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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Karner (US 2019/0036178 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Karner discloses an apparatus comprising: a battery pack 200 comprising cells 100 and sensor pads 120 attached to an external surface of the cells (see Figure 2A and paragraph 34); a battery control system that can measure and operate based off of voltage (paragraphs 41 and 117). The cells are in parallel (paragraph 31). The recitation “having resistance values which vary according to an applied pressure” is piezoresistivity and considered a fundamental property and intrinsic to Karner.
Regarding claim 2, Karner discloses each sensing pad a first wire connected to the positive terminal and a second wire connected to the negative terminal (paragraph 36).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the Office considers the claimed recitation to be fundamental property (piezoresistivity) and intrinsic to Karner.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Karner discloses that the control system can compare actual cell voltage measurement data with theoretical calculated voltage data and provide a notice or take action if the two differ by a predetermined amount (paragraph 121).
Regarding claim 8, Karner discloses an apparatus comprising: a battery pack 200 comprising cells 100 and sensor pads 120 attached to an external surface of the cells (see Figure 2A and paragraph 34); a battery control system that can measure and operate based off of voltage (paragraphs 41 and 117). The cells are in parallel (paragraph 31). Karner discloses each sensing pad a first wire connected to the positive terminal and a second wire connected to the negative terminal (paragraph 36). The recitation “having resistance values which vary according to an applied pressure” is piezoresistivity and considered a fundamental property and intrinsic to Karner.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, the Office considers the claimed recitation to be fundamental property (piezoresistivity) and intrinsic to Karner.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Laramie (US 2023/00118071 A1).
Laramie discloses an apparatus comprising: a battery pack 100 comprising cells 110 and sensor pads 130 attached to an external surface of the cells (see Figure 4 and paragraphs 53 & 54); a battery control system that can measure and operate based off of voltage (paragraph 58). The sensors are piezoelectric (paragraph 88) which has the claimed properties.
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 nonobviousness.
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 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karner as applied to claims 2 and 8 above, respectively, and further in view of Cho (US 2017/0179542 A1).
Karner does not disclose how the wires are fixed. Cho—in an invention for a battery with voltage sensors and BMS—discloses adhesive coated onto the sensor and its wires so as to fix the elements to the battery module thereby providing an aesthetically pleasing appearance to the battery module, preventing the increase of cost due to the use of the adhesive or the adhesive tape, and improving tact time through the simple and uniform manufacturing process of pushing the voltage sensing wires from above to fix the voltage sensing wires (paragraph 18). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to coat the sensor and wires of Karner with adhesive for the advantages disclosed in Cho.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights