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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 1/29/25. Claims 3 and 5 are amended. Claim 15 is added. Claims 1-15 are pending. Claims 5-9 and 13 are allowed. Claims 1-4, 10-12, and 14-15 are rejected finally for the reasons provided below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejection of claim 3 is withdrawn in light of the amendment.
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 1-4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuriki et al. (US 2022/0231341) in view of Ampolini et al. (US 2016/0331030).
Regarding claim 1, Kuriki teaches a battery module comprising:
a battery (913) having two opposite end faces (Figure 16B);
a flexible printed circuit board (900), connected to the battery via electrodes (971, 972), comprising a portion extending over a side wall in the longitudinal direction of the battery, the circuit (900) forming a main circuit board of the battery module and carrying a microcontroller, or control circuit (912) (Figures 16A-16D, [0286]);
wherein the circuit (900) is bent such that a second portion extends over one of the end faces (Figure 16A).
Kuriki fails to teach that the second portion carries a pressure sensor.
Ampolini teaches a battery module for an aerosol generating system wherein a printed circuit board (5106) extends over an end face of a battery and includes a pressure sensor (5108) for informing controlling supply of electrical power (abstract, [0099], [0124]-[0125]). (Therefore, the pressure sensor is provided on a portion of the circuit covering an end face, equivalent to the claimed second portion of the circuit.)
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to incorporate a pressure sensor in the battery module of Kuriki such as suggested by Ampolini in order to provide information to the controller.
It is noted that the preamble of claim 1 includes intended use language that is not given patentable weight since the claims do not positively recite any structure pertaining to an aerosol generating system. MPEP 2111.02 II
As for claim 2, it is seen in Figure 16A of Kuriki that the second portion of the circuit fully covers an end face.
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Kuriki teaches that the controller controls parameters such as state of charge, e.g. when an abnormality is detected ([0289]).
With regard to claim 4, Kuriki teaches that the battery has a substantially parallelepiped, or prism, shape (Figures 8 and 16A-D, [0216]).
Claims 10-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuriki in view of Ampolini as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hayama et al. (US 6,225,778).
The teachings of Kuriki and Ampolini as discussed above are incorporated herein.
Kuriki in view of Ampolini teaches the battery module of claim 1 but is silent on the battery and circuit being embedded in a holder comprising a first and second longitudinal frame.
Regarding claim 10, Hayama teaches a battery module including a printed circuit (6) and battery (B1) embedded, or provided, in a battery holder frame, or container (16), which is seen in Figure 1 to have first and second longitudinal ends (abstract).
Further regarding claim 10 and with regard to claims 11 and 14, Hayama further teaches that the holder (16) includes a ferromagnetic sheet, or metal plate (12a, 14a) made of cold rolled steel (Figure 1, column 18 line 40). The examiner finds that cold rolled steel is inherently ferromagnetic. MPEP 2112
Hayama additionally teaches that the case, including container (16) and metal plates (12a, 14a) and having the circuit contained within the container is desirable for forming a flat, sheet-shaped battery having reduced thickness with required overall strength (column 4 lines 50-64).
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to use a holder such as that of Hayama to protect the battery of Kuriki in view of Ampolini.
As for claim 14, Hayama further teaches spring contacts, or spring terminal pieces (Figure 54, column 26 lines 37-47).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9 and 13 allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: see Non-Final mailed 9/26/25.
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.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/25 concerning claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 6 of the Remarks filed 12/29/25, Applicant argues that Ampolini fails to teach or fairly suggest locating a pressure sensor on an end of the battery coincident with a bent portion of a PCB (emphasis added by the examiner).
This argument does not appear to be based on any statement in the Non-Final Rejection that Ampolini teaches the sensor coincident with a bent portion of a PCB. Instead, Kuriki is relied upon for a teaching of the bent portion of a PCB.
The rejection is based on the following:
Kuriki teaches a PCB having a bent portion (i.e. second portion) that is coincident with one of the end faces of the battery.
Ampolini teaches a sensor placement coincident with an end face of a battery.
Placing a sensor on an end face of the battery Kuriki such as taught by Ampolini would necessarily result in the sensor being placed on the bent portion, since the bent portion of Kiriki is found at an end face of the battery.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually by arguing that Ampolini does not teach locating a pressure sensor on an end of the battery coincident with a bent portion of a PCB, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Additionally, Applicant is reminded that a person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton, and is able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle. MPEP 2141.03 I
The examiner maintains that Ampolini does not need to teach locating a pressure sensor on an end of the battery coincident with a bent portion of a PCB in order to obviate the claimed invention.
As to the statements on page 6 that the positioning of the sensor is “advantageous”, such arguments are not found to be probative of nonobviousness since they are just attorney argument and not the kind of factual evidence that is required to rebut a prima facie case of nonobviousness. MPEP 2145 I
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALIX ECHELMEYER EGGERDING whose telephone number is (571)272-1101. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 4:30pm.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
/ALIX E EGGERDING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729