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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 28 August 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant argues the interconnect routing of Engle et al. is not a strain gauge including a single resistor whose resistance value varies by both case displacement and case temperature change, with first and second measurement-point pluralities electrically connected to that same resistor, as disclosed and claimed by the instant application.
However, the Examiner disagrees, and notes that the resistance of the interconnect material of the prior art necessarily changes with temperature and stress/strain conditions imposed inside of the case as such is a material property. For example, as the rejection below and applicant notes, the prior art discloses copper as the interconnect material. Copper’s electrical resistance increases with temperature due to more frequent electron-atom collisions, with a typical temperature coefficient of about 0.0039–0.0043 per °C. Copper, like most pure metals, exhibits a positive temperature coefficient of resistance, meaning its resistance rises as temperature increases. When copper is strained, its electrical resistance changes primarily due to geometric deformation (length and cross‑section changes) and, at higher strains, microstructural changes that alter electron scattering. The instant specification fails to provide a definite description of what materials can be used for the “single resistor”, therefore the copper interconnect between the sensors of the prior art is reasonably considered to have the claimed structure and function.
Further, the limitations “used to detect a change in the resistance value of the resistor according to the case displacement” relate to functions of the device, per MPEP 2114 relating to Apparatus and Article claims – Functional Language: While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. >In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In the instant case, the sensing element’s electrical communication through the interconnect layer (i.e. “the single resistor”) of the prior art will necessarily include an indication of the effect of the temperature and strain (caused by case displacement) on the interconnect layer as the components are electrically connected and the changing resistance of the interconnect material will affect the communication between the components.
Therefore, the rejection based on the prior art of record is maintained and this action is FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 8-12, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1 or 2) as being anticipated by Engle et al. (US Pub 2011/0039137 of record).
In regard to claims 1 and 10, Engle et al. teach a battery pack, comprising: a case (outer structure 120) accommodating at least one cell 100 therein; a strain gauge (sensing platform 134) disposed at a surface of the case 120 and having a resistance value varied by a case displacement and a case temperature change (see paragraphs [0032-0033] – “resistance temperature detection (RTD) elements”), the strain gauge including a single resistor (sensing platform including interconnect layer 916 such as copper – paragraph [0067]) having the resistance value varied by the case 120 displacement and the case temperature change; a plurality of first measurement points (sensing elements 138, including sensing layer 914) electrically connected to the resistor and used to detect a change in the resistance value of the resistor according to the case displacement; a plurality of second measurement points (sensing elements 138, including sensing layer 914) electrically connected to the resistor and used to detect a change in the resistance value of the resistor according to the case temperature change; and the plurality of first measurement points and the plurality of second measurement points being spaced apart from each other (see paragraphs [0041-0067], figure 1 annotated below, figure 9 showing detailed structure of Cu/Ni elements for resistance strain gauge elements).
In regard to claim 2 and 11, Engle et al. teach the resistor (interconnect layer 916 within sensing platform 134) has a bar shape extending along a first direction, the plurality of first measurement points face each other in the first direction, the plurality of second measurement points face each other in a second direction, and the first direction and the second direction are orthogonal to each other (see figure 1 annotated below, paragraph [0044]).
PNG
media_image1.png
608
845
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 3 and 12, Engle et al. teach the plurality of second measurement points are adjacent to an electrode tab (terminals 106, 108) of the battery pack (annotated figure 1 above, paragraph [0043]).
In regard to claim 8 and 17, Engle et al. teach the battery pack comprises a protection circuit detecting a displacement amount of the case based on first resistance values measured through the plurality of first measurement points and detecting the temperature based on second resistance values measured through the plurality of second measurement points (data receiving structure 428 - “external device configured to process data collected by the sensing elements 416” – paragraph [0056-0060]).
In regard to claims 9 and 18, “the protection circuit uses a value obtained by subtracting a change amount of the second resistance values from a change amount of the first resistance values to correct the displacement amount” relates to an intended operation of the claimed device, as the prior art teaches a patentably indistinct data processing controller (see functionality described in paragraphs [0037-0038]), the device of the prior art is reasonably presumed to be capable of performing the claimed function (see MPEP 2114).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Pub 2008/0097704 teaches additional strain gauge arrangements.
US Patent No. 9,356,325 (newly cited) teaches a similar strain and temperature measuring system for a battery module where the controller 42 then executes a program stored in the memory portion. The program calculates whether the internal pressure of the battery cells 26 is excessive. The program uses the resistance measurements from the strain gauges 34, apparent temperature measurements, temperature measurements from the temperature sensor 46, or some combination of these in columns 4 and 5.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas P D'Aniello whose telephone number is (571)270-3635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm 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.
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights