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 .
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 18 and 19 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 18 recites the broad recitation “25-80 degrees Celsius”, and the claim also recites “35-80 degrees Celsius” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. In the present instance, claim 19 recites the broad recitation “12 hours - 30 days”, and the claim also recites “0-5 days” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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.
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 1-2, 4-5, 7, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2024/0113529, hereinafter “Kim”) in view of Nishino et al. (US 2010/0330404, hereinafter “Nishino”).
Claim 1: Kim discloses a cell charging and discharging tray (100; see [0058]) adapted for simultaneously ageing one type-A cell and a plurality of type-B cells (an intended use of the tray, which Kim is capable of), a potential of the type-A cell being higher than that of type-B cell (an intended use of the tray, which Kim is capable of), and the tray comprising:
a base component (110) for accommodating the type-A cell and the type-B cells (Kim is capable of accommodating different type cells, e.g. of different chemistries, in each of 140); and
a conductive component (120; see [0061]-[0062], where each of the top and bottom components comprise terminals, i.e. conductive components, for coupling the terminals in parallel) for realizing sequential parallel connection of the type-A cell and the type-B cells (i.e. the cells coupled in a physical sequence in the same manner as disclosed in the instant specification); where the base component (110) is separated from the conductive component (e.g. via the top cover member 120; see [0061]).
First, Kim does not disclose that the charging tray comprises a type-A and plurality of type-B cells, the type-A cell having a higher potential than that of the type-B cell. However, the claim language is directed to the tray itself and utilizing different type batteries with different potentials is merely an intended use of the tray, which Kim is capable of. Thus, the scope of the limitation is met (see MPEP 2111.02.II and MPEP 2114.II).
Second, Kim does not disclose the base component as “an insulating” base component. Nishino discloses that a similar tray for housing multiple batteries for aging and/or testing ([0004]), a similar tray (100) may be made of “an insulating resin material” (see [0060]) including “filler such as carbon fiber and glass fiber” to provide desired shapes under high temperatures (see [0065]). Further, providing a tray or housing in polypropylene resin ([0065]) has a well-known benefit in the art of low cost and ease of manufacture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have provided the tray as an insulating base component in order to have provided desired shapes under high temperatures, low cost, and/or ease of manufacture.
Claim 2: the combination discloses wherein the base component is a bottom plate extending upwards along the periphery of a bottom surface to form side walls (e.g. the bottom surface and 110 of Kim, and/or 112 of Fig.2B of Nishino).
Claim 5: the combination discloses wherein the tray further includes a fastening component for encircling the cells to realize integrated fastening of the cells (e.g. the sidewalls of each groove of Kim; see [0056]).
Claim 4: Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the tray further comprises a plurality of insulating separation components for separating the cells, the separation components are a plurality of baffles separated from each other, and the baffles are arranged in parallel on the base component. However, Nishino discloses a alternate design including a plurality of baffles separated from each other and arranged in parallel on the base component (rows of 120). Nishino discloses that such a design “is preferable because a heat insulation effect … can be enhanced” (see [0064]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have provided the parallel baffles of Nishino in place of the grooves of Kim in order to have provided an enhanced heat insulation effect.
Claim 7: the combination discloses wherein the conductive component comprises a first conductive component for realizing sequential connection of positive poles of the type-A cell and the type-B cells, and a second conductive component for realizing sequential connection of negative poles of the type-A cell and the type-B cells in the same order (Kim discloses both top and bottom conductive components for connecting each of the positive poles and negative poles in physical sequence; see [0061]).
Claim 14: the combination discloses a cell ageing device comprising a tray, wherein the tray is the cell charging and discharging tray according to claim 1 (see [0071] of Kim, where the tray is utilized for an aging process).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 6, 8-13, 15-17, and 20 are 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.
Claims 18 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not explicitly disclose within the overall context of the claims:
gripping portions are formed on two opposite side walls in a partially sunken manner; or, gripping portions are formed on the tops of the two opposite side walls along a surface parallel to the bottom surface of the bottom plate by extending in an opposite direction (claim 3)
wherein the fastening component is a flexible belt-shaped hoop, and an opening-closing connection portion capable of being opened and closed is arranged at an opening of the hoop (claim 6);
wherein the first conductive component comprises a first metal strip and X probes arranged at intervals on a lower surface of the first metal strip; the second conductive component comprises a second metal strip and Y probes arranged at intervals on a lower surface of the second metal strip (claim 8);
wherein the first conductive component comprises a first main flexible conductive wire and X branch flexible conductive wires, where one ends of the X branch flexible conductive wires are connected to the first main flexible conductive wire at intervals, and the other ends of the X branch flexible conductive wires are connected to a conductive clip; the second conductive component comprises a second main flexible conductive wire and Y branch flexible conductive wires, wherein one ends of the Y branch flexible conductive wires are connected to the second main flexible conductive wire at intervals, and the other ends of the Y branch flexible conductive wires are connected to a conductive clip (claim 13); or
step 1: connecting positive poles of at least one type-A cell in a first state and at least one type-B cell in a second state through a first conductive component in sequence, and connecting negative poles thereof through a second conductive component in sequence, wherein a potential of the type-A cell is higher than that of each of the type-B cells; step 2: performing standing on the connected cells at a first set temperature T1 for a first duration t1; step 3: cooling each cell at a second set temperature T2, wherein T1 is greater than T2; step 4: testing a voltage OCV1 of each cell; step 5: performing standing the cells at the second set temperature for a second duration t2; step 6: testing a voltage OCV2 of each cell; and step 7: based on the voltage OCV1 and the voltage OCV2, determining whether each cell is qualified according to a set rule (claim 15).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ryan Johnson whose telephone number is (571)270-1264. 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, Menna Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
/RYAN JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights