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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4 June 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 4-11 are currently pending
Claims 1 and 7 are amended
Status of Amendments
The amendment filed 4 June 2026 has been fully considered, but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
Status of Objections and Rejections of the Office Action from 6 March 2026
The informality objections to claims 1 and 7 have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The 112 rejection of claims 1 and 4-11 have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The 103 rejections over Stafl in view of Reineccius further in view of Seol are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment. However, a new grounds of rejection over Stafl in view of Chiyajo further in view of Reineccius has been set forth, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stafl et al. (US 20190131672 A1), hereinafter Stafl, in view of Chiyajo et al. (US 20180233930 A1), hereinafter Chiyajo, further in view of Reineccius et al. (US 20160093843 A1), hereinafter Reineccius.
Regarding claim 1, Stafl teaches a battery 100 (Fig. 4) [0004] comprising:
a battery cell retention frame 110 (Fig. 1) [0025];
a first cell array 130 (Fig. 1), the first cell array 130 including cells 120 [0025] and a first cell array printed circuit board (PCB) 152A (Fig. 4) electrically connected with sense leads 141a and 141b (Fig. 5) associated with the cells 120 of the first cell array 130 [0034];
a second cell array 132 (Fig. 1), the second cell array 132 including cells 120 [0025] and a second cell array PCB 152D (Fig. 4) electrically connected with sense leads, not numbered, but similar to 141a and 141b of Fig. 5, associated with the cells 120 of the second cell array 132 [0032-0033];
a primary PCB 150 (Fig. 4) spanning the first and second cell arrays 130 and 132, as seen in Fig. 4, the primary PCB 150 and the first cell array PCB 152A being mechanically and electrically connected, in this case through FPC connector 151A [0032] (Fig. 4), for the primary PCB 150 to receive electrical signals indicative of the cells 120 of the first cell array 130 from the first cell array PCB 152A, as taught in a signal flow path [0034, 0036], and the primary PCB 150 and the second cell array PCB 152D being mechanically and electrically connected, in this case through FPC connector 151D [0032] (Fig. 4), for the primary PCB 150 to receive electrical signals indicative of the cells 120 of the second cell array 132 from the second cell array PCB 152D, as taught in a signal flow path [0034, 0036].
Stafl is silent as to the inclusion of a battery sensor PCB that is carried by the primary PCB 150. However, Chiyajo teaches a battery monitoring device 1 (Fig. 7) comprising a circuit board 30 that may be a single-layer or multilayer circuit board including a plurality of circuit board bodies 30A and 30B [0042-0043] that are mechanically and electrically connected via a board-to-board connector, in this case coupler 31, for PCB 30B to receive the electrical signals indicative of the cells 501 from PCB 30A [0041]. Chiyajo further teaches the first circuit board body 30A including a battery state monitoring unit 20 that receives the battery state detection signals via the battery information input terminals 11 [0032], corresponding to a primary PCB, the second circuit board body 30B, that is considered to be carried by the first circuit board body 30A, including a controller 50 [0046] that receives battery state detection signals and control information on the cell balance control and transmits them to an external arithmetic processor via the output terminals 12 as monitoring information [0041], corresponding to a battery sensor PCB, and a communication unit 60 that transmits and receives signals between the battery state monitoring unit 20 and the controller 50 and may be wired or wireless [0041]. The second circuit board body 30B receiving battery state detection signals and control information and converting them into monitoring information is considered to read on the limitation of the battery sensor PCB being configured to generate data representative of operating parameters of the cells based on the electrical signals received from the primary PCB. Further, although the monitoring information is taught to be transmitted via output terminals 12, the controller 50 being able to wirelessly communicate with the battery state monitoring unit 20 through the communication unit 60 is considered to read on the limitation of the battery sensor PCB being configured to wirelessly communicate the data to a remote controller external to the housing for use by the remote controller in controlling the battery.
Stafl and Chiyajo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery packs including a plurality of battery cells and PCBs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the single-layer primary circuit board 150 of Stafl with the multilayer structure comprising a plurality of circuit board bodies of Chiyajo, including the second circuit board body 30B and coupler 31 that are carried by the primary PCB 150. Doing so would have produced a smaller orthogonal area of the circuit board [Chiyajo 0058] and reduced gaps (insulation distances) between the wires in the circuit pattern, allowing the circuit pattern to be reduced in size, resulting in downsizing of the circuit board [Chiyajo 0062].
Stafl is silent as to each battery component being arranged entirely within a housing. However, Reineccius teaches a modular battery pack 300 (Fig. 3) comprising a backplane assembly 406 and support panels 602 and 604 (Fig. 6) that is similar to the battery cell retention frame of Stafl and is then completely enclosed by panels [0044].
Stafl and Reineccius are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery modules comprising multiple cell arrays and PCBs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further enclose the battery cell retention frame 110 of Stafl with panels, as taught by Reineccius, in a way that the cell array PCBs, the primary PCB, and the battery sensor PCB are each arranged entirely within the housing. Doing so would have better protected the interior components and improved the safety of the module [Reineccius 0044].
Stafl further teaches the cell array PCBs 152A and 152D and the primary PCB 150 together defining a multi-level PCB network, as seen by the signal flow path that flows through each [0034, 0036]. Therefore, someone of ordinary skill in the art would expect the battery sensor PCB of Chiyajo to be included in the multi-level PCB network.
Regarding claim 4, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1. Chiyajo further teaches the board-to-board connector being mounted on the primary PCB, in this case coupler 31 being connected to the first circuit board body 30A [0052] (Fig. 9). Examiner acknowledges that Chiyajo teaches the coupler 31 as being a barren portion of the circuit board 30, rather than being formed separately and connected after the fact [0052]. However, Stafl teaches multiple FPC connectors connecting separate PCBs, such as 151A-D (Fig. 4)[0032] and 155 (Fig. 5)[0035]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to form the board-to-board connector, in this case coupler 31, as a separate circuit board from the primary PCB and thereafter mount the board-to-board connector on the primary PCB using an FPC connector. It has been held that selection of any order of performing process steps, in this case connecting two circuit boards after they have been separately formed rather than forming the two circuit boards already connected, is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results; In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930). See MPEP 2144.04.IV.C.
Regarding claim 5, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the battery sensor PCB 30B attaches to a flexible printed circuit coupler 31 to be spaced apart from the primary PCB 150 [Chiyajo 0053]. Modified Stafl is silent as to the primary PCB 150 including a standoff mounted thereon. However, Reineccius further teaches a rechargeable [0035] modular battery pack with multiple cell compartments [0020] where the PCBs are coupled together using a plurality of threaded standoffs 612 (Reineccius Fig. 6) [Reineccius 0056].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to swap the flexible printed circuit coupler 31 with the standoffs taught by Reineccius, mount the standoffs on the primary PCB 150 of Stafl, and attach the battery sensor PCB 30B thereto to be spaced apart from the primary PCB 150. Doing so would have provided electrical paths and physical rigidity and strength to the battery module [Reineccius 0056].
Regarding claim 6, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1. Chiyajo further teaches the circuit board 30, comprising battery sensor PCB 30B, as being a rigid flexible board [0052].
Regarding claim 7, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1. Stafl further teaches the first cell array PCB 152A and the second cell array PCB 152D being flexible PCBs [0032].
Regarding claim 8, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1. Stafl is silent as to the primary PCB 150 being a flexible PCB. However, Chiyajo teaches the circuit board 30, comprising the battery state monitoring first circuit board body 30A, as being a rigid flexible board. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery monitoring primary PCB 150 of Stafl with the rigid flexible board of Chiyajo. The selection of a known material., in this case a rigid flexible board, based on its suitability for its intended use, in this case as a battery monitoring circuit board, supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Regarding claims 9 and 11, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1. Stafl further teaches the sense leads being voltage sense leads, in this case voltage monitoring tabs 141A and 141B [0034], and temperature sense leads, in this case temperature monitors installed on FPC 160 [0036].
Regarding claim 10, modified Stafl teaches the battery of claim 1. Stafl further teaches that cell group size may be varied to achieve various design specifications, like a particular current output [0025], indicating a desire to monitor the current of the battery. Chiyajo further teaches a battery monitoring device monitoring the voltage, electric current, and temperature to determine the battery state [0027]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to modify the monitoring circuit of Stafl to include current monitoring FPCs in addition to the voltage monitoring FPCs and temperature monitoring FPCs. Doing so would have allowed for more accurate cell group size modifications [Stafl 0025] and a more comprehensive understanding of the battery state as a whole [Chiyajo 0027].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chiyajo could be considered to read on the claimed invention by arbitrarily dividing the group of cells into two cell arrays, wherein each array is associated with a separate signal transmitting member 711 as first and second cell array PCBs, 30A is the primary PCB, and 30B is the battery sensor PCB.
US 20200083511 A1 teaches a rechargeable battery pack comprising a plurality of battery cells and a current sensor R arranged on the charge/discharge path.
US 20220131237 A1 teaches a battery pack comprising a plurality of battery cells and FPCs and a BMS to avoid overcharge and over-discharge of the battery pack, wherein the BMS is a flexible circuit board.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN KENWOOD VAN KIRK whose telephone number is (703)756-4717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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.
/DUSTIN VAN KIRK/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
