providing an additional arrangement of a second varactor diode coupled to a first node arranged between the first varactor diode and the RF signal manager, as well as a third varactor diode connected to ground and coupled to a second node arranged between the first varactor diode and the first RF antenna, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of further improving characteristics of the battery cell monitoring system (see paragraph [0003] of Garelli et al.; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (in this instance, the number of RF antennas) of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, and in referring to the rejection of claims 2 and 7 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the control component of the signal generated by the RF signal manager controls the plurality of varactor diodes of the adaptive tuning circuit, wherein the signal generated by the RF signal manager is based upon the control component of the signal generated by the RF signal manager (see paragraph [0030] and Figure 2 of Garelli et al.; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.). In this instance, one of ordinary skill in the art would have optimized this arrangement of varactor diodes for the purpose of further improving characteristics of the battery cell monitoring system (see paragraph [0003] of Garelli et al.). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (in this instance, the number of RF antennas) of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 10, Garelli et al. disclose that the battery monitoring sensor (cell sense circuit (35)) comprises a temperature sensor arranged to monitor a temperature of the battery cell (14C), and wherein the parametric component of the signal includes the temperature of the battery cell (14C) – see paragraphs [0020], [0024], [0030], [0031], and [0036]; and Figures 1-3.
Regarding claim 11, Garelli et al. disclose that the battery monitoring sensor (cell sense circuit (35)) comprises a voltage sensor arranged to monitor a voltage of the battery cell (14C), and wherein the parametric component of the signal includes the voltage of the battery cell (14C) – see paragraphs [0020], [0024], [0030], [0031], and [0036]; and Figures 1-3.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, and in referring to the rejection of independent claim 1 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the control component dynamically controls the adaptive tuning circuit to match one or more RF antenna of the battery cell monitoring unit to the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas) of the battery management system (battery system manager (BSM) – see paragraph [0025] of Garelli et al.), which would be based upon at least one of a location, structure, or environment of an RF antenna of the battery cell monitoring unit in relation to the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas) of the battery management system (see Garelli et al.; paragraph [0025] and Figures 1-3; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.).
Regarding claim 14, although the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose that the transmission link includes the adaptive tuning circuit (as set forth in the rejection of independent claim 1 above – also see Figures 1-3 of Garelli et al.), the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. do not explicitly disclose a conductive lead composed as a meander line arranged between the RF signal manager and an RF antenna. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further include a conductive lead composed as a meander line arranged between the RF signal manager and an RF antenna, for the purpose of further improving characteristics of the battery cell monitoring system (see paragraph [0003] of Garelli et al.).
Regarding independent claim 15, Garelli et al. disclose a battery cell monitoring system (abstract; paragraphs [0003]-[0013] and [0019]-[0041]; and Figures 1-3), in which the battery cell monitoring system includes the following features:
a battery cell monitoring unit (30), including a controller (electronic control unit (ECU), or host computer (25) serving as a battery controller), a battery monitoring sensor that senses a plurality of battery cells (14C) of one or more battery modules (14) via a cell sense circuit (35) (see paragraphs [0020], [0030], [0031], and [0036]; and Figures 2 and 3), and a radiofrequency (RF) signal manager that is electrically connected to an RF antenna via a transmission link (as a portion of an RF communications circuit (32) or (132)) and is operable to generate a signal having a parametric component and a control component (see Figures 1-3); and
a battery management system (battery system manager (BSM) – see paragraph [0025]) in communication with either the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas), wherein the battery monitoring sensor (cell sense circuit (35)) is arranged to monitor a parameter of a battery cell (14C) of each battery module (14), and wherein the RF signal manager wirelessly communicates the signal between the battery cell monitoring unit (30) and the battery management system (battery system manager (BSM)) via the RF antennas, which includes operation of wireless transceiver (R) configured to request transmission of RF battery data (19) from a rechargeable energy storage system (12) (see paragraphs [0019], [0023], [0025], and [0028]-[0030]; and Figures 2 and 3).
Although not explicitly disclosed by Garelli et al., one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas) would be utilized in the battery cell monitoring system of Garelli et al., which would be optimized to have (at least) first and second RF antennas, as claimed. In this instance, one of ordinary skill in the art would have readily determined the number of required RF antennas based on design choice upon conducting routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve characteristics of the battery cell monitoring system, including enabling selective battery data collection and local storage of battery data during extended periods of dormancy of the battery module (see paragraph [0003]). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (in this instance, the number of RF antennas) of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In addition, Garelli et al. do not disclose a plurality of battery cell monitoring units arranged to monitor a plurality of battery cells, wherein each battery cell monitoring unit includes a respective plurality of battery cells, a respective controller, a respective battery monitoring sensor, and respective additional features that are provided in duplicate with respect to the (single) battery cell monitoring system disclosed and/or suggested by Garelli et al. for independent claim 1. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that duplication of all essential parts within the battery cell monitoring system of claim 1 would be advantageous for providing additional efficiency to improve characteristics of the battery cell monitoring system, including enabling selective battery data collection and local storage of battery data during extended periods of dormancy of the battery module (see paragraph [0003]). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Garelli et al. do not disclose that the transmission link includes an adaptive tuning circuit that is dynamically controlled by the control component.
However, Apostolos et al. disclose a charging station and monitoring system (paragraphs [0026], [0027], [0031]-[0033], [0036], [0038]-[0046]; and Figure 1-4), in which the charging station and monitoring system includes a charging station (200) having adaptive tuning circuits (219) that are dynamically controlled by a controller (230) as a control component, wherein each adaptive tuning circuit (219) feeds a transmit wire loop (RF) antenna (210) as part of a transmission link (see paragraphs [0036] and [0038]), in which the features of the transmission link with an adaptive tuning circuit that is dynamically controlled by the control component are advantageous for monitoring and allowing for dynamic changes in operation and data communications (see paragraphs [0041] and [0046]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicant’s invention was made to modify the battery cell monitoring system disclosed by Garelli et al., by including that the transmission link includes an adaptive tuning circuit that is dynamically controlled by the control component, as taught by Apostolos et al., in order to monitor and allow for dynamic changes in operation and data communications (Apostolos et al.; paragraphs [0041] and [0046]).
Regarding claim 16, being similar in scope to claim 2 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the battery cell monitoring system of Figure 2 includes diodes (see paragraph [0030] of Garelli et al.), in which Apostolos et al. disclose that the adaptive tuning circuit comprises a varactor diode (see paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device (including the adaptive tuning circuit) involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 17, being similar in scope to claim 5 above, and in referring to the rejection of claim 16 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the control component of the respective signal generated by the RF signal manager controls the varactor diode of the adaptive tuning circuit, wherein the signal generated by the RF signal manager would be based upon the control component of the signal generated by the RF signal manager (see paragraph [0030] and Figure 2 of Garelli et al.; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device (including the adaptive tuning circuit) involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 18, being similar in scope to claim 13 above, and in referring to the rejection of independent claim 15 above, the combined teachings of Garelli et al. and Apostolos et al. disclose and/or suggest that the respective control component dynamically controls the respective adaptive tuning circuit to match one or more respective RF antenna of the battery cell monitoring unit to the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas) of the battery management system (battery system manager (BSM) – see paragraph [0025] of Garelli et al.), which would be based upon at least one of a location, structure, and environment of a respective RF antenna of the respective battery cell monitoring unit in relation to the same or another RF antenna (or group of RF antennas) of the battery management system (see Garelli et al.; paragraph [0025] and Figures 1-3; and paragraphs [0038] and [0040] of Apostolos et al.). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device (including the control component, the adaptive tuning circuit, and the battery monitoring unit) involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Response to Arguments
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s amendment/response received by the USPTO on January 26, 2026. The amendment overcomes the prior objection to the specification. In addition, the applicants’ arguments addressing the prior 35 USC 103 rejection based on Garelli et al. (US 2020/0076014) are persuasive (also refer to the interview summary mailed January 26, 2026 of the telephone interview conducted on January 21, 2026), and thus the prior art rejection has been withdrawn. Since the applicant did not amend independent claims 1 and 15 and a new ground of rejection is made, this Office Action is made non-final. Claims 19 and 20 remain withdrawn from consideration as drawn to a non-elected invention. Claims 1-18 remain under consideration in the application.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection includes a new secondary reference to Apostolos et al. (US 2019/0381902), as also provided in the newly underlined portions of the above 35 USC 103 rejection, and thus does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN P KERNS whose telephone number is (571)272-1178. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN P KERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735 April 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights