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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 03/20/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group III in the reply filed on 04/30/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the amended claims 1 and 8 are now linking claims and now require all the functional limitations of the elected method claim 15 and that the groups I-III are not patentably distinct. This is not found persuasive because the Groups I-III are related to different fields of search that would require different search strategies for each group. Examiner acknowledges that applicant amends claims 1 and 8 to include limitations of claim 15, however, the method for testing a battery of claim 15 is structurally different than an apparatus for testing a battery of claim 1 and a system for testing a battery of claim 8 as both claims 1 and 8 contain structural limitations that differentiate from the method of claim 15. Examiner notes the possibility of rejoinder following examination of the claims.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Status
Claims 1-12, 14, and 21 have been withdrawn in view of the restriction requirement.
Claim 13 has been cancelled.
Claim 21 has been added, support is found in Figure 3 and [0031] of the specification as filed. No new matter has been added.
Claims 15-20 are currently pending and have been examined on the merits in this office action.
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 15-16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Biswas et al. (US 2020/0321665 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Biswas discloses a method for testing a battery comprising:
Receiving, during a test procedure associated with the battery, a first signal indicative of a first pressure within a force applicator of a testing apparatus, wherein the force applicator is configured to effect a compressive force on the battery based on the first pressure (abstract; method for testing a battery including applying a pressure and measuring a pressure between a transducer and a battery and then adjusting the pressured applied based on the determined pressure; [0010-0013]);
Determining a control signal configured to adjust the compressive force based on the first signal and at least one parameter of the test procedure ([0010-0013] measure, control and adjust the pressure between the transducer and the battery based on the determined pressure readings);
Adjusting the compressive force via the control signal ([0010-0013] measure, control and adjust the pressure between the transducer and the battery based on the determined pressure readings; [0031] adjusting pressure of the battery with adjusting the springs and affects the measurements of signals transmitted and received through the battery); and
Determining an output of the test procedure, wherein the output comprises information associated with an impact of the compressive force on the battery ([0010-0013] measure, control and adjust the pressure between the transducer and the battery based on the determined pressure readings; [0031] adjusting pressure of the battery with adjusting the springs and affects the measurements of signals transmitted and received through the battery; [0079], [0040], [0061-0062] effect of applying pressure and adjustments of pressure relating to the compression and overall battery quality and grading).
Regarding claim 16, Biswas discloses all the claim limitations of claim 15. Biswas further discloses wherein the force applicator can be a pneumatic piston ([0047] the spring or arm of the pressure actuator or respective means for applying and adjusting pressure can be done with a piston such as a pneumatic piston see claim 9).
Regarding claim 19, Biswas discloses all the claim limitations of claim 15. Biswas further discloses wherein the at least one parameter is a second pressure within the force applicator that is to be maintained through the test procedure (0010-0013] measure, control and adjust the pressure between the transducer and the battery based on the determined pressure readings; [0031] adjusting pressure of the battery with adjusting the springs and affects the measurements of signals transmitted and received through the battery; [0079], [0040], [0061-0062] effect of applying pressure and adjustments of pressure relating to the compression and overall battery quality and grading). Examiner notes that the measuring and adjusting of the pressure can be considered the second pressure that can be maintained throughout the testing process after the initial pressure adjustment.
Regarding claim 20, Biswas discloses all the claim limitations of claim 15. Biswas further discloses receiving a second signal indicative of a thickness of the battery, wherein the information associated with the impact includes the thickness of the battery ([0048,0053,0059] pressure of the battery stack has an initial thickness and can disclose and monitor any changes in the thickness during the pressure).
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.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Biswas et al. (US 2020/0321665 A1) in view of Obad (US 2024/0154192 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Biswas discloses all the claim limitations of claim 15. Biswas is silent with respect to wherein the at least one parameter is a non-linear representation of force associated with a material.
Obad discloses a battery testing apparatus that is analogous with the instant invention. Obad discloses wherein an actuator device used for providing pressure the a battery cell has a pressure sensor that is connected to a computer system to record the pressure profile during the test procedure and record the resulting pressure curve of the battery with the pressure profile being a curve ([0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan that the pressure measured through the testing procedure results in a non-linear pressure curve as taught by Obad as the pressure profile of the material would likely have a general non-linear profile that contains a curvature as taught by Obad. Thus it is the examiner’s opinion that the modification would read on the pressure curve being non-linear ad thus would render obvious the claim limitations of claim 17. When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02.
Regarding claim 18, modified Biswas discloses all the claim limitations of claim 17 and thus would render obvious wherein the non-linear representation of force associated with the material was received prior to initiation of the test procedure as the material property of the material is known and would have been known before the testing procedure. See modification of claim 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liu (CN 115790710 A)-discloses a battery expansion displacement measuring system and method for measuring optimal external pressure of the battery.
Li (CN 111351460 A)- discloses a high precision battery cell expansion displacement testing device wherein a battery cell is applied with a pressing force to apply pressure to the battery cell.
Lee (KR 20210055363 A)-discloses a jig for measuring cell swelling pressure with a pressure plate providing pressure to a battery cell.
Shin (KR 20210138883 A)-discloses a cell jig for detecting swelling of a battery cel land method for measuring swelling of the battery cell.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam J Francis whose telephone number is (571)272-1021. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7 am-4 pm EST.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571)270-7871. 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.
/ADAM J FRANCIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights