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
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-8, and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. KR2022/0063611, as evidenced by Kim et al. USPG Pub. No.: US 2023/0375449, in further view of Biswas et al. USPG Pub. No.: US 2018/0123189.
Regarding Claim 1, Kim teaches a battery test apparatus for testing a swelling force of a battery housing (see figure 2),
wherein the battery test apparatus comprises:
equivalent end plates (see figure 2, 60, which are buffer pads that qualify as endplates as they are plate-shaped and at the ends of the battery portions 20), wherein two of the equivalent end plates are spaced apart along a first direction (seen in figure 2); and
a retractable structure (figure 2, the flexible tube 31) arranged between the two of the equivalent end plates and retractable along the first direction so that the retractable structure is able to compress and move the equivalent end plates (see figure 2 and [0032] which describes the expansion and contraction of the flexible tube casing 31, which moves the buffer pads and the housing such that sensors 70 detect a change in displacement along a first direction) along the first direction.
wherein the retractable structure comprises an actuator (see [0032] and figure 5, in which the transmission fluid in the tube casing 31 can broadly be considered the actuator) and a transmission structure (see figure 5, in which the outer casing of the retractable part that expands and contracts is the transmission structure) arranged in sequence along the first direction (seen in figure 5), and the actuator drives the transmission structure to reciprocate along the first direction (see in figure 5 and [0032] in which reciprocation occurs as fluid expands and contracts the tube along the x axis, as seen in figure 5).
Although Kim is silent in explicitly teaching a drive form of the actuator is gear drive or electromagnetic drive, Biswas teaches a drive form of the actuator is gear drive or electromagnetic drive (see Biswas [0053] and figure 2D, which discusses electromagnetic solenoids as an alternate means of adjusting pressure that allows for precise testing when in conjunction with adequate sensors). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the teachings of Kim with those of Biswas in order to conduct precise testing (as discussed in Biswas [0053]).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim and Biswas teach the battery test apparatus according to claim 2, wherein two such transmission structures are connected to two ends of the actuator along the first direction so that the actuator is able to drive the two transmission structures to reciprocate along the first direction (seen in Kim figure 5 in which multiple transmission structures 32 exist and operate simultaneously).
Regarding Claim 4, Kim and Biswas teach the battery test apparatus according to claim 2, wherein an end of the transmission structure away from the actuator is connected with a push plate, and the push plate is configured to push the equivalent end plate (as seen in Kim figure 2).
Regarding Claim 5, Kim and Biswas teach the battery test apparatus according to claim 4, wherein an area of a cross- section of the push plate perpendicular to the first direction is greater than an area of a cross-section of the transmission structure perpendicular to the first direction (as seen in Kim figure 2).
Regarding Claim 6, Kim and Biswas teach the battery test apparatus according to claim 4, wherein a center of the push plate and centers of the equivalent end plates are in a straight line extending along the first direction (as seen in Kim figure 2).
Regarding Claim 7, Kim and Biswas teach the battery test apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the retractable structure further comprises: a pressure sensor arranged between the transmission structure and the push plate, to collect pressure information fed back from the push plate (see Kim figure 2 and [0042], 70 which is the pressure sensor between the transmission structure and the push plate that collects pressure information).
Regarding Claim 8, Kim and Biswas teach the battery test apparatus according to claim 7, wherein a center of the pressure sensor and a center of the push plate are in a straight line extending along the first direction (seen in Kim figure 2).
Regarding Claim 10, Kim and Biswas teach teach a test method comprising:
placing the battery test apparatus according to claim 1 in a battery housing under test (refer to the rejection of claim 1);
starting the retractable structure to make the retractable part extend and deform along the first direction and compress the equivalent end plates (see Kim [0042]-[0043] and figure 2 in which displacement sensors 70 detect the retractable parts expansion as a force on the end plates);
controlling the retractable structure so that the retractable structure retracts and deforms along the first direction (seen in Kim figure 2); and
stopping the retractable structure after the retractable structure has reciprocally compressed the equivalent end plates N times and checking whether there is any crack on the surface of the battery housing under test, wherein N > 0 (see Kim [0007], which discusses the device as a fatigue verification device and see the title of the reference “Apparatus for Inspecting Fatigue Fracture of Housing Welding Part of Battery Module”, which indicates the method of crack inspection associated with the apparatus upon test cycling).
Regarding Claim 11, Kim and Biswas teach the test method according to claim 10, wherein in the step of starting the retractable structure to make the retractable structure extend and deform along the first direction and compress the equivalent end plates, the retractable structure is made to extend along the first direction to cause the retractable structure to compress the equivalent end plates until the retractable structure reaches a peak load (see Kim [0030] and figure 2).
Regarding Claim 12, Kim and Biswas teach the test method according to claim 11, wherein in the step that the retractable structure is made to extend along the first direction to cause the retractable structure to compress the equivalent end plates until the retractable structure reaches a peak load, the retractable structure is held at the peak load and held there for a first time t1, wherein t1> 0 (see Kim [0030]-[0032] and figure 2).
Regarding Claim 13, Kim and Biswas teach the test method according to claim 11, wherein in the step of controlling the retractable structure so that the retractable structure retracts and deforms along the first direction, the retractable structure is made to retract along the first direction to cause the retractable structure to leave the equivalent end plates until the retractable structure reaches a valley load (see Kim [0030]-[0032] and figure 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Kim and Biswas teach the test method according to claim 13, wherein in the step that the retractable structure is made to retract along the first direction to cause the retractable structure to leave the equivalent end plates until the retractable structure reaches a valley load, the retractable structure is held at the valley load and held there for a second time t2, wherein t2 > 0 (see Kim [0005] and [0030]-[0032] and figure 2, which broadly meets the claim as the battery would naturally expand and retract to and from the end plates given the repeated filling/releasing of chamber 31 with fluid occurring at a non-zero time).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-8, and 10-14 have been considered but are moot because 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, as Biswas et al. USPG Pub. No.: US 2018/0123189 has been added to modify the original teach in meeting the newly amended claim limitation of Claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A HARRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-3573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 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, STEPHANIE BLOSS can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/MICHAEL A HARRISON/Examiner, Art Unit 2852