DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed 08/27/2024 hasbeen placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings received 04/03/2023 and 06/30/2023 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II claims 10-23 in the reply filed on 11/14/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims Status.
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/14/2025. Claims 1-23 were pending. Claims 1-23 are now pending. Claims 1-9 are withdrawn from further examination as being drawn to non-elected invention (see above) Claims 10-23 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2021/0301630 to Krippner (Krippner) in view of US 20160226081 to Navarro (Navarro)
Regarding claim 10, Krippner a method of operating a battery monitoring system (para 120) , comprising: during downhole (para 69) drilling operations (para 108), taking health measurements with a health sensor of the battery monitoring system corresponding to a health condition of a battery (para 90) operatively connected to a downhole tool (para 96); recording the health measurements with an electronic module of the battery monitoring system; and communicating the health measurements recorded by the electronic module such that a health condition of the battery can be determined (para 96). Krippner does not expressly disclose wherein the battery monitoring system being contained within a housing of the battery secured to the downhole tool.
Navarro teaches a battery cell housing and control system control system for use various applications, including downhole environments (Abstract). Navarro also teaches that said system is disposed in the housing attached to downhole tool (Claims 10, 11). Therefore such structural design is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to dispose the battery monitoring system of Krippner in the housing of the battery secured to the downhole tool as taught by Navarro The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results such as avoiding losing power due to resistance of wiring connectors See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, A.).
Regarding claim 11, modified Krippner discloses temperature (Krippner para 50, para 96)
Regarding claim 12, modified Krippner discloses wherein the health measurements correspond to one or more of a shock experienced by the battery and a vibration experienced by the battery (Navarro, para 40, claim 10).
Regarding claim 13, modified Krippner discloses wherein the health condition corresponds to a capacity for the battery to be reused in a subsequent drilling operation; and indicating the health condition (para 96).
Regarding claim 14, modified Krippner discloses wherein recording the health measurements includes periodically recording the health measurements based on a health measurement taken by the health sensor exceeding a threshold (predetermined) value (Krippner, para 107).
Regarding claim 15, modified Krippner discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 14 and incorporated therein. Modified Krippner does not expressly disclose wherein the health measurement exceeding a threshold value is a temperature experienced by the battery exceeding 135 °C. However, since, the battery management system disclosed by modified Krippner is controlled by the programmable device fully capable of being programmed as needed, including the temperature threshold depending on properties of drilled material, speed of bore, weather condition, in its turn, is fully capable of performing the claimed step as obvious design choice based on routine experimentations.
Regarding claim 17, modified Krippner discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 10 and incorporated therein including the electronic device comprising database collecting health information. Modified Krippner does not expressly disclose wherein the electronic device is datalogger, however since the criticality of the electronic device being datalogger - a position claimed by Applicant is not supported by any showing of criticality of such placement in the instant specification, nor did Applicant stated that such placement serves any specific purpose or performs any specific function other that the function disclosed in modified Knipper, it would have been obvious top those skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the datalogger as an obvious design choice, and as such it does not impact the patentability of claim 17.
Claims 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2021/0301630 to Krippner in view of US 20160226081 to Navarro and further in view of US 20230087283 to Liu (Liu).
Regarding claim 16, modified Krippner discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 10 and incorporated therein including the electronic device comprising database collecting health information of health measurements (para 67). Modified Krippner does not expressly disclose wherein communicating the health measurements includes communicating the health measurements wirelessly.
Lui teaches dynamic sensor data collection, wherein input or output data can be collected wirelessly (para 35), characterizing an operational state of the battery unit. (Abstract).It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery monitoring system of modified Krippner with the wireless as taught by Lui The use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Claims 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2021/0301630 to Krippner in view of US 20160226081 to Navarro and further in view of US 2016/0241053 to Erbos (Erbos).
Regarding claim 10, Krippner a method of operating a battery monitoring system (para 120), in the active state: taking health measurements corresponding to a health condition of the battery; and communicating one or more signals corresponding to the health measurements such that the health condition may be determined (para 90,96). Krippner does not expressly disclose Krippner does not expressly disclose wherein the battery monitoring system being contained within a housing of the battery secured to the downhole tool.
Navarro teaches a battery cell housing and control system control system for use various applications, including downhole environments (Abstract). Navarro also teaches that said system is disposed in the housing attached to downhole tool (Claims 10, 11). Therefore such structural design is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to dispose the battery monitoring system of Krippner in the housing of the battery secured to the downhole tool as taught by Navarro The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results such as avoiding losing power due to resistance of wiring connectors See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, A). Modified Krippner does not expressly disclose a step comprising operating the battery monitoring system in a sleep state, while in the sleep state, monitoring, with one or more sensors of the battery monitoring system, for a trigger event associated with a downhole drilling operation of the downhole tool; based on detecting the trigger event, waking the battery monitoring system to an active state.
Erbos teaches an improved downhole battery control, monitoring, and management system is described wherein battery pack parameters can be measured and used to determine optimal and efficient battery usage scenarios for a downhole measurement system (Abstract). In addition, Erbos teaches monitoring system in a sleep state, while in the sleep state, monitoring, with one or more sensors of the battery monitoring system (para 37), for a trigger event associated with a downhole drilling operation of the downhole tool; based on detecting the trigger event, waking the battery monitoring system to an active state (para 22, 37, claim 18).
Regarding claim 19, modified Krippner (Krippner in view of Navarro and further in view of Erbos) a shock experienced by the battery and a vibration experienced by the battery (Navarro, para 40, claim 10).
Regarding claim 20, modified Krippner discloses wherein the battery monitoring system is powered by the battery (Erbos, Abstract).
Regarding claims 21 and 22, modified Krippner discloses wherein the battery monitoring system monitors current draw (Erbos, para 24) , but does not expressly wherein the in sleep state battery operates at less than 1 mA of current draw and at no more at 5 mA in the active state. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to optimize the power draw at the sleep state and at the active state, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233(MPEP 2144.05 (II-A)).
Regarding claim 23, modified Krippner discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 18 and incorporated therein. Modified Krippner does not expressly disclose operating in a deep sleep state, wherein the deep sleep state corresponds to one or more of a manufacturing, a shipping, and a storage of the battery, and wherein in the deep sleep state the battery monitoring system will not monitor for the trigger event. However, since, disclosed by the battery monitoring system is controlled by the programmable device fully capable of being programmed as needed, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to exclude the step of monitoring for trigger event since battery is not connected to downhole tool and such no reason to increase power draw during a manufacturing, a shipping, and a storage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER USYATINSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7703. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/Alexander Usyatinsky/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751