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
The amendments filed on March 18, 2026 in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on December 18, 2025 have been received and entered. Claims 1-3, 10-12 and 17 have been amended. Specifically independent claims 1, 10 and 17 have been amended to include the feature, or a variant, “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”, which was not presented before. Claims 18 and 19 have been cancelled. Claims 1-17 and 20 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Claim 1 and 17 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN 104485490 A, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 1, the applicant argues (see Remarks page 8-9) that Li relies on two different types of sensors: resistance strain sensors for deformation and temperature sensors. From Li’s work the amended feature regarding the piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties are not disclosed, taught or suggested, therefore failing to anticipate the present claim. The secondary references applied to claims 2-9 fail to cure the teaching deficiencies of Li.
Regarding claim 17 (see Remarks page 9-12), the concept of simultaneously utilizing piezoelectric and pyroelectric effects within the same sensing part to generate corresponding signals is absent in Li. Li fails to disclose, teach or suggest the amended features recited in claim 17, therefore failing to anticipate the present claim.
Claim 10 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 104485490 A, see machine translation for citation) in view of Dasgupta et al. (US 20020145404 A1).
Regarding claim 10 (see Remarks page 9), because it recites substantially similar features to those discussed above with respect to the patentability of amended independent claim 1, Li fails to disclose, teach or suggest the amended limitations. Dasgupta fail to cure the teaching deficiencies of Li. The secondary references applied to claims 11-16 fail to cure the teaching deficiencies of Li.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 10 and 17 have been considered but are moot because it incorporate features not presented before and 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.
Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 1, Hinterberger teaches a motor vehicle (10) equipped with a battery system (11) comprising several batteries (13), which may be battery modules with several battery cells each or individual battery cells [0032, 0033 and Fig. 1]. Each battery component (13) may have a monitoring unit (14) including at least one sensor for measuring values related to a state of the battery component (13) [0034 and Fig. 1]. In at least one embodiment the at least one monitoring unit (14) of each of the battery components (13) generates a respective monitoring signal which may be related to at least one of the following operating variables: electrical voltage, electrical current, a temperature and an internal resistance [0025]. A computing device (15) is connected to the monitoring units (14) and is able to receive a signal (17) transmitted from them and detect whether one of the battery components (13) has a fault. [0035, 0036 and Fig. 1]. By means of a predetermined correlation-based classification method (18), based on a respective time course (22) of some or all of the monitoring signals (17), an expected corridor within which the respective monitoring value must lie in the absence of the fault is specified [claim 1]. When one monitoring value deviates from the determined expected corridor, an error signal (31) is generated, which means that a battery component (13) has a fault [claim 1].
Hinterberger does not teach the features “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”.
Schmidt teaches an electrical energy storage device (10) (battery assembly) having a housing (14) and containing at least two battery cells (18) on its interior (16) [0023 and Fig. 1]. The electrical energy storage device (10) (battery assembly) has at least one sensor device (24) [0025 and Fig. 1]. The sensor device (24) has at least one pyroelectric sensor (26) and an electronic computing device (28). The pyroelectric sensor (26) is arranged on the housing (14) and it can detect a temperature change in the interior (16) and/or a brightness change as a parameter change (30), which may be the result of a fire or an electrical breakdown [0027]. From the previous description the pyroelectric sensor (26) is able to detect deformation and temperature of the monitored batteries (18). The electronic computing device (28) (alarm module) is designed to detect a thermal runaway (22) only when a predetermined parameter change (30) threshold is exceeded and issue a warning signal [0028]. From the previous descriptions the feature wherein the pyroelectric sensor (26) generates a “generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties” and wherein it is electrically connected to the electronic computing device (28) are implicit. Schmidt teaches as an advantage of pyroelectric sensors that it has very high sensitivity and implicitly detects rapid and inhomogeneous changes [0010].
Whatmore evidence that piezoelectricity is the release of electric charge under the application of mechanical stress and pyroelectricity is the release of charge due to a material's change of temperature. It is further evidence that all pyroelectric materials are piezoelectric [p. 283; Introduction], therefore a pyroelectric material possesses piezoelectric properties.
From the above teachings and evidence, if the pyroelectric sensor (26) of Schmidt is selected as the “at least one sensor” on the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, because it will have both piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties as evidenced by Whatmore, the limitation wherein “the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties” will be met. Additionally, because of the above reasons, the computing device (15) of Hinterberger will be analogous to the claimed “alarm module”.
Hinterberger is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising: at least one battery; at least one sensing part on the battery, able to monitor values related to a state of the battery component and transmit the monitored value signals to a computing device (electrically connected), which when one monitoring value deviates from the determined expected corridor, generates an error signal.
Schmidt is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising: at least one battery; at least one sensing part on the battery, wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties; and an alarm module electrically connected to the at least one sensing part, wherein the alarm module is configured to issue an alarm in response to the deformation sensing signal exceeding a threshold.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the “several batteries (13) and monitoring units (14) including at least one sensor” disclosed by Hinterberger because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obvious. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the monitoring units (14) including at least one sensor of Hinterberger by the pyroelectric sensor (26) of Schmidt in order to meet the feature “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”, because Schmidt teaches the employment of a pyroelectric sensor which has very high sensitivity and implicitly detects rapid and inhomogeneous changes, and Whatmore evidence that all pyroelectric materials are piezoelectric, therefore a pyroelectric material possesses piezoelectric properties.
Regarding claim 3, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, because the computing device (15) (alarm module) is connected to the monitoring units (14) and is able to receive a signal (17) transmitted from them and detect whether one of the battery components (13) has a fault [0035, 0036 and Fig. 1], the limitations wherein the battery assembly comprise “multiple batteries and multiple sensing parts, wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is electrically connected to the alarm module independently, and the alarm module is further configured to record a position of each of the multiple sensing parts and determine a position of a deformed battery among the multiple batteries based on the position of a sensing part, of the multiple sensing parts, generated the deformation sensing signal” are met.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Martins et al. (Electroactive phases of poly(vinylidene fluoride): Determination, processing and applications, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 2, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein the piezoelectric material comprises at least one of polyvinylidene difluoride, polyvinylidene fluoride-trifluoro ethylene, or a piezoelectric ceramic”.
Martins teaches that electroactive polymers are employed as smart materials for applications such as sensors, among others. Amid polymers presenting piezo, pyro or ferroelectricity, poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF) and its copolymers, being poly(vinylidene fluoride-trifluoroethylene) one of the most studied, have the best all-around electroactive properties [p. 684; par. 1 and p. 691; PVDF copolymers ].
Martins is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely electroactive polymers such as poly(vinylidene fluoride) and poly(vinylidene fluoride-trifluoroethylene), having piezo and pyroelectric properties, which are employed as smart materials for sensor applications, among others.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pyroelectric sensor/monitoring unit (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to comprise “polyvinylidene difluoride and/or polyvinylidene fluoride-trifluoro ethylene” as its piezoelectric material, because Martins teaches that it have the best all-around electroactive properties.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Battery University (Pouch Cell - Small but not Trouble Free, see NPL documents for citation) and Martin et al. (Thin Film Sensors for Surface Measurement, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 4, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 3, except “wherein each of the multiple batteries and each of the multiple sensing parts is sheet shaped”.
Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs [Figure 1 and par. 2].
Martin teaches that advanced thin film sensors, capable of provide accurate surface temperature and strain measurements, have been already developed and applied at NASA Glenn Research Center. These sensors provide minimally intrusive characterization of components in hostile and/or high temperature environment [Abstract].
Battery university is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely teachings related to battery pack comprising pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries).
Martin is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely thin film sensors capable of provide accurate surface temperature and strain measurements. Despite its invention was developed for NASA objectives, the monitoring of surface properties is applicable to the current invention.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery components (13) and monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitation wherein they are “sheet shaped”, because Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs, and Martin teaches that thin film sensors provide minimally intrusive characterization of components in hostile and/or high temperature environment.
From the above modifications and because on Fig. 1 of Hinterberger the battery components (13) and the monitoring units (14) are alternated, the limitation wherein “at least one of the multiple batteries is alternated with one of the multiple sensing parts” is met.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Das et al. (Joining Technologies for Automotive Battery Systems Manufacturing, see NPL documents for citation), Intano et al. (Thermal investigation of cell arrangements for cylindrical battery with forced air-cooling strategy, see NPL documents for citation) and Rabbers et al. (EP 3054523 A1, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claims 5 and 7, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 3, except “wherein each of the multiple batteries and each of the multiple sensing parts is cylindrical shaped, the multiple batteries are arranged in an array of rows and columns, and one of the multiple sensing parts is at an intersection of two adjacent rows and two adjacent columns of the array of the multiple batteries” (claim 5) and “wherein each of the multiple batteries is cylindrical shaped, each of the multiple sensing parts comprises a flat surface or a curved surface, and each of the multiple sensing parts is between two of the multiple batteries” (claim 7).
Das teachings are related to major and emerging joining techniques to support the wide range of joining requirements that exist during automotive battery pack manufacturing [Abstract]. It is taught that generally battery packs are assembled by connecting modules, comprising multiple cells generally connected in series and parallel together, with sensors and controllers within a housing structure [p. 1; par. 2]. Regarding cylindrical cells battery pack it is taught that cylindrical cells have better thermal management efficiency because of its small size, and because of it a large number of cells and connections compared with modules composed of pouch/prismatic cells are obtainable [p. 7; 3.1.1. Joining of Cylindrical Cell Based Battery Pack].
Regarding the “the multiple batteries are arranged in an array of rows and columns” feature, Intano teaches that the cell arrangement is one of the most crucial rules for designing an efficient cooling system of the lithium-ion battery pack in electric vehicles [Abstract]. It was found that the aligned arrangement of cylindrical cells (columns and rows) had a better cooling effectiveness and temperature uniformity, compared to a staggered configuration [p. 17; par. 2].
Rabbers teaches a storage device (10), which can be used, for example, as a battery for motor vehicles, comprising a plurality of cylindrical electrochemical energy storage cells (12) [0034, 0035 and Fig. 1]. On a second embodiment, a sensor (18) extends completely around the respective cell housing (14) in a circumferential direction [0043 and Fig. 2]. The sensor (18) is a co-deformation sensor with which excessive deformations of the respective cell housing (14) can be detected directly, before the respective cell housing (14) opens [0042]. Depending on the signal transmitted by the sensor (18) protective or countermeasures can then be initiated [0042].
Das is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely joining techniques for battery packs, generally comprising multiple cells connected in series and parallel together, with sensors and controllers within a housing structure.
Intano is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising an aligned arrangement of cylindrical cells (columns and rows).
Rabbers is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising at least one battery and at least one sensing part on the battery capable of detect deformation of a single battery cells and transmit a deformation signal, depending on which protective or countermeasures can then be initiated.
If the battery components (13) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore are modified to be cylindrical cells having an aligned arrangement (rows and columns) as taught by Das and Intano, and the monitoring sensing units (14) are modified to have the cylindrical shape of the sensor (18) taught by Rabbers, the claimed limitations of claims 5 and 7 are met.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery components (13) and the monitoring sensing units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitations “wherein each of the multiple batteries and each of the multiple sensing parts is cylindrical shaped, the multiple batteries are arranged in an array of rows and columns, and one of the multiple sensing parts is at an intersection of two adjacent rows and two adjacent columns of the array of the multiple batteries” (claim 5) and “wherein each of the multiple batteries is cylindrical shaped, each of the multiple sensing parts comprises a flat surface or a curved surface, and each of the multiple sensing parts is between two of the multiple batteries” (claim 7), because Das teaches that cylindrical cells have better thermal management efficiency because of its small size, and because of it a large number of cells and connections compared with modules composed of pouch/prismatic cells are obtainable, Intano teaches that the aligned arrangement of cylindrical cells (columns and rows) had a better cooling effectiveness and temperature uniformity, compared to a staggered configuration and Rabbers teaches that having a sensor with its taught shape, excessive deformations of the respective cell housing can be detected directly, before the respective cell housing opens.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Yan et al. (Stretchable Micromotion Sensor with Enhanced Sensitivity Using Serpentine Layout, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 6, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 3, except wherein “wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is a mesh with a plurality of holes, and each of the plurality of holes is configured to receive at least one of the multiple batteries”.
Yan teachings are related to enhancement strategies for piezoelectric micromotion sensors used to detect tiny movements of the human body [p. 12262; col. 1; par. 2]. It is taught that by patterning the film to form a mesh layout consisting of serpentine unit cells, desired stretchability can be obtained for the piezoelectric film, which possesses high performance but is intrinsically hard-to-stretch [p. 12262; col. 1; par. 2].
Yan can be considered analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric micromotion sensors. Despite its work is directed to tiny movements detection of the human body, the working principle is applicable to battery systems sensors as claimed in this invention.
If the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore are modified to have a mesh shape as taught by Yan, the limitation “wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is a mesh with a plurality of holes” will be met. Because from Hinterberger teachings the monitoring units (14) are attached to the battery components (13), the limitation wherein “each of the plurality of holes is configured to receive at least one of the multiple batteries” would be met as well.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitations wherein “wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is a mesh with a plurality of holes”, because Yan teaches that by patterning the film to form a mesh layout consisting of serpentine unit cells, desired stretchability can be obtained for the piezoelectric film, which possesses high performance but is intrinsically hard-to-stretch.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Battery University (Pouch Cell - Small but not Trouble Free, see NPL documents for citation) and Yan et al. (Stretchable Micromotion Sensor with Enhanced Sensitivity Using Serpentine Layout, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 8, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except wherein “the battery is sheet shaped and the sensing part is a non-porous continuous layer or the sensing part is mesh shaped”.
Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs [Figure 1 and par. 2].
Yan teachings are related to enhancement strategies for piezoelectric micromotion sensors used to detect tiny movements of the human body [p. 12262; col. 1; par. 2]. It is taught that by patterning the film to form a mesh layout consisting of serpentine unit cells, desired stretchability can be obtained for the piezoelectric film, which possesses high performance but is intrinsically hard-to-stretch [p. 12262; col. 1; par. 2].
Battery university is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely teachings related to battery pack comprising pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries).
Yan can be considered analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric micromotion sensors. Despite its work is directed to tiny movements detection of the human body, the working principle is applicable to battery systems sensors as claimed in this invention.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitations wherein “the battery is sheet shaped and the sensing part is mesh shaped”, because Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs and Yan teaches that by patterning the film to form a mesh layout consisting of serpentine unit cells, desired stretchability can be obtained for the piezoelectric film, which possesses high performance but is intrinsically hard-to-stretch.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Battery University (Pouch Cell - Small but not Trouble Free, see NPL documents for citation)
Regarding claim 9, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the limitations “wherein a number of the at least one battery is one, a number of the at least one sensing part is greater than one, the at least one sensing part is electrically insulated from each other (separated), each of the at least one sensing part is electrically connected to the alarm module independently, and the alarm module is further configured to record a position of each of the at least one sensing part” are met. Since the method taught by Hinterberger is able to receive and analyze the monitoring units (18) transmitted signals to generated an error signal (310 indicating that a battery component (13) has a fault [claim 1], the limitation wherein “the alarm being able to detect a deformation region” is considered met.
Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore does not teach the features wherein “the battery is sheet shaped”.
Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs [Figure 1 and par. 2].
Battery university is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely teachings related to battery pack comprising pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery components (13) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to be “sheet shaped”, because Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs.
Claim 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 10, Hinterberger teaches a motor vehicle (10) equipped with a battery system (11), which may be designed as a traction battery or high-voltage battery for a drive system (drive motor) of the motor vehicle (10) [0032]. A vehicle component (12), which may be an electric motor, can be connected to the battery system (11) in order to be operated with the energy from the system [0032 and Fig. 1]. The battery system (11) comprises several batteries (13), which may be battery modules with several battery cells each or individual battery cells [0032, 0033 and Fig. 1]. Each battery component (13) may have a monitoring unit (14) including at least one sensor for measuring values related to a state of the battery component (13) [0034 and Fig. 1]. From Fig.1, the monitoring units (14) are alternated with the battery components (13), therefore it can be said that the monitoring units (14) are “electrically insulated”. In at least one embodiment the at least one monitoring unit (14) of each of the battery components (13) generates a respective monitoring signal which may be related to at least one of the following operating variables: electrical voltage, electrical current, a temperature and an internal resistance [0025]. A computing device (15) is connected to the monitoring units (14) and is able to receive a signal (17) transmitted from them and detect whether one of the battery components (13) has a fault. [0035, 0036 and Fig. 1]. By means of a predetermined correlation-based classification method (18), based on a respective time course (22) of some or all of the monitoring signals (17), an expected corridor within which the respective monitoring value must lie in the absence of the fault is specified [claim 1]. When one monitoring value deviates from the determined expected corridor, an error signal (31) is generated, which signals that a battery component (13) has a fault [claim 1]. From the previous description, the feature wherein an alarm is emitted regarding “at least two of the multiple batteries exceeding a threshold” is reasonably achievable.
Hinterberger does not teach the features “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”.
Schmidt teaches an electrical energy storage device (10) (battery assembly) having a housing (14) and containing at least two battery cells (18) on its interior (16) [0023 and Fig. 1]. The electrical energy storage device (10) (battery assembly) has at least one sensor device (24) [0025 and Fig. 1]. The sensor device (24) has at least one pyroelectric sensor (26) and an electronic computing device (28). The pyroelectric sensor (26) is arranged on the housing (14) and it can detect a temperature change in the interior (16) and/or a brightness change as a parameter change (30), which may be the result of a fire or an electrical breakdown [0027]. From the previous description the pyroelectric sensor (26) is able to detect deformation and temperature of the monitored batteries (18). The electronic computing device (28) (alarm module) is designed to detect a thermal runaway (22) only when a predetermined parameter change (30) threshold is exceeded and issue a warning signal [0028]. From the previous descriptions the feature wherein the pyroelectric sensor (26) generates a “generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties” and wherein it is electrically connected to the electronic computing device (28) are implicit. Schmidt teaches as an advantage of pyroelectric sensors that it has very high sensitivity and implicitly detects rapid and inhomogeneous changes [0010].
Whatmore evidence that piezoelectricity is the release of electric charge under the application of mechanical stress and pyroelectricity is the release of charge due to a material's change of temperature. It is further evidence that all pyroelectric materials are piezoelectric [p. 283; Introduction], therefore a pyroelectric material possesses piezoelectric properties.
From the above teachings and evidence, if the pyroelectric sensor (26) of Schmidt is selected as the “at least one sensor” on the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, because it will have both piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties as evidenced by Whatmore, the limitation wherein “the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties” will be met. Additionally, because of the above reasons, the computing device (15) of Hinterberger will be analogous to the claimed “alarm module” and its related limitations would be met.
Hinterberger is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a motor vehicle having a battery assembly, which powers the vehicle drive system and/or an electric motor, comprising: at least one battery; at least one sensing part on the battery, able to monitor values related to a state of the battery component and transmit the monitored value signals to a computing device (electrically connected), which when one monitoring value deviates from the determined expected corridor, generates an error signal.
Schmidt is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising: at least one battery; at least one sensing part on the battery, wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties; and an alarm module electrically connected to the at least one sensing part, wherein the alarm module is configured to issue an alarm in response to the deformation sensing signal exceeding a threshold.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the “several batteries (13) and monitoring units (14) including at least one sensor” disclosed by Hinterberger because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obvious. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the monitoring units (14) including at least one sensor of Hinterberger by the pyroelectric sensor (26) of Schmidt in order to meet the feature “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”, because Schmidt teaches the employment of a pyroelectric sensor which has very high sensitivity and implicitly detects rapid and inhomogeneous changes, and Whatmore evidence that all pyroelectric materials are piezoelectric, therefore a pyroelectric material possesses piezoelectric properties.
Regarding claim 12, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 10. From claim 10 discussion, because the computing device (15) (alarm module) is connected to the monitoring units (14) and is able to receive a signal (17) transmitted from them and detect whether one of the battery components (13) has a fault [0035, 0036 and Fig. 1], the limitations wherein the battery assembly comprise “multiple batteries and multiple sensing parts, wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is electrically connected to the alarm module independently, and the alarm module is further configured to record a position of each of the multiple sensing parts and determine a position of a deformed battery among the multiple batteries based on the position of a sensing part, of the multiple sensing parts, generated the deformation sensing signal” are met.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 10 above, further in view of Martins et al. (Electroactive phases of poly(vinylidene fluoride): Determination, processing and applications, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 11, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 10, except “wherein the piezoelectric material comprises at least one of polyvinylidene difluoride, polyvinylidene fluoride-trifluoro ethylene, or a piezoelectric ceramic”.
Martins teaches that electroactive polymers are employed as smart materials for applications such as sensors, among others. Amid polymers presenting piezo, pyro or ferroelectricity, poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF) and its copolymers, being poly(vinylidene fluoride-trifluoroethylene) one of the most studied, have the best all-around electroactive properties [p. 684; par. 1 and p. 691; PVDF copolymers ].
Martins is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely electroactive polymers such as poly(vinylidene fluoride) and poly(vinylidene fluoride-trifluoroethylene), having piezo and pyroelectric properties, which are employed as smart materials for sensor applications, among others.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pyroelectric sensor/monitoring unit (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to comprise “polyvinylidene difluoride and/or polyvinylidene fluoride-trifluoro ethylene” as its piezoelectric material, because Martins teaches that have the best all-around electroactive properties.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 12 above, further in view of Battery University (Pouch Cell - Small but not Trouble Free, see NPL documents for citation) and Martin et al. (Thin Film Sensors for Surface Measurement, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 13, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 12, except “wherein each of the multiple batteries and each of the multiple sensing parts is sheet shaped”.
Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs [Figure 1 and par. 2].
Martin teaches that advanced thin film sensors capable of provide accurate surface temperature and strain measurements have been already developed and applied at NASA Glenn Research Center. These sensors provide minimally intrusive characterization of components in hostile and/or high temperature environment [Abstract].
Battery university is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely teachings related to battery pack comprising pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries).
Martin is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely thin film sensors capable of provide accurate surface temperature and strain measurements. Despite its invention was developed for NASA objectives, the monitoring of surface properties is applicable to the current invention.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery components (13) and monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitation wherein they are “sheet shaped”, because Battery University teaches that pouch cells (sheet shaped batteries) presents several advantages over other battery constructions such as flexibility, lightweight and achieves a 90-95% of packaging efficiency, which is the highest among battery packs and Martin teaches that thin film sensors provide minimally intrusive characterization of components in hostile and/or high temperature environment.
From the above modifications and because on Fig. 1 of Hinterberger the battery components (13) and the monitoring units (14) are alternated, the limitation wherein “at least one of the multiple batteries is alternated with one of the multiple sensing parts” is met.
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 12 above, further in view of Das et al. (Joining Technologies for Automotive Battery Systems Manufacturing, see NPL documents for citation), Intano et al. (Thermal investigation of cell arrangements for cylindrical battery with forced air-cooling strategy, see NPL documents for citation) and Rabbers et al. (EP 3054523 A1, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claims 14 and 16, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 12, except “wherein each of the multiple batteries and each of the multiple sensing parts is cylindrical shaped, the multiple batteries are arranged in an array of rows and columns, and one of the multiple sensing parts is at an intersection of two adjacent rows and two adjacent columns of the array of the multiple batteries” (claim 14) and “wherein each of the multiple batteries is cylindrical shaped, each of the multiple sensing parts comprises a flat surface or a curved surface, and each of the multiple sensing parts is between two of the multiple batteries” (claim 16).
Das teachings are related to major and emerging joining techniques to support the wide range of joining requirements that exist during automotive battery pack manufacturing [Abstract]. It is taught that generally battery packs are assembled by connecting modules, comprising multiple cells generally connected in series and parallel together, with sensors and controllers within a housing structure [p. 1; par. 2]. Regarding cylindrical cells battery pack it is taught that cylindrical cells have better thermal management efficiency because of its small size, and because of it a large number of cells and connections compared with modules composed of pouch/prismatic cells are obtainable [p. 7; 3.1.1. Joining of Cylindrical Cell Based Battery Pack].
Regarding the “the multiple batteries are arranged in an array of rows and columns” feature, Intano teaches that the cell arrangement is one of the most crucial rules for designing an efficient cooling system of the lithium-ion battery pack in electric vehicles [Abstract]. It was found that the aligned arrangement of cylindrical cells (columns and rows) had a better cooling effectiveness and temperature uniformity, compared to a staggered configuration [p. 17; par. 2].
Rabbers teaches a storage device (10), which can be used, for example, as a battery for motor vehicles, comprising a plurality of cylindrical electrochemical energy storage cells (12) [0034, 0035 and Fig. 1]. On a second embodiment, a sensor (18) extends completely around the respective cell housing (14) in a circumferential direction [0043 and Fig. 2]. The sensor (18) is a co-deformation sensor with which excessive deformations of the respective cell housing (14) can be detected directly, before the respective cell housing (14) opens [0042]. Depending on the signal transmitted by the sensor (18) protective or countermeasures can then be initiated [0042].
Das is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely joining techniques for battery packs, generally comprising multiple cells connected in series and parallel together, with sensors and controllers within a housing structure.
Intano is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising an aligned arrangement of cylindrical cells (columns and rows).
Rabbers is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising at least one battery and at least one sensing part on the battery capable of detect deformation of a single battery cells and transmit a deformation signal, depending on which protective or countermeasures can then be initiated.
If the battery components (13) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore are modified to be cylindrical cells having an aligned arrangement (rows and columns) as taught by Das and Intano, and the monitoring sensing units (14) are modified to have the cylindrical shape of the sensor (18) taught by Rabbers, the claimed limitations of claims 14 and 16 are met.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery components (13) and the monitoring sensing units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitations “wherein each of the multiple batteries and each of the multiple sensing parts is cylindrical shaped, the multiple batteries are arranged in an array of rows and columns, and one of the multiple sensing parts is at an intersection of two adjacent rows and two adjacent columns of the array of the multiple batteries” (claim 14) and “wherein each of the multiple batteries is cylindrical shaped, each of the multiple sensing parts comprises a flat surface or a curved surface, and each of the multiple sensing parts is between two of the multiple batteries” (claim 16), because Das teaches that cylindrical cells have better thermal management efficiency because of its small size, and because of it a large number of cells and connections compared with modules composed of pouch/prismatic cells are obtainable, Intano teaches that the aligned arrangement of cylindrical cells (columns and rows) had a better cooling effectiveness and temperature uniformity, compared to a staggered configuration and Rabbers teaches that having a sensor with the above shape excessive deformations of the respective cell housing can be detected directly, before the respective cell housing opens.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 12 above, further in view of Yan et al. (Stretchable Micromotion Sensor with Enhanced Sensitivity Using Serpentine Layout, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 15, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 12, except wherein “wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is a mesh with a plurality of holes, and each of the plurality of holes is configured to receive at least one of the multiple batteries”.
Yan teachings are related to enhancement strategies for piezoelectric micromotion sensors used to detect tiny movements of the human body [p. 12262; col. 1; par. 2]. It is taught that by patterning the film to form a mesh layout consisting of serpentine unit cells, desired stretchability can be obtained for the piezoelectric film, which possesses high performance but is intrinsically hard-to-stretch [p. 12262; col. 1; par. 2].
Yan can be considered analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric micromotion sensors. Despite its work is directed to tiny movements detection of the human body, the working principle is applicable to battery systems sensors as claimed in this invention.
If the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore are modified to have a mesh shape as taught by Yan, the limitation “wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is a mesh with a plurality of holes” will be met. Because from Hinterberger teachings the monitoring units (14) are attached to the battery components (13), the limitation wherein “each of the plurality of holes is configured to receive at least one of the multiple batteries” would be met as well.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore to meet the limitations wherein “wherein each of the multiple sensing parts is a mesh with a plurality of holes”, because Yan teaches that by patterning the film to form a mesh layout consisting of serpentine unit cells, desired stretchability can be obtained for the piezoelectric film, which possesses high performance but is intrinsically hard-to-stretch.
Claims 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterberger et al. (DE 102019212909 A1, see machina translation for citation) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102020110067 A1, see machine translation for citation) evidenced by Whatmore, R. W. (Piezoelectric and pyroelectric materials and their applications, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 17, Hinterberger teaches a motor vehicle (10) equipped with a battery system (11) comprising several batteries (13), which may be battery modules with several battery cells each or individual battery cells [0032, 0033 and Fig. 1]. Each battery component (13) may have a monitoring unit (14) including at least one sensor for measuring values related to a state of the battery component (13) [0034 and Fig. 1]. In at least one embodiment the at least one monitoring unit (14) of each of the battery components (13) generates a respective monitoring signal which may be related to at least one of the following operating variables: electrical voltage, electrical current, a temperature and an internal resistance [0025]. A computing device (15) is connected to the monitoring units (14) and is able to receive a signal (17) transmitted from them and detect whether one of the battery components (13) has a fault. [0035, 0036 and Fig. 1]. By means of a predetermined correlation-based classification method (18), based on a respective time course (22) of some or all of the monitoring signals (17), an expected corridor within which the respective monitoring value must lie in the absence of the fault is specified [claim 1]. When one monitoring value deviates from the determined expected corridor, an error signal (31) is generated, which signals that a battery component (13) has a fault [claim 1].
From the above teachings the computing device (15) is able to determine whether a single battery component (13) has a fault, therefore it is able to “a position of each of multiple sensing parts” and “determining a position of a deformed battery among the multiple adjacent batteries based on a position of a sensing part generated the deformation sensing signal”.
Hinterberger does not teach the features “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”.
Schmidt teaches an electrical energy storage device (10) (battery assembly) having a housing (14) and containing at least two battery cells (18) on its interior (16) [0023 and Fig. 1]. The electrical energy storage device (10) (battery assembly) has at least one sensor device (24) [0025 and Fig. 1]. The sensor device (24) has at least one pyroelectric sensor (26) and an electronic computing device (28). The pyroelectric sensor (26) is arranged on the housing (14) and it can detect a temperature change in the interior (16) and/or a brightness change as a parameter change (30), which may be the result of a fire or an electrical breakdown [0027]. From the previous description the pyroelectric sensor (26) is able to detect deformation and temperature of the monitored batteries (18). The electronic computing device (28) (alarm module) is designed to detect a thermal runaway (22) only when a predetermined parameter change (30) threshold is exceeded and issue a warning signal [0028]. From the previous descriptions the feature wherein the pyroelectric sensor (26) generates a “generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties” and wherein it is electrically connected to the electronic computing device (28) are implicit. Schmidt teaches as an advantage of pyroelectric sensors that it has very high sensitivity and implicitly detects rapid and inhomogeneous changes [0010].
Whatmore evidence that piezoelectricity is the release of electric charge under the application of mechanical stress and pyroelectricity is the release of charge due to a material's change of temperature. It is further evidence that all pyroelectric materials are piezoelectric [p. 283; Introduction], therefore a pyroelectric material possesses piezoelectric properties.
From the above teachings and evidence, if the pyroelectric sensor (26) of Schmidt is selected as the “at least one sensor” on the monitoring units (14) of Hinterberger, because it will have both piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties as evidenced by Whatmore, the limitation wherein “the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties” will be met. Additionally, because of the above reasons, the computing device (15) of Hinterberger will be analogous to the claimed “alarm module”.
Hinterberger is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising: at least one battery; at least one sensing part on the battery, able to monitor values related to a state of the battery component and transmit the monitored value signals to a computing device (electrically connected), which when one monitoring value deviates from the determined expected corridor, generates an error signal.
Schmidt is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery assembly comprising: at least one battery; at least one sensing part on the battery, wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties; and an alarm module electrically connected to the at least one sensing part, wherein the alarm module is configured to issue an alarm in response to the deformation sensing signal exceeding a threshold.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the “several batteries (13) and monitoring units (14) including at least one sensor” disclosed by Hinterberger because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obvious. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the monitoring units (14) including at least one sensor of Hinterberger by the pyroelectric sensor (26) of Schmidt in order to meet the feature “wherein the at least one sensing part is made of a piezoelectric material having piezoelectric properties and pyroelectric properties, the at least one sensing part is configured to generate a deformation sensing signal corresponding to a deformation of the at least one battery based on the piezoelectric properties, and generate a temperature monitoring signal corresponding to a temperature of the at least one battery based on the pyroelectric properties”, because Schmidt teaches the employment of a pyroelectric sensor which has very high sensitivity and implicitly detects rapid and inhomogeneous changes, and Whatmore evidence that all pyroelectric materials are piezoelectric, therefore a pyroelectric material possesses piezoelectric properties.
Regarding claim 20, Hinterberger, Schmidt and Whatmore teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 17. From claim 17 discussion, the claimed limitation is met.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 GILBERTO RAMOS RIVERA whose telephone number is (571) 272-2740. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 pm.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/G.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights