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 (IDS) submitted on 1/23/24, 9/10/24, 10/1/24, 10/1/24, and 1/17/25 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 6/29/23. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 17 and 18 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.
Claims 17 and 18 each depend from claim 13, which is directed to a cap plate. However, claims 17 and 18 recite “the battery cell pressure monitor”, thereby requiring subject matter that is not provided by claim 13. As written, the dependency is inconsistent and renders the scope of claims 17 and 18 unclear.
Specifically, claim 13 is directed to “The cap plate of claim 9”, whereas claims 17 and 18 recite limitations directed to a battery cell pressure monitor, resulting in an improper dependency and lack of antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter.
Claims 17 and 18 should be amended to depend from claim 14, which properly recites a battery cell pressure monitor, or rewritten in independent form to clarify the scope of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1-5, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102013216076 A1 (“DE’076”).
As to Claim 1:DE’076 discloses:
a battery cell (battery cell (1)) having a sensor / detection device (detection device (5)) that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell. Specifically, DE’076 teaches that gas formation within the battery cell causes an increase in internal pressure, which in turn causes mechanical deformation of a portion of the battery cell housing, and that this deformation is detected by a sensor to indicate the pressure increase (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14). The reference further discloses that the detection device is configured to detect the deformation of the cell housing resulting from the pressure increase, thereby detecting the increase in internal pressure of the battery cell (p. 2, lines 15–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; Figs. 1–3b).
As to Claim 2:DE’076 discloses the battery cell of claim 1 having a sensor that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14). DE’076 further discloses that the sensor (detection device) is arranged on and forms part of a cap plate / cover element of the battery cell, such that deformation of the cap plate caused by increased internal pressure is detected by the sensor (p. 2, lines 15–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 1–3b).
As to Claim 3:DE’076 discloses the battery cell of claim 1 having a sensor that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14). DE’076 further discloses that the sensor is implemented as a resistive sensor, specifically a strain gauge whose electrical resistance changes in response to mechanical deformation of the battery cell housing caused by increased internal pressure (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6).
As to Claim 4:DE’076 discloses the battery cell of claim 1 having a sensor that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14). DE’076 further discloses that the sensor includes a strain gauge, wherein the strain gauge detects mechanical deformation of the battery cell housing caused by increased internal pressure (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 1–3b).
As to Claim 5:
DE’076 discloses the battery cell of claim 4, wherein the sensor includes a strain gauge that detects deformation caused by increased internal pressure (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6). DE’076 further discloses that the strain gauge is formed as and attached to a metal foil, and that the metal foil is attached to a cap plate (cover element) of the battery cell, such that deformation of the cap plate due to increased internal pressure is transmitted to the strain gauge (p. 2, lines 23–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 2 and 3a–3b).
As to Claim 9:DE’076 discloses a cap plate (cover element) for a battery cell (cover element (3)) that comprises a sensor which detects an increase in an internal pressure of the battery cell. Specifically, the reference teaches that gas formation inside the battery cell causes an increase in internal pressure, which results in mechanical deformation of the cap plate, and that a detection device arranged on the cap plate detects this deformation to thereby detect the pressure increase (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14; p. 2, lines 15–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 1–3b).
As to Claim 10:DE’076 discloses the cap plate of claim 9 comprising a sensor that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell (p. 2, lines 15–27; p. 3, lines 1–6). DE’076 further discloses that the sensor arranged on the cap plate is a resistive sensor, specifically a strain gauge whose electrical resistance changes in response to deformation of the cap plate caused by increased internal pressure within the battery cell (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 2 and 3a–3b).
As to Claim 11:DE’076 discloses the cap plate of claim 9 comprising a sensor that detects an increase in an internal pressure of the battery cell (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14). DE’076 further discloses that the sensor provided on the cap plate (cover element) includes a strain gauge, wherein the strain gauge detects deformation of the cap plate caused by increased internal pressure within the battery cell (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 1–3b).
As to Claim 12:DE’076 discloses the cap plate of claim 11, wherein the sensor includes a strain gauge for detecting deformation caused by increased internal pressure (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6). DE’076 further discloses that the strain gauge is formed as and attached to a metal foil, and that the metal foil is attached to the cap plate (cover element) of the battery cell, such that deformation of the cap plate is transmitted to the strain gauge (p. 2, lines 23–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; see also Figs. 2 and 3a–3b).
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 6-8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102013216076 A1, as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of DE 102012209271 A1.
As to Claim 6:DE’076 discloses a battery cell having a sensor that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell, wherein internal gas generation causes deformation of the cell housing and a detection device senses such deformation to detect pressure increase (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14; Figs. 1–3b).
However, DE’076 does not disclose that the sensor is a capacitive sensor, as required by claim 6. Instead, DE’076 teaches a resistive strain gauge as the pressure-sensing element (p. 2, lines 20–27).
DE’271discloses a capacitive pressure sensor suitable for detecting pressure changes, wherein changes in pressure cause deformation of a dielectric structure and corresponding changes in capacitance between opposing electrode surfaces ([0012]–[0018]; [0026]–[0030]).
DE’076 and DE’271 are analogous arts because both references are directed to detecting pressure changes in battery systems using sensors that respond to mechanical deformation caused by internal pressure.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery cell of DE’076 by substituting the resistive strain-gauge sensor with a capacitive pressure sensor as taught by DE’271, as an alternative known pressure-sensing technology, in order to detect internal battery pressure using predictable and well-understood capacitive sensing principles.
As to Claim 7:DE’076 discloses a battery cell pressure-detection arrangement in which internal pressure causes mechanical deformation of a battery component, and a sensor detects such deformation to determine pressure increase (p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14).
However, DE’076 does not disclose a capacitive sensor comprising a first capacitive surface, a second capacitive surface, and a compressible dielectric that varies the distance between the capacitive surfaces due to changes of internal pressure, as required by claim 7.
DE’271 discloses a capacitive pressure sensor structure comprising opposing capacitive electrodes (first and second capacitive surfaces) and a deformable or compressible dielectric layer disposed therebetween, wherein deformation of the dielectric in response to pressure changes alters the spacing between the electrodes and thus the measured capacitance ([0012]–[0018]; [0026]–[0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to incorporate the capacitive sensor structure of DE’271 into the battery cell pressure-detection system of DE’076, such that the sensor includes first and second capacitive surfaces separated by a compressible dielectric whose deformation varies the distance between the surfaces in response to internal battery pressure, in order to achieve predictable capacitive pressure sensing within the battery cell.
As to Claim 8:DE’076 discloses a battery cell having a sensor that detects an increase in the internal pressure of the battery cell, wherein internal gas generation causes deformation of a battery component and a detection device senses the deformation to detect pressure increase (Abstract; p. 1, lines 8–15; p. 2, lines 1–14). DE’076 further discloses that the sensor is arranged on and forms part of a cap plate (cover element) of the battery cell (p. 2, lines 15–27; Figs. 1–3b).
However, DE’076 does not disclose that the sensor is the capacitive sensor of claim 7, i.e., a sensor comprising first and second capacitive surfaces with a compressible dielectric that varies the distance between the surfaces due to changes of internal pressure.
DE’271 discloses a capacitive pressure sensor comprising opposing capacitive electrodes (first and second capacitive surfaces) separated by a deformable or compressible dielectric, wherein deformation of the dielectric in response to pressure changes varies the spacing between the electrodes and thus the capacitance ([0012]–[0018]; [0026]–[0030]). DE’271 further teaches that such capacitive pressure sensors may be implemented in compact structures suitable for integration into battery components.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery cell of DE’076 by implementing the pressure sensor on the cap plate as a capacitive sensor having first and second capacitive surfaces separated by a compressible dielectric, as taught by DE’271, in order to detect internal battery pressure using a known alternative pressure-sensing technology while maintaining cap-plate integration.
As to Claim 13:DE’076 discloses a cap plate for a battery cell, wherein the cap plate comprises a sensor that detects an increase in an internal pressure of the battery cell by sensing deformation of the cap plate caused by pressure increase (p. 2, lines 15–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; Figs. 1–3b).
However, DE’076 does not disclose that the sensor on the cap plate is a capacitive sensor, as required by claim 13. Instead, DE’076 teaches a resistive strain-gauge-type sensor.
DE’271 discloses a capacitive pressure sensor suitable for detecting pressure changes, including sensor structures having capacitive electrodes and a deformable dielectric, such that pressure-induced deformation results in a measurable change in capacitance ([0012]–[0018]; [0026]–[0030]).
DE’076 and DE’271 are analogous arts because both references relate to pressure sensing in battery systems and integration of pressure sensors into battery components.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cap plate sensor of DE’076 by using a capacitive pressure sensor as taught by DE’271, as an alternative known pressure-sensing technology, in order to detect internal battery pressure using predictable and well-understood capacitive sensing principles.
Claims 14-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,260,638 A (“US’638”) in view of DE 102012209271 A1 (“DE’271”).
As to Claim 14:US’638 discloses a battery cell pressure monitor that detects an increase in an internal pressure of a battery cell, including a sensor that detects changes in internal pressure by sensing deformation of the battery casing using a strain gage (col. 3, lines 10–25; col. 4, lines 1–10; Fig. 3A). US’638 further discloses signal conditioning circuitry in which the output of the strain gage is processed to produce a voltage corresponding to the detected strain, which is indicative of internal pressure (col. 3, lines 26–40; col. 4, lines 11–25; Fig. 5).
However, US’638 does not explicitly disclose that the amplifier circuit converts the sensor output to a voltage that is proportional to the internal pressure of the battery cell, as expressly recited in claim 14.
DE’271discloses pressure-sensing systems in which an analog sensor signal is amplified and converted into a voltage that varies proportionally with applied pressure, enabling accurate evaluation of pressure magnitude ([0026]–[0030]). Thus, DE’271 teaches the missing aspect of explicit proportional conversion between sensor output and internal pressure.
US’638 and DE’271 are analogous arts because both references are directed to pressure detection and electronic signal processing in battery or pressure-monitoring systems, and both addresses converting pressure-responsive sensor outputs into electrical signals for evaluation.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery cell pressure monitor of US’638 to employ an amplifier circuit that converts the sensor output to a voltage proportional to internal battery pressure, as taught by DE’271, in order to provide a predictable and more directly interpretable pressure-dependent voltage signal for monitoring battery safety conditions.
As to Claim 15:US’638 discloses a battery cell pressure monitor that detects an increase in internal pressure of a battery cell, including a sensor that detects changes in internal pressure and an amplifier circuit that converts an output of the sensor to a voltage corresponding to the detected pressure (col. 3, lines 10–40; col. 4, lines 1–25; Fig. 5).
However, US’638 does not explicitly disclose a processing unit that converts the voltage to a digital value, as required by claim 15.
DE’271 discloses electronic signal processing of a pressure sensor output, including conversion of an analog sensor signal into a digitally evaluable value using processing circuitry ([0026]–[0032]). Thus, DE’271 teaches the missing limitation of a processing unit that converts a voltage to a digital value.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery cell pressure monitor of US’638 to include a processing unit that converts the amplified voltage signal to a digital value, as taught by DE’271, in order to enable digital evaluation and control of battery pressure conditions.
As to Claim 16:US’638 discloses a battery pressure monitoring system in which a pressure-dependent voltage derived from a strain gage sensor is compared to a predetermined reference level to determine an abnormal pressure condition, and wherein a warning or control signal is generated when the pressure exceeds a limit (col. 4, lines 11–25; col. 5, lines 10–25; Fig. 5).
However, US’638 does not explicitly disclose generating a high-pressure alarm based on a digital value produced by a processing unit, as required by claim 16.
DE’271discloses digital evaluation of pressure sensor signals, including comparison of digitized pressure values to threshold values to determine abnormal pressure conditions ([0028]–[0032]). Thus, DE’271 teaches the missing limitation of generating an alarm when a digital pressure value exceeds a threshold.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure the processing unit of the modified pressure monitor to generate a high-pressure alarm when the digitized pressure value exceeds a threshold, as taught by DE’271, in order to provide a predictable and improved safety indication of abnormal battery pressure.
As to Claim 17:
US’638 discloses a battery cell pressure monitor for detecting an increase in an internal pressure of a battery cell, wherein a sensor is provided that detects changes in internal pressure via deformation of the battery casing (col. 3, lines 10–25; col. 4, lines 1–10; Fig. 3A). US’638 further discloses that the sensor is a resistive sensor, specifically a strain gage whose electrical resistance varies in response to mechanical strain caused by internal pressure increase (col. 3, lines 10–20; col. 4, lines 1–10).
As to Claim 18:US’638 discloses a battery cell pressure monitor that detects an increase in internal pressure of a battery cell using a sensor responsive to deformation of the battery casing (col. 3, lines 10–25; col. 4, lines 1–10). US’638 further discloses that the sensor includes a strain gage, which is bonded to the battery casing and detects strain caused by pressure-induced expansion of the cell (col. 3, lines 10–20; Fig. 3A).
As to Claim 20:US’638 discloses a battery cell pressure monitor that detects an increase in internal pressure of a battery cell using a pressure-responsive sensor, specifically a resistive strain gauge that responds to deformation of the battery casing (col. 3, lines 10–25; col. 4, lines 1–10).
However, US’638 does not disclose that the sensor is a capacitive sensor, as required by claim 20.
DE’271 discloses a capacitive pressure sensor for detecting pressure changes, including sensor structures having electrodes separated by a deformable dielectric, such that changes in pressure result in changes in capacitance ([0012]–[0018]; [0026]–[0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to substitute the capacitive pressure sensor taught by DE’271 for the resistive strain gauge sensor of US 5,260,638 A, as an alternative known pressure-sensing technology, in order to detect internal battery pressure using predictable and well-understood sensor principles.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,260,638 A (“US’638”) in view of DE 102012209271 A1, as applied to Claim 13 above, and further in view of DE 102013216076 A1 (“DE’076”).
As to Claim 19:US’638 discloses a battery cell pressure monitor that detects an increase in internal pressure of a battery cell using a sensor that includes a strain gage, wherein the strain gage detects deformation of the battery casing caused by pressure increase (col. 3, lines 10–25; col. 4, lines 1–10; Fig. 3A).
However, US’638 does not disclose that the strain gauge is attached to a metal foil attached to a cap plate of the battery cell, as required by claim 19. In US ’638, the strain gage is mounted on a casing wall and is not disclosed as being implemented on a metal foil or attached to a cap plate.
DE’271 discloses pressure sensor structures implemented on thin, flexible films or foils suitable for attachment to battery components and for transmitting pressure-induced deformation to the sensing element ([0012]–[0016]). DE’076 further discloses a strain gauge formed as a metal foil and attached to a cap plate (cover element) of a battery cell, such that deformation of the cap plate caused by increased internal pressure is transmitted to the strain gauge (p. 2, lines 20–27; p. 3, lines 1–6; Figs. 2–3b).
US’638, DE’271, and DE’076 are analogous arts because all three references are directed to detecting internal pressure in battery cells using pressure-responsive sensors mechanically coupled to battery structures.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the battery cell pressure monitor of US’638 by implementing the strain gauge on a metal foil attached to a cap plate of the battery cell, as taught by DE’271 and DE’076, in order to provide a thin, flexible, and mechanically responsive mounting arrangement that reliably transmits pressure-induced deformation of the cap plate to the strain gauge.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 2012-206652 A teaches capacitive pressure sensors integrated into battery housings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723