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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 11-18 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
Group I, claim(s) 1-10, drawn to a modular series-connected battery pack.
Group II, claim(s) 11-12, drawn to a method of using a modular series-connected battery pack.
Group III, claim(s) 13-16, drawn to a series-parallel battery using modular series-connected battery packs.
Group IV, claim(s) 17-18, drawn to a method for using a series-parallel battery.
Groups I-IV lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of the modular series-connected battery pack of claim 1, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Kim (KR 10-2020-0020565 A, cited in IDS filed 11/30/22) in view of Hooper (US 2021/0126302, previously cited). See discussion of Kim and Hooper as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 below.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention (Group I, claims 1-3 and 6), this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 11-18 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Status of the Claims
Amendments were filed 10/27/25. Claims 1-18 are pending. Claims 4-5 and 7-18 have been amended to correct the issues under improper multiple dependency. However, note that claims 11-18 are withdrawn as being directed to a non-elected invention, as Group I was constructively elected by original presentation.
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 1-10 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said cells with the same characteristics" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that there is no antecedent basis for cells having the same characteristics. Which of said cells have the same characteristics?
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the battery" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "each BMS card" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the claims have not described that the BMS is a card. Is “each BMS card” referring to the BMS in claim 1?
Claim 4 recites the limitation "each modular block" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the claims have not described a modular block. Is each modular block referring to the modular series-connected battery pack or a block of cells within the battery pack?
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the switching device" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the BMS card" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the claims have no described that the BMS is a card. Is “the BMS card” referring to the BMS in claim 1?
Claim 7 recites the limitation "each module" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites “the elements”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, is “a modular battery pack” referring to an additional modular battery pack, or the modular battery pack of claim 3 (which appears to be a shorthand form of modular series-connected battery pack of claim 1).
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the BMS card" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the claims have no described that the BMS is a card. Is “the BMS card” referring to the BMS in claim 1?
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the charging current" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the circuit" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Is “the circuit” referring to the processing circuit of claim 1?
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the BMS card" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the claims have no described that the BMS is a card. Is “the BMS card” referring to the BMS in claim 1?
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the charging current" in 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "each BMS card" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the claims have not described that the BMS is a card. Is “each BMS card” referring to the BMS in claim 1?
Claim 10 recites the limitation “innovative algorithm” in line 5. This limitation is indefinite, as it is a subjective term and the specification does not provide a reasonably clear and exclusive definition, leaving the facially subjective claim language without an objective boundary. See MPEP 2173.05(b)(IV).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 10-2020-0020565 A, cited in IDS filed 11/30/22) in view of Hooper et al (US 2021/0126302, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches modular series-connected battery pack having lithium battery cells (paragraph [0017], lithium-ion battery cell) arranged in a vertical direction (fig 1); said cells with the same characteristics are connected in series (paragraph [0046], connected in series) by connections extending along a series connection direction to obtain necessary voltage (fig 2, note the lengthwise direction of the connections 30-1),
wherein the modular series-connected battery pack comprises, in the vertical direction, a pair of upper and lower holding elements for holding adjacent ones of the cells and perpendicular to the series direction (fig 1, upper and lower holders 20-1 and 20-2);
wide tongues (fig 1, connecting members 30-1 and 30-2) connecting, on each upper or lower face of the modular series-connected battery pack, each pair of adjacent cells mounted in series each with the next by their poles of opposite polarity, in the series direction, ensure connections between the battery cells (figs 1-2, note the connections of 30-1), said wide tongues of each upper, respectively lower, face being offset by one cell on the other lower, respectively upper, face (fig 1, note there are upper connections 30-1 and lower connections 30-2, in order for the series connection as discussed in paragraph [0046], would be offset);
wherein the connections being also connected to a processing circuit for measuring the potentials of each cell (paragraph [0051], signal lines pass through connection members 40,50 (which connect connection members 30) and connected to a control unit including a BMS for controlling the charging and discharging, note paragraph [0050] describing that each cell and the battery management system must be connected so that the voltage of each battery cell can be checked), the circuit being mounted on a printed circuit assembly forming three surfaces arranged in a U to form a U-shaped assembly, wherein the three surfaces include an upper surface, a lower surface, and a central surface connecting the upper surface and the lower surface (fig 1 and 3, note the U-shape is formed from upper member 40, lower member 50, and the PCB with the BMS 60 as the central surface), said U-shaped assembly enveloping the modular battery pack on three sides (fig 1, fig 3), said U-shaped assembly being arranged so that the normal to a central part of the U is perpendicular to the series direction and to the vertical direction (fig 1 and 3, the normal to the PCB with the BMS 60 is perpendicular to the length and vertical), and
an outer face of the central part of the U includes the electronics of a management system of the modular battery pack (fig 1 and 3, see BMS 60 on the outer face of the PCB);
at least one BMS, forming the central part of the U, arranged vertically (fig 1 and 3, see BMS 60 at the central part of the U);
wherein a lower part of the U (fig 1, paragraph [0038], battery connection member 50) arranged under the cells contributes, with an upper part of the U (fig 1, paragraph [0038], battery connection member 40), at least to recovering potentials of each of the cells of the modular battery pack for supplying to a voltage management circuit of the modular battery pack management system (fig 1, paragraph [0038], for electrically connecting adjacent electrode connection members 30, paragraph [0051], holes through connection members 40,50 connected to BMS for controlling charge and discharge).
Kim is quiet to the BMS includes heating resistors connected on command from the management circuit to one or more battery cells of the modular battery pack for their supply.
Hooper teaches a battery pack that includes a heating element, which can be an electric ribbon-type heating element (abstract), including resistive elements (paragraph [0059]). The heating element can be switched on when pack temperatures are near or fall below the minimum discharge or charge operating temperatures (abstract). The heating element is controlled by the battery pack BMS (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a heating element, as taught in Hooper, connected to the BMS, as Hooper teaches that in cold environments, battery packs have usable charge and discharge rates that are based on cell temperature, and that keeping the battery cells at a minimum temperature is necessary to maintain the operation of the battery cell storage system (paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches wherein the central part comprises temperature sensors (Hooper, paragraph [0062], temperature sensor 138) and a thermostat (paragraph [0062], power and control system 122 can power and control the heating arrangement in response to measured temperature, construed as a thermostat).
Claim(s) 3-5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as modified by Hooper as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Aikens et al (US 2020/0036047, previously cited) and Li (US 2015/0372279, previously cited).
Regarding claims 3/1 and 3/2, the combination is quiet to wherein an open/closed contact of a switching device is connected to a positive or negative pole of a last battery cell of the modular battery pack at a module level to enable disconnection of the modular battery pack from the battery and to a positive or negative lug, respectively, of the modular series-connected battery pack, the switching device being a MOSFET or an electromagnetic element.
Aikens et al teaches operating a lithium-ion battery high-voltage distribution system (abstract) including a disconnect mechanism operable in an operational position between a battery bus and a plurality of battery cells and a bypass position and a battery management system configured to monitor battery pack performance and responsive to detecting a triggering event, cause the disconnect mechanism to be in the bypass position (abstract). The disconnect mechanism is a single-pole double-throw switch or relay, or may also be realized by a solid state switch (paragraph [0017]). Responsive to detecting a triggering event such as a short circuit, the BMS causes the disconnect to be in the bypass position (paragraph [0019]). The triggering event can also be a thermal increase in the battery pack (paragraph [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination to further include a disconnect mechanism, such as a solid state switch, in order to disconnect and bypass battery packs that are identified as abnormal (paragraph [0003], [0051-0052]).
The combination teaches a solid state switch, but is quiet to the switch being a MOSFET or an electromagnetic element.
However, the use of MOSFETs to function as solid state switch is known in the art. Li teaches a battery pack (abstract), including a plurality of battery management systems 106 (paragraph [0021]) that can engage and disengage individual batteries (abstract). Li teaches that any mechanical relay or solid state switch such as metal-oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFET) can be used (paragraph [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a MOSFET switch, as Aikens et al teaches that solid state switches can be used and that Li teaches that MOSFETS are a type of solid state switch.
All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395. MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches each BMS card of each modular block comprises a bus connected to a connector allowing the buses of a plurality of cards to be connected together (Kim, paragraph [0012], bus bar member that electrically connects adjacent cell holder members to each other), but is quiet to a digital bus and an analog bus that are connected to a connector allowing the buses of a plurality of cards belonging to a plurality of modular series-connected battery packs to be connected together, then with a supervisor system of all of the plurality of modular battery packs.
Note that the claim is directed to the modular series-connected battery pack comprising a digital and analog bus connected to a connector. The features of the connector allowing a plurality of cards belonging to a plurality of modular series-connected battery packs to be connected, and then to be connected to a supervisor, is a material worked upon by the apparatus, and is not claimed as being part of the modular series-connected battery pack. See MPEP 2115.
Aikens further teaches the BMS is configured to receive external power via 120, can communicate analog and digital signals via 122, and provide communications with other services via 124 (paragraph [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination such that the bus bar communicates digital and analog signals, as Aikens teaches the BMS is not limited to monitoring performance and can provide additional services and provide communication.
All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395. MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches a number of cells in series on a line is within 1 to X (Kim, figure 1). Note that the number of cells in series determines the voltage, thus the number of cells is necessarily chosen depending on a desired voltage.
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches each module comprises a set of three interconnected electronic cards (Kim, fig 1 and 3, BMS 60), ensuring a BMS function, for managing the elements of a modular battery pack, extending to have one or more of the following features in a so-called normal operation:
Supply of electric battery heaters in case of negative temperature (note combination, where Hooper teaches the heaters when temperatures fall below a minimum operating temperature); module temperature measurement managed by the BMS card (see above regarding combination with Hooper).
Regarding claim 8, the combination is quiet to the BMS card having the reaction time characteristics of detection of a short circuit: opening time of 75 ms, detection of the maximum admissible current: opening time of 10 seconds, detection of a discharge corresponding to 10°C: 10 times the capacity C of the battery or for a 10 Ah battery, the discharge is at 100 Ah and the circuit opening time is 5 minutes 40 seconds; detection of a discharge corresponding to 1°C: the circuit opening time is 60 minutes.
However, Aikens teaches a BMS that detects a short circuit via a current sensor (see claim 3), detects at least one of an overvoltage condition, an undervoltage condition, and a temperature exceeding a temperature threshold value (see claim 5, paragraph [0020]), and responsive to the detections, causing the disconnect mechanism to operate in a bypass position (construed as opening the circuit) (paragraph [0022]). In some embodiments, the transition of the disconnect mechanism from the operational position to the bypass position is instantaneous or near instantaneous, realized by a fast acting disconnect mechanism capable of transitioning between an operational position and a bypass position between 5 and 60 milliseconds (paragraph [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to optimize the opening time of the circuit, as Aikens teaches that the BMS can be responsive to a short circuit, overvoltage, undervoltage, or exceeding temperature threshold, by triggering a disconnect. In response to a short circuit or an overvoltage, the time can be near instaneously (paragraph [0018]). In response to an overheating or temperature exceeding a threshold, it would have been obvious to optimize the opening time until the temperature decreases below the threshold.
"[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as modified by Hooper as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lawrence et al (US 2022/0278427, previously cited).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the holding elements are bezels held by spacers and delimiting a set of cylindrical housings with a square or polygonal section defining, on each upper or lower bezel, a line of housings each receiving a cell (note that the structure of the holders shown in figure 1, such as the size walls, can be construed as bezels, and the connecting portions between the individual cells can be considered spacers, the holding elements define a rectangular housing).
The combination is quiet to the tongues form, with elastic pins, a T whose central bar forms a connection with the processing circuit for recovering potentials via an upper and lower card.
Lawrence et al teaches the use of pogo pins for voltage monitoring with a BMS (paragraph [0044]), and that the pogo pins are arranged contacting contact pads 366 (fig 8c, construed as the claimed T-shaped arrangement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further include elastic pins, such as pogo pins, contacting the tongues to form a T-shaped connection, as Lawrences teaches that the use of pogo pins are known for voltage monitoring and connected to a BMS (paragraph [0044]).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as modified by Hooper as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Banos et al (US 2012/0274279).
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches a BMS for controlling charging and discharging (Kim, paragraph [0051]) but is quiet to each BMS card uses a component of the resistor type, which is conductive in the direction of discharge of the battery and resistive like a diode connected in opposition in the direction of charge, to limit the charging current.
Banos et al teaches an intelligent rechargeable battery pack having a battery management system for monitoring and controlling the charging and discharging (abstract). The battery management system includes primary and secondary protection circuits for monitoring the charging and discharging of the battery (abstract). The battery management system monitors and controls all aspects of battery operation (paragraph [0009]), including recording events and communicating those for later analysis (paragraph [0009]). Banos et al notes that it is well known that Li-Ion cells should not be overcharged, nor should they be over discharged (paragraph [0060]). Banos et al teaches that each cell has its own dedicated combination of resistor and n-FET in electrical communication with IC 410 for monitoring each cell and preventing each individual cell from over charging (paragraph [0071-0072]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the BMS of the combination so as to include a resistor, as taught in Banos et al, as part of a protection circuit for preventing each cell from being over charged, as it is well known that Li-Ion cells should not be overcharged.
Regarding claim 10, the Kim as modified by Hooper is quiet to a microcontroller in each module and of a supervisor to allow implementation of innovative algorithms, machine learning, or deep learning.
Banos et al further teaches a pack controller 800 which serves as an overall supervisor for various functions carried out by the battery management system (paragraph [0089]). The pack controller may be a low or ultra-low power microcontroller including memory such as random access memory or flash memory to provide for rapid and efficient execution of various functions of the battery management system, and has the capability of communicating with peripheral devices (paragraph [0090]). The pack controller may be configured using appropriate software and/or hardware commands (paragraph [0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination to further include a microcontroller and supervisor, as Banos et al teaches that a pack controller, which may be a low power microcontroller, can serve as an overall supervisor for various functions carried out by the battery management system (paragraph [0089-0090]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/27/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kim and Hooper do not teach or suggest the feature that the connections are connected to a processing circuit for measuring the potentials of each cell. Applicant argues that Kim’s BMS controls pack-level charging and discharging, which requires only pack-level voltage measurement.
Kim discloses in paragraph [0050] that each cell and the battery management system must be connected so that the voltage of each battery cell can be checked. To this end, the battery connection members (40,50) are soldered to the positions of each cell to form an electrically connected structure. (paragraph [0050]). A plurality of holes through which signal lines can pass are formed in the battery connection members, and the signal lines are connected to a control unit such as a BMS, for controlling the battery cells, so that the battery cells can be controlled to be charged and discharged by the control unit (paragraph [0051]).
Applicant argues, on p.12 of the Remarks, that the U-shaped printed circuit assembly provides a specific structural configuration where both the upper and lower portions of the U-shaped assembly participate in the cell potential measurement. Applicant argues that Kim’s connection members 40 and 50 extending from a horizontal PCB do not teach the integrated architecture.
The Examiner disagrees. In figure 3 of Kim, the PCB 60 is shown arranged vertically, corresponding to the central part of applicant’s U-shaped assembly with a central surface. Connection member 40 corresponds to the upper part with the upper surface, and the connection member 50 corresponds to the lower part with the lower surface. The voltages of each cell can be checked (paragraph [0050]) by soldering the battery connection members to the positions of each cell (paragraph [0050]) and forming a plurality of holes through which signal lines can pass (paragraph [0051]) and connected to a control unit such as the BMS (paragraph [0051]).
Applicant argues that the claimed U-shaped configuration provides non-obvious functional integration. Applicant argues that the three surfaces function as integrated components that envelops the battery pack on three sides, with the central surface oriented with its normal perpendicular to both the series connection direction and the vertical direction, with the BMS electronics and heating resistors integrated into the central surface. Applicant argues that Kim shows a horizontal PCB above the cells and separate connection members 40 and 50 extending vertically.
The examiner disagrees. Figure 3 of Kim shows the BMS on a PCB arranged vertically. Connection members 40 and 50 are positioned above and below the battery pack, thus enveloping the battery pack on three sides.
Applicant argues that positioning the central surface with integrated heating resistors vertically alongside the cells provides direct thermal coupling along the length of the cells, enabling heat transfer. Applicant argues that one skilled in the art motivated to add heating to Kim’s structure would simply add Hooper’s ribbon heating elements to Kim’s existing structure, and that there is no suggestion to undertake the substantial structural redesign necessary to arrive at the claimed configuration.
The examiner disagrees. As noted, Kim already discloses a U-shaped assembly, with the BMS (60) being arranged vertically. Hooper shows an arrangement with a control system (124) arranged vertically in figure 2, with individual cells extending vertically (fig 2, cells 102). Heating element 130 is wrapped around the cells (fig 1-2 and 7) and are connected to the power and control system 122. The combination suggests providing a heating element wrapped around the cells of Kim, connected to the BMS, thus meeting the limitation that the BMS includes the heating resistors.
Applicant argues that the rejections are based on hindsight reconstruction, and that one skilled in the art reading Kim and Hooper would not be motivated to create the specific integrated U-shaped printed circuit assembly with its vertical central surface orientation, when Kim shows a functional battery module with horizontal PCB-mounted BMS.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Note that in Kim, figures 1 and 3, shows the BMS (60) on a PCB mounted vertically, forming the central part of the U-shaped assembly. Connection member 40 is the upper part of the U, and connection member 50 is the lower part of the U.
Regarding claim 2, applicant argues that the central part comprises temperature sensors and a thermostat. Applicant argues that Hooper does not teach integrating these components into a central part of a U-shaped printed circuit assembly.
The examiner disagrees. The temperature sensors of Hooper are associated with the control module 124 which is shown arranged vertically on a central part. The corresponding location of the BMS of Kim is shown vertically at a central part in figure 3.
Regarding claim 3, applicant refers to the arguments already addressed above. Applicant further argues that Aikens disconnect mechanism operates between a battery bus and multiple battery packs, creating bypass current paths around failed packs, which is a system level bypass. Applicant argues their invention requires module-level isolation switching with a switching device connected between the last battery cell of a modular pack and the battery lug to enable disconnection of that individual module. Applicant argues that Aikens implements system-level switching that creates alternative current paths around failed modules, while the claimed invention implements module-level switching that isolates individual modules from the battery.
The Examiner disagrees, and notes that Aikens bypass around a failed module meets the claim limitation of disconnecting the battery pack from the battery, as the failed module would no longer be electrically connected. Applicant’s argument that is not clear how Aikens bypass can be combined with Kim who teaches a module-level structure is not persuasive, as Kim teaches in paragraph [0060] that a plurality of battery cells are connected to form a single module, and a plurality of modules are assembled to form a single high-capacity battery assembly, and that a battery assembly with a desired capacity can be configured by appropriately arranging an appropriate number of battery assemblies according to the user’s needs (paragraph [0060]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACKY YUEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5749. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00.
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, 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.
/JACKY YUEN/
Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735