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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
logic circuitry configured to compare
in claim 1.
By reviewing the specification (paragraph [0038]) it appears that the logic circuitry is any battery controller or battery management system which can store and control the operation of the battery by comparing the current value with the stored value.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8, 10-13, 15, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Hinterberger et al. (US 2018/0026312), herein after Hinterberger.
Regarding claim 1, Hinterberger discloses a safety system for batteries and/or supercapacitors, the safety system comprises:
a housing (a battery cell housing 32, fig. 3);
a controller encased within the housing (a control unit 40 is provided, which is in the present case arranged within the interior of the battery cell housing 32, paragraph [0055]), the controller configured to cease charging and/or discharging of one or more battery cells (the control unit 40 can be used to ensure that the when the control voltage applied to the switching element 38, an electrically conductive connection is interrupted or established, paragraph [0055]), the controller is configured with a threshold temperature and a threshold pressure for the one or more battery cells (the control unit is provided with an interface by means of which a threshold value of at least one parameter can be changed, paragraph [0034] Note: the threshold values of the battery parameters e.g. temperature, pressure are stored in the control unit 40);
a pressure sensor configured to sense a current pressure of the one or more battery cells in near real-time; a temperature sensor configured to sense a current temperature of the one or more battery cells in near real-time (sensors 42 are shown schematically which are arranged inside the battery cell housing of the battery and which thus detect the corresponding parameters inside the battery cell housing 32. These parameters can include for example a temperature, a pressure, accelerations (which can be detected for example by means of a force sensor), mechanical stresses or the composition of an electrolyte of the galvanic element, paragraph [0057]);
a logic circuitry operably coupled to the pressure sensor and the temperature sensor, the logic circuitry configured to compare the current temperature and the current pressure of the one or more battery cells to the threshold temperature and the threshold pressure respectively (paragraph [0028]-[0029] the control unit inherently compare the current battery parameters (e.g. temperature and pressure) and trigger interruption of the battery cell), the logic circuitry operably coupled to the controller, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive a signal from the logic circuitry, the signal indicative of the current temperature or the current pressure exceeding the threshold temperature or the threshold pressure respectively; and in response to the signal, ceasing the charging and/or discharging of the one or more battery cells (paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 3, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the safety system further comprises one or more MOSFETS (38, fig. 1; paragraph [0018]), the one or more MOSFETS operably coupled to the controller and configured to stop the charging and/or discharging of the one or more battery cells (paragraph [0055]).
Regarding claim 4, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the battery is a power bank, the one or more battery cells comprise a plurality of battery cells, wherein the controller is configured to isolate a single battery cell of the plurality of battery cells of the power bank (paragraph [0037]).
Regarding claim 5, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the battery is a standalone battery (the battery 24 is a standalone battery 24, fig. 3), the one or more battery cells comprises a single cell (a cell 26, fig. 3), and the safety system is configured to be encased with a shell of the standalone battery (the safety components e.g. 42, 40 and 38 is encased inside the housing 32, fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the housing is in contact with the shell for dissipating heat to the shell (Information about such thermal stresses which occur in the in the battery cell or in the vicinity and which have an impact on the battery cell can be preferably communicated by means of the control unit (paragraph [0027]), shows that the shell is in contact with the housing and also capable of absorbing and dissipating heat to and from surrounding).
Regarding claim 8, Hinterberger discloses a method for enhancing safety of batteries and/or supercapacitors, method comprises: providing a safety system comprising:
a housing (a battery cell housing 32, fig. 3); a controller encased within the housing(a control unit 40 is provided, which is in the present case arranged within the interior of the battery cell housing 32, paragraph [0055]), the controller configured to cease charging and/or discharging of one or more battery cells (the control unit 40 can be used to ensure that the when the control voltage applied to the switching element 38, an electrically conductive connection is interrupted or established, paragraph [0055]), the controller is configured with a threshold temperature and a threshold pressure for the one or more battery cells(the control unit is provided with an interface by means of which a threshold value of at least one parameter can be changed, paragraph [0034] Note: the threshold values of the battery parameters e.g. temperature, pressure are stored in the control unit 40);
a pressure sensor configured to determine a current pressure of the one or more battery cells in near real-time; a temperature sensor configured to sense a current temperature of the one or more battery cells in near real-time(sensors 42 are shown schematically which are arranged inside the battery cell housing of the battery and which thus detect the corresponding parameters inside the battery cell housing 32. These parameters can include for example a temperature, a pressure, accelerations (which can be detected for example by means of a force sensor), mechanical stresses or the composition of an electrolyte of the galvanic element, paragraph [0057]);
a logic circuitry operably coupled to the pressure sensor and the temperature sensor, the logic circuitry configured to compare the current temperature and the current pressure of the one or more battery cells to the threshold temperature and the threshold pressure respectively(paragraph [0028]-[0029] the control unit inherently compare the current battery parameters (e.g. temperature and pressure) and trigger interruption of the battery cell),
the logic circuitry operably coupled to the controller, wherein the controller is configured to: receive a signal from the logic circuitry, the signal indicative of the current temperature or the current pressure exceeding the threshold temperature or the threshold pressure respectively, and in response to the signal, ceasing the charging and/or discharging of the one or more battery cells(paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 10, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the safety system further comprises one or more MOSFETS(38, fig. 1; paragraph [0018]), the one or more MOSFETS operably coupled to the controller and configured to stop the charging and/or discharging of the one or more battery cells(paragraph [0055]).
Regarding claim 11, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the battery is a power bank, the one or more battery cells comprise a plurality of battery cells, wherein the controller is configured to isolate a single battery cell of the plurality of battery cells of the power bank (paragraph [0037]).
Regarding claim 12, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the battery is a standalone battery(the battery 24 is a standalone battery 24, fig. 3), the one or more battery cells comprises a single cell(a cell 26, fig. 3), and the safety system is configured to be encased with a shell of the standalone battery(the safety components e.g. 42, 40 and 38 is encased inside the housing 32, fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the housing is in contact with the shell for dissipating heat to the shell ((Information about such thermal stresses which occur in the in the battery cell or in the vicinity and which have an impact on the battery cell can be preferably communicated by means of the control unit (paragraph [0027]), shows that the shell is in contact with the housing and also capable of absorbing and dissipating heat to and from surrounding).
Regarding claim 15, Hinterberger discloses a battery comprising: a safety system for keeping the battery safe, the safety system comprises: a housing(a battery cell housing 32, fig. 3);
a controller encased within the housing(a control unit 40 is provided, which is in the present case arranged within the interior of the battery cell housing 32, paragraph [0055]), the controller configured to cease charging and/or discharging of one or more battery cells(the control unit 40 can be used to ensure that the when the control voltage applied to the switching element 38, an electrically conductive connection is interrupted or established, paragraph [0055]), the controller is configured with a threshold temperature and a threshold pressure for the one or more battery cells(the control unit is provided with an interface by means of which a threshold value of at least one parameter can be changed, paragraph [0034] Note: the threshold values of the battery parameters e.g. temperature, pressure are stored in the control unit 40);
a pressure sensor configured to determine a current pressure of the one or more battery cells in near real-time; a temperature sensor configured to sense a current temperature of the one or more battery cells in near real-time(sensors 42 are shown schematically which are arranged inside the battery cell housing of the battery and which thus detect the corresponding parameters inside the battery cell housing 32. These parameters can include for example a temperature, a pressure, accelerations (which can be detected for example by means of a force sensor), mechanical stresses or the composition of an electrolyte of the galvanic element, paragraph [0057]);
a logic circuitry operably coupled to the pressure sensor and the temperature sensor, the logic circuitry configured to compare the current temperature and the current pressure of the one or more battery cells to the threshold temperature and the threshold pressure respectively(paragraph [0028]-[0029] the control unit inherently compare the current battery parameters (e.g. temperature and pressure) and trigger interruption of the battery cell), the logic circuitry operably coupled to the controller, wherein the controller is configured to: receive a signal from the logic circuitry, the signal indicative of the current temperature or the current pressure exceeding the threshold temperature or the threshold pressure respectively; and in response to the signal, ceasing the charging and/or discharging of the one or more battery cells (paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 17, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the safety system further comprises one or more MOSFETS(38, fig. 1; paragraph [0018]), the one or more MOSFETS operably coupled to the controller and configured to stop the charging and/or discharging of the one or more battery cells(paragraph [0055]).
Regarding claim 18, Hinterberger further discloses wherein the battery is a standalone battery(the battery 24 is a standalone battery 24, fig. 3), the one or more battery cells comprises a single cell(a cell 26, fig. 3), and the safety system is configured to be encased with a shell of the standalone battery, the housing is in contact with the shell for dissipating heat to the shell(the safety components e.g. 42, 40 and 38 is encased inside the housing 32, fig. 3).
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.
Claim(s)2, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger (US 2018/0026312) as applied to claims 1, 8, 15 above, and further in view of Stafl (US 2023/0198276).
Regarding claim 2, Hinterberger discloses the safety system of claim 1. However, Hinterberger does not explicitly disclose a load resistor configured to dissipate energy as heat, wherein the controller is configured to: in response to the signal, place the one or more battery cells in a dormant state and slowly cause the one or more battery cells to discharge through the load resistor.
Stafl discloses a load resistor configured to dissipate energy as heat, wherein the controller is configured to: in response to the signal, place the one or more battery cells in a dormant state and slowly cause the one or more battery cells to discharge through the load resistor (paragraph [0037]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Hinterberger’s safety system to connect a resistor to the battery cell as taught by Stafl, in order to protect the battery components, manage inrush current, and balance cells, thereby enhancing safety and extending system life.
Regarding claim 9, Hinterberger discloses the method of claim 8. However, Hinterberger is silent over wherein the safety system further comprises: a load resistor configured to dissipate energy as heat, wherein the controller is configured to: in response to the signal, place the one or more battery cells in a dormant state and slowly cause the one or more battery cells to discharge through the load resistor.
Stafl discloses a load resistor configured to dissipate energy as heat, wherein the controller is configured to: in response to the signal, place the one or more battery cells in a dormant state and slowly cause the one or more battery cells to discharge through the load resistor (paragraph [0037]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Hinterberger’s safety system to connect a resistor to the battery cell as taught by Stafl, in order to protect the battery components, manage inrush current, and balance cells, thereby enhancing safety and extending system life.
Regarding claim 16, Hinterberger discloses the battery of claim 15. However, Hinterberger does not explicitly disclose a load resistor configured to dissipate energy as heat, wherein the controller is configured to: in response to the signal, place the one or more battery cells in a dormant state and slowly cause the one or more battery cells to discharge through the load resistor.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Hinterberger’s safety system to connect a resistor to the battery cell as taught by Stafl, in order to protect the battery components, manage inrush current, and balance cells, thereby enhancing safety and extending system life.
Claim(s)7, 14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger (US 2018/0026312) as applied to claim 1, 8, 15 above, and further in view of Iqra et al. (US 2018/0006341), herein after Iqra.
Regarding claim 7, Hinterberger discloses the safety system of claim 1. However, Hinterberger does not explicitly disclose wherein the safety system further comprises a thermally conductive epoxy, the housing is filled with the thermally conductive epoxy.
Iqra discloses the housing is filled with the thermally conductive epoxy (paragraph [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Hinterberger’s safety system to fill the housing with thermally conductive epoxy as taught by Iqra, in order to have high-performance thermal management, efficiently wicking heat away from cells to prevent thermal runaway and, ultimately, prolonging battery lifespan. It provides, superior structural bonding, electrical insulation, and vibration damping while ensuring temperature uniformity across the pack.
Regarding claim 14, Hinterberger discloses the method for the safety system of claim 8. However, Hinterberger does not explicitly disclose wherein the safety system further comprises a thermally conductive epoxy, the housing is filled with the thermally conductive epoxy.
Iqra discloses the housing is filled with the thermally conductive epoxy (paragraph [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Hinterberger’s safety system to fill the housing with thermally conductive epoxy as taught by Iqra, in order to have high-performance thermal management, efficiently wicking heat away from cells to prevent thermal runaway and, ultimately, prolonging battery lifespan. It provides, superior structural bonding, electrical insulation, and vibration damping while ensuring temperature uniformity across the pack.
Regarding claim 19, Hinterberger discloses the battery of claim 15. However, Hinterberger does not explicitly disclose wherein the safety system further comprises a thermally conductive epoxy, the housing is filled with the thermally conductive epoxy.
Iqra discloses the housing is filled with the thermally conductive epoxy (paragraph [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Hinterberger’s safety system to fill the housing with thermally conductive epoxy as taught by Iqra, in order to have high-performance thermal management, efficiently wicking heat away from cells to prevent thermal runaway and, ultimately, prolonging battery lifespan. It provides, superior structural bonding, electrical insulation, and vibration damping while ensuring temperature uniformity across the pack.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADIA KOUSAR whose telephone number is (571)272-3386. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
SADIA . KOUSAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859