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 .
Claim Objections
2. Claims 1 and 11-20 objected to because of the following informalities: a) In claim 1 line 1, please change "A system for dynamic control and optimization of secondary battery cell finishing process" to --A system for dynamic control and optimization of a secondary battery cell finishing process--.
b) In claim 11 lines 1, please change "A system for feedback alert and/or control of secondary battery cell finishing process" to --A system for feedback alert and/or control of a secondary battery cell finishing process--. c) Two claims are both designated as claim 11. Please correct the second instance of claim 11 from: "11. The system of claim 10 wherein deviations can be characterized" to
--12. The system of claim 11 wherein deviations can be characterized--.
c) Because of the misnumbering of claim 11, the subsequent originally presented claims from 12-20 should be corrected to 13-21 respectively. In addition, any claim dependencies should also be incremented by one to reflect the updated numbering.
d) In originally printed claim 16 line 1, please change "A system for feedforward alert and/or control of lithium-ion battery cell finishing process" to --A system for feedforward alert and/or control of a lithium-ion battery cell finishing process--.
e) In originally printed claim 16 lines 2-4, please change:
"which comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured to process real-time in-line manufacturing data (i) process real-time in-line manufacturing data" to:
--which comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured to: (i) process real-time in-line manufacturing data--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
In view of the new 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 4, January 7, 2019), the Examiner has considered the claims and has determined that under step 1, claims 1-20 (including duplicated claim 11) are to a machine. Next under the new step 2A prong 1 analysis, the claims are considered to determine if they recite an abstract idea (judicial exception) under the following groupings: (a) mathematical concepts, (b) certain methods of organizing human activity, or (c) mental processes. The independent claims contain at least the following bolded limitations (see representative independent claims) that fall into the grouping of mathematical concepts and/or mental processes:
1. A system for dynamic control and optimization of secondary battery cell finishing process that comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured to process real-time in-line manufacturing data derived from at least one of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), self-discharge analysis (SDA), amperometric, or potentiometric battery measurements.
11. A system for feedback alert and/or control of secondary battery cell finishing process that comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured to:
(i) process real-time in-line manufacturing data from charge/discharge functions, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements, self-discharge analysis measurements (SDA), amperometric measurements, and/or potentiometric measurements,
(ii) identify deviations of battery performance from a norm, and
(iii) identify historical battery manufacturing operation conditions that potentially contribute to battery performance deviations from that norm.
16. A system for feedforward alert and/or control of lithium-ion battery cell finishing process which comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured to process real-time in-line manufacturing data
(i) process real-time in-line manufacturing data from charge/discharge functions, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements, self-discharge analysis measurements (SDA), amperometric measurements, and/or potentiometric measurements, and
(ii) identify deviations of battery performance from a norm, and
(iii) identify post operation(s) material for similar attributes for potential contributions from that norm for laboratory analysis and/or sequestering.
It is important to note that a mathematical concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula."(see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) I.). Thus, the limitation of "that is configured to process real-time in-line manufacturing data" could describe an abstract mental process to evaluate or analyze numerical manufacturing data, or it could describe in words an abstract mathematical processing of manufacturing data. The limitations of "identify deviations of battery performance from a norm" amount to a mental process to compare data, and could be performed mentally by a person evaluating between two sets of data. The limitations of "identify post operation(s) material for similar attributes for potential contributions from that norm for laboratory analysis and/or sequestering" amounts to a mental process to evaluate and recognize/categorize additional data, and/or a comparison analysis to identify similarities among attributes. At least in step 2A prong 1, it is clear that there is some recitation of an abstract idea in the processing and comparison analysis of numerical data values.
Next in step 2A prong 2, the independent claims are analyzed to determine whether there are additional elements or combination of elements that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception, in order to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. These limitations have been identified and underlined above, and are not indicative of integration into a practical application because: (1) the recitation of a system that comprises a closed-loop process control module amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)); (2) the recitation of "for dynamic control and optimization of secondary battery cell finishing process", or "for feedback alert and/or control of secondary battery cell finishing process," or "for feedforward alert and/or control of lithium-ion battery cell finishing process" amount to generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)); and (3) the recitation of data derived from at least one of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), self-discharge analysis (SDA), amperometric, or potentiometric battery measurements, amount to adding insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity to the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Next in step 2B, the independent claims are considered to determine if they recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (“significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception. The recitation of a system comprising a closed-loop process control module does not add significantly more because such recitations amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The general recitation of a system for dynamic control and optimization of secondary battery cell finishing process, or the system for feedback alert and/or control of secondary battery cell finishing process, or the system for feedforward alert and/or control of lithium-ion battery cell finishing process, amount to generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)), which does not add significantly more, especially when the details of the control and optimization are not described (as the control and optimization could, for instance, be merely an update to an abstract mental plan/strategy). The recitation of data derived from at least one of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), self-discharge analysis (SDA), amperometric, or potentiometric battery measurements, does not add something significantly more, as such limitations amount to adding insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity to the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(g)), and do not describe any gathering of data in an unconventional way.
Dependent claim 2 and 6 contain additional limitations that amounts to details of the insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity to the judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(g). Dependent claims 5-7, 9-10, and 16 describe insignificant post-solution outputting activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)), as the data is merely presented in visual/alert format at various endpoints as output which does not change the character of the presented data as abstract information. Dependent claims 11-15 and 17-20 describe additional abstract idea mental processes or mathematical calculations to manipulate numerical data as part of the identified judicial exception.
4. An invention is not rendered ineligible for patent simply because it involves an abstract concept. Applications of such concepts "to a new and useful end" remain eligible for patent protection (see Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2354 (quoting Benson, 409 U.S. at 67)). However, "a claim for a new abstract idea is still an abstract idea" (see Synopsys v. Mentor Graphics Corp. _F.3d_, 120 U.S.P.Q. 2d1473 (Fed. Cir. 2016)). There needs to be additional elements or combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception or render the claim as a whole to be significantly more than the exception itself in order to demonstrate “integration into a practical application” or an “inventive concept.” For instance, particular physical arrangements for actively obtaining the sensor data, or further physical applications using the processed data to provide a change in operation, transformation, or repair/maintenance of a technical component or process could provide integration into a practical application to demonstrate an improvement to the technology or technical field. Dependent claim 3 contains patent eligible subject matter because sufficient detail is described regarding controlling the EIS measurement device and/or the SDA measurement device to execute a set of pre-configured charge/discharge protocols (which clearly describes an integration into a physical practical application beyond a mere data-based result). Dependent claim 4 contains patent eligible subject matter because sufficient detail is described regarding directing the battery charging and discharging device to either execute, terminate or implement alternate charge/discharge procedures, which is also an integration into a practical application. Dependent claim 8 contains patent eligible subject matter because sufficient detail is described regarding directing an automated storage and retrieval system and/or autonomous mobile robot to physically transport individual cells between formation, aging and/or sorting stations as an integration into a practical application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9 and originally printed claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
a) Claim 9 lines 1-2 recites the limitation "The system of claim 6 where the MES and/or DCS includes a human-machine interface (HMI) and data from the MES and/or DCS is displayed." There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation of "the MES and/or DCS," as there is no previous teaching in claims 1 and 5-6 (on which claim 9 depends from) for any "MES" or "DCS," making it unclear what these terms are referring to. Appropriate correction is required.
b) Originally printed claim 16 lines 8-9 recites "identify post operation(s) material for similar attributes for potential contributions from that norm for laboratory analysis and/or sequestering." The term "for potential contributions from that norm" is indefinite, as it is unclear what "contributions" are referring to and how contributions are taken "from" a norm. Perhaps the claim meant to say instead "for potential contributions to the deviations from that norm," which would make more sense as material attributes may contribute to deviations from the norm (as this is the interpretation taken by the Examiner). Or is the claim referring to the material's attributes contributing "to" (and not from) the value of the norm? Appropriate correction/clarification is requested.
Dependent claims 17-20 depend from claim 16 and are rejected for at least the same reasons as given for claim 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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 nonobviousness.
8. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballantine et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2019/0317152, hereinafter "Ballantine"), and further as modified by Fauteux et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2021/0257840, hereinafter "Fauteux").
In regards to claim 1, Ballantine teaches a system for dynamic control and optimization of secondary battery cell (Ballantine paragraph [0003] teaches a system for control of charging and safety of batteries based on an analysis of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) performed on the battery, and Ballantine paragraph [0137] teaches where the analysis of EIS data occurs in real-time to implement dynamic action control) that comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured to process real-time manufacturing data (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 712 and paragraphs [0075] and [0159] teach a battery fail module as a process control module that processes EIS test response waveforms (manufacturing data) as feedback (in a closed-loop process) for implementing a battery protection action; Ballantine paragraph [0137] teaches where the EIS test attributes are observed in real-time) derived from at least one of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), self-discharge analysis (SDA), amperometric, or potentiometric battery measurements (Ballantine paragraph [0075] teaches where at least one of EIS manufacturing data is obtained from a EIS system battery tester circuit). Ballantine fails to expressly teach a battery cell "finishing process," or "in-line" manufacturing data.
Fauteux paragraph [0026] teaches carrying out testing of one or more voltage characteristics, impedance characteristics, or current characteristics associated with a plurality of batteries in a manufacturing line, such as after an aging process. Fauteux paragraph [0028] teaches where the battery cell parameters measured in-line during manufacturing are verified by comparison to a threshold, and Fauteux paragraph [0029] teaches where such a verification serves as a type of finishing process to clear "passed" batteries for packaging and shipping, while discarding or recycling batteries that fail to meet one or more verification operations.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux in order to define an appropriate testing environment such as a battery manufacturing line for implementing the EIS inspection process as described in Ballantine. Therefore, it would be beneficial to obtain in-line manufacturing data such as EIS measurements in order to verify battery cell parameters for finishing a battery, in order to properly discard batteries that fail to meet a quality verification standard.
In regards to claim 2, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the battery measurements comprise process parameters that are selected from the group consisting of ohmic resistance RΩ, charge transfer resistance Rct, leakage current Ileak, open circuit voltage (OCV), voltage drop (ΔV), and combinations thereof (Ballantine paragraph [0028]).
In regards to claim 3, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the system comprises an EIS measurement device that is operatively connected to secondary batteries and/or a SDA measurement device that is operatively connected to secondary batteries (Ballantine Fig. 7 and paragraph [0075] teaches a EIS system battery tester circuit operatively connected to secondary batteries), wherein the closed-loop process control module is configured to compare real-time process parameters against a set of selected process parameter values and to direct the EIS measurement device and/or the SDA measurement device to execute a set of pre-configured charge/discharge protocols to bring the battery measurements closer to desired target values (Ballantine abstract, paragraph [0003], paragraph [0040], and paragraph [0150] teach comparing the EIS measured parameters against a set of historical process parameters, and upon detecting a poor performance event, implementing a charging/discharging protocol to bring the battery measurements closer to the desired target safety values).
Ballantine fails to expressly teach "in-line" process parameters.
Fauteux paragraph [0026] teaches carrying out testing of one or more voltage characteristics, impedance characteristics, or current characteristics associated with a plurality of batteries in a manufacturing line, such as after an aging process. Fauteux paragraph [0028] teaches where the battery cell parameters measured in-line during manufacturing are verified by comparison to a threshold, and Fauteux paragraph [0029] teaches where such a verification serves as a type of finishing process to clear "passed" batteries for packaging and shipping, while discarding or recycling batteries that fail to meet one or more verification operations.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux in order to define an appropriate testing environment such as a battery manufacturing line for implementing the EIS inspection process as described in Ballantine. Therefore, it would be beneficial to obtain in-line process parameter data such as EIS measurements in order to verify battery cell parameters for finishing a battery, in order to properly discard batteries that fail to meet a quality verification standard.
In regards to claim 4, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the system comprises a battery charging and discharging device (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 730 and paragraph [0074]) and the closed-loop process control module (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 712) is configured to:
receive and analyze feedback data (Ballantine Fig. 7, paragraph [0075], and paragraph [0110] teach the battery fail module receiving and analyzing feedback response EIS waveforms),
determine deviations from desired target values (Ballantine abstract, paragraph [0003], paragraph [0040], paragraph [0110], and paragraph [0150] teach determining deviations from a target safety value threshold), and
based on deviations from the feedback, direct the battery charging and discharging device to either execute, terminate or implement alternate charge/discharge procedures (Ballantine abstract, paragraph [0003], paragraph [0040], and paragraph [0150] teaches directing the battery charging and discharging device to execute alternate charge/discharge procedures, or halt battery operation (terminate charging/discharging procedures)).
In regards to claim 5, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the closed-loop control module is operatively connected to a data analysis module that is configured to receive and process manufacturing data for analysis and presentation in visual format (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 744 and paragraph [0078] teach where the battery fail module (closed-loop control module) is operatively connected to a user device (data analysis module) that is configured to receive and process the in-line manufacturing measurements for analysis and presentation in visual format on a graphical user interface (GUI)).
Ballantine fails to expressly teach "in-line" manufacturing data.
Fauteux paragraph [0026] teaches carrying out testing of one or more voltage characteristics, impedance characteristics, or current characteristics associated with a plurality of batteries in a manufacturing line, such as after an aging process. Fauteux paragraph [0028] teaches where the battery cell parameters measured in-line during manufacturing are verified by comparison to a threshold, and Fauteux paragraph [0029] teaches where such a verification serves as a type of finishing process to clear "passed" batteries for packaging and shipping, while discarding or recycling batteries that fail to meet one or more verification operations.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux in order to define an appropriate testing environment such as a battery manufacturing line for implementing the EIS inspection process as described in Ballantine. Therefore, it would be beneficial to obtain in-line manufacturing data such as EIS measurements in order to verify battery cell parameters for finishing a battery, in order to properly discard batteries that fail to meet a quality verification standard.
In regards to claim 6, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the system comprises an EIS measurement device that is operatively connected to secondary batteries and/or a SDA measurement device that is operatively connected to secondary batteries (Ballantine Fig. 7 and paragraph [0075] teaches a EIS system battery tester circuit operatively connected to secondary batteries), and wherein the data analysis module comprises a processor (Ballantine paragraph [0074] teaches where the data analysis module comprises a laptop which has a processor) which is configured (i) to receive measurement data from the EIS measurement device and/or SDA measurement device (Ballantine Fig. 7 and paragraph [0075] teach receiving measurement data from the EIS battery tester circuit), (ii) to perform data processing and analysis using algorithms and extract performance assessment metrics, and present the metrics to a user interface (Ballantine paragraph [0078] and [0109] teach performing data analysis using an algorithm and extracting battery condition information (performance assessment metrics) which are presented to a user on the GUI).
In regards to claim 7, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the system comprises a communication module (Ballantine Fig. 7 paragraph 704) which is configured to transmit performance assessment metrics and adjusted process parameters to a remote server, manufacturing execution system (MES) and/or distributed control system (DCS) for monitoring and analysis (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 720 and paragraphs [0120] and [0151] teach sharing the performance metrics to a remote server within an EISA network).
In regards to claim 8, Ballantine teaches the system as explained in the rejection of claim 7 above. Ballantine fails to expressly teach wherein, based on performance assessment metrics and adjusted process parameter inputs received from the communication module, the MES and/or DCS directs an automated storage and retrieval system (AS/RS) and/or an autonomous mobile robot (AMR) to transport individual cells between formation, aging and/or sorting stations.
Fauteux Fig. 2 and paragraph [0021] teaches a controller 110 as a manufacturing execution system (MES) that initiates or controls operations of the manufacturing line, and paragraph [0022] teaches where the controller directs an automated storage and retrieval system using an automated conveyance system to transfer one or more of the batteries from one station to another station. Fauteux Fig. 2 teaches transfer from the formation station to the aging station to the sorting station on the manufacturing line. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux to specify the use of a controller as a manufacturing execution system (MES), as a central controller provides for monitoring and controlling operations of a manufacturing line including automated transfers between formation, aging, and sorting stations. Therefore, since Ballantine is interested in halting battery operation upon detecting performance metrics that indicate a poor performance event (see Ballantine paragraph [0003]), it would be beneficial to report such performance assessment metrics to a MES controller in order to provide improved control in allowing a battery to continue or not in a manufacturing line.
In regards to claim 9, Ballantine teaches the system as explained in the rejection of claim 6 above. Ballantine fails to expressly teach where the MES and/or DCS includes a human-machine interface (HMI) and data from the MES and/or DCS is displayed on the HMI to provide a centralized platform to visualize and control various processes, equipment, and systems employed in a manufacturing line for producing lithium-ion batteries. Fauteux Fig. 2 and paragraph [0021] teaches a controller 110 as a manufacturing execution system (MES) that initiates or controls operations of the manufacturing line. Fauteux Fig. 1, paragraph [0018], and paragraphs [0039]-[0040] teach where the controller includes a command interface (human-machine interface HMI) to provide a centralized platform to visualize and control the various processes via received commands. Fauteux paragraph [0017] teaches where the batteries manufactured include lithium-ion batteries.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux to specify the use of a controller as a manufacturing execution system (MES) having a human-machine command interface, in order to provide monitoring and control of the operations of the manufacturing line for batteries. Therefore, it would be beneficial to include such an interface to provide an input means for receiving commands to control the manufacturing of batteries, such as well-known lithium-ion batteries.
In regards to claim 10, Ballantine teaches the system of claim 1 as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above. Ballantine fails to expressly teach wherein the closed loop control module is configured to transmit in-line process information derived from formation and aging stations to a safety control system which provide advanced warning of premature cell failure. Fauteux Fig. 2 and paragraph [0026] teaches where in-line process information derived from the formation and aging stations by testing one or more of voltage characteristics, impedance characteristics, or current characteristics after completion of the one or more aging processes, is transmitted to the controller (also a safety control system) to indicate one or more cell deficiencies (warning of premature cell failure). Fauteux paragraphs [0028]-[0029] teach discarding or recycling the battery upon flagging batteries that fail to satisfy verification operations after aging.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux to specify transmitting in-line process information derived from formation and aging stations in order to determine cell deficiencies as a warning of premature cell failure after the aging process. Therefore, defective batteries can be identified by a safety control system controller to be appropriately discarded or recycled before continuing on the manufacturing line.
In regards to claim 11, Ballantine teaches a system for feedback alert and/or control of secondary battery cell (Ballantine paragraph [0003] teaches a system for feedback alert on a graphical user interface (GUI) and/or control of charging and safety of batteries based on an analysis of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) performed on the battery) that comprises a closed-loop process control module that is configured (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 712 and paragraph [0159] teaches a battery fail module as a process control module that processes EIS test results (manufacturing data) as feedback (in a closed-loop process) that is configured for implementing a battery protection action) to:
(i) process real-time manufacturing data from charge/discharge functions, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements, self-discharge analysis measurements (SDA), amperometric measurements, and/or potentiometric measurements (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 712 and paragraphs [0075] and [0159] teach processing EIS test response waveforms (manufacturing data) as feedback for implementing a battery protection action; Ballantine paragraph [0137] teaches where the EIS test attributes are observed in real-time),
(ii) identify deviations of battery performance from a norm (Ballantine abstract and paragraph [0029] teach identifying deviations of the battery performance from a safety threshold norm), and
(iii) identify historical battery manufacturing operation conditions that potentially contribute to battery performance deviations from that norm (Ballantine abstract, paragraph [0029], and paragraph [0121] teach identifying known signatures of impedance responses of batteries with known characteristics (historical battery manufacturing operation conditions) that contribute to deviations from the threshold norm).
Ballantine fails to expressly teach a battery cell "finishing process," or "in-line" manufacturing data.
Fauteux paragraph [0026] teaches carrying out testing of one or more voltage characteristics, impedance characteristics, or current characteristics associated with a plurality of batteries in a manufacturing line, such as after an aging process. Fauteux paragraph [0028] teaches where the battery cell parameters measured in-line during manufacturing are verified by comparison to a threshold, and Fauteux paragraph [0029] teaches where such a verification serves as a type of finishing process to clear "passed" batteries for packaging and shipping, while discarding or recycling batteries that fail to meet one or more verification operations.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux in order to define an appropriate testing environment such as a battery manufacturing line for implementing the EIS inspection process as described in Ballantine. Therefore, it would be beneficial to obtain in-line manufacturing data such as EIS measurements in order to verify battery cell parameters for finishing a battery, in order to properly discard batteries that fail to meet a quality verification standard.
In regards to claim 11 (duplicate numbering), Ballantine teaches the system wherein deviations can be characterized as being better or worse than the norm (Ballantine Fig. 13 and paragraphs [0116]-[0118] teach where deviations can be scored to be better or worse than the norm, such a difference frequency as a percentage score being lower (0-2%) or higher (5-10%) than a normal 2-5% condition).
In regards to claim 12, Ballantine teaches the system wherein deviations are determined from at least one of: (i) statistical analysis of the process parameters, (ii) rate-of change comparison, (iii) application of parameter limits, (iv) data extraction (dQ/dV), (v) machine learning, and (vi) artificial intelligence (Ballantine paragraphs [0116]-[0117] teach determining the deviations by at least one of a statistical analysis of a percentage of differences between the EIS test waveform and the response waveforms).
In regards to claim 13, Ballantine teaches the system wherein historical data of the material components used in the batteries and process parameters employed in fabricating the batteries are evaluated to determine their contributions to performance deviations (Ballantine paragraphs [0029] and [0040] teach where known historical signatures of impedance response with known characteristics regarding material components and process parameters, such as buildup of non-conductive compounds on the anode or cathode or dendritic breakdown of the electrolyte, are evaluated to determine their contributions to the performance deviations).
In regards to claim 14, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the control module is configured to automatically adjust production parameters in the finishing process to reduce performance deviations (Ballantine paragraph [0029] teaches automatically adjusting a parameter setting of the electrochemical device to reduce performance deviations).
In regards to claim 15, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the control module is configured to issue automatic alerts (Ballantine paragraph [0149] teaches issuing an alarm (alert) when a problem persists and rises to an alarm level) and/or sequester battery components for additional evaluation (Ballantine paragraph [0040] teaches isolating (sequestering) battery components for additional evaluation to prevent failure).
In regards to claim 16, Ballantine teaches a system for feedforward alert and/or control of battery cell (Ballantine paragraph [0003] teaches a system for feedforward of a notification alert to a user and control of charging and safety of of batteries based on an analysis of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) performed on the battery) which comprises a closed-loop process control module (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 712 and paragraph [0159] teaches a battery fail module as a process control module that processes EIS test results (manufacturing data) as feedback (in a closed-loop process) that is configured for implementing a battery protection action) that is configured to process real-time manufacturing data
(i) process real-time manufacturing data from charge/discharge functions, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements, self-discharge analysis measurements (SDA), amperometric measurements, and/or potentiometric measurements (Ballantine Fig. 7 Item 712 and paragraphs [0075] and [0159] teach processing EIS test response waveforms (manufacturing data) as feedback for implementing a battery protection action; Ballantine paragraph [0137] teaches where the EIS test attributes are observed in real-time), and
(ii) identify deviations of battery performance from a norm (Ballantine abstract and paragraph [0029] teach identifying deviations of the battery performance from a safety threshold norm), and
(iii) identify post operation(s) material for similar attributes for potential contributions from that norm for laboratory analysis and/or sequestering (Ballantine abstract, paragraph [0029], and paragraph [0040] teach identifying correlations to post operation materials such as cathode or anode degradation, dendritic degradation of the electrolyte, or chemical breakdown of the electrolyte for similar attributes for potential contributions that cause differing from the norm, in order to implement isolating (sequestering) the battery).
Ballantine fails to expressly teach a "lithium-ion" battery cell "finishing process," or "in-line" manufacturing data.
Fauteux paragraph [0026] teaches carrying out testing of one or more voltage characteristics, impedance characteristics, or current characteristics associated with a plurality of batteries in a manufacturing line, such as after an aging process. Fauteux paragraph [0028] teaches where the battery cell parameters measured in-line during manufacturing are verified by comparison to a threshold, and Fauteux paragraph [0029] teaches where such a verification serves as a type of finishing process to clear "passed" batteries for packaging and shipping, while discarding or recycling batteries that fail to meet one or more verification operations. Fauteux paragraph [0017] teaches where the batteries manufactured include lithium-ion batteries.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Fauteux in order to define an appropriate testing environment such as a lithium-ion battery manufacturing line for implementing the EIS inspection process as described in Ballantine. Therefore, it would be beneficial to obtain in-line manufacturing data such as EIS measurements in order to verify battery cell parameters for finishing a lithium-ion battery, in order to properly discard batteries that fail to meet a quality verification standard.
In regards to claim 17, Ballantine teaches the system wherein deviations can be characterized as being better or worse than the norm (Ballantine Fig. 13 and paragraphs [0116]-[0118] teach where deviations can be scored to be better or worse than the norm, such a difference frequency as a percentage score being lower (0-2%) or higher (5-10%) than a normal 2-5% condition).
In regards to claim 18, Ballantine teaches the system wherein deviations are determined from at least one of: (i) statistical analysis of the process parameters, (ii) rate-of change comparison, (iii) application of parameter limits, (iv) data extraction (dQ/dV), (v) machine learning, and (vi) artificial intelligence (Ballantine paragraphs [0116]-[0117] teach determining the deviations by at least one of a statistical analysis of a percentage of differences between the EIS test waveform and the response waveforms).
In regards to claim 19, Ballantine teaches the system wherein historical data of the material components used in the secondary batteries and process parameters employed in fabricating the batteries are evaluated to determine their contributions to performance deviations (Ballantine paragraphs [0029] and [0040] teach where known historical signatures of impedance response with known characteristics regarding material components and process parameters, such as buildup of non-conductive compounds on the anode or cathode or dendritic breakdown of the electrolyte, are evaluated to determine their contributions to the performance deviations).
In regards to claim 20, Ballantine teaches the system wherein the control module is configured to automatically adjust production parameters in the finishing process to reduce performance deviations (Ballantine paragraph [0029] teaches automatically adjusting a parameter setting of the electrochemical device to reduce performance deviations).
Pertinent Art
9. Applicants are directed to consider additional pertinent prior art included on the Notice of References Cited (PTOL 892) attached herewith. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
B. Pressgrove et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2023/0258736) discloses Interconnect Resistance Compensation for Cell Voltage Measurements Under High Current Conditions. C. Keene et al. (US Pat Pub. 2022/0283243) discloses Method and System for Key Predictors and Machine Learning for Configuring Cell Performance. D. Klee et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0029432) discloses Method for Detecting Electrical Fault States of at Least One Removable Battery Pack and/or an Electrical Device That Can be Connected to the at Least One Removable Battery Pack, and System for Carrying Out the Method. E. Ghantous et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0317199) discloses Battery Adaptive Charging Using a Battery Model.
F. Huh et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2023/0160967) discloses Inspection Equipment for Inspecting Secondary Battery Cell. G. Christophersen (US Pat. No. 11,422,102) discloses Multispectral Impedance Measurements Across Strings of Interconnected Cells.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1598. The examiner can normally be reached on M to F, 9:30 am to 6 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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at 571-272-2619. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL D LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 12/23/2025