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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copies have been filed in parent Application No. HK13107541.4, filed on 6/26/2013, and Application No. HK13107780.4, filed on 07/03/2013.
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.
Claim(s) 32-35, 37-38, 43-46, 48-49 and 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsson (US20130164567A1 – see IDS) in view of White (US20080309289A1 – see IDS) and Kritzer (US20110003185A1 – see IDS).
Regarding Claims 32, 34-35 and 44-46, Olsson discloses a lithium-polymer based battery pack (battery pack module 600 including Li-ion polymer cells) for powering at least one selected from a group consisting of a hand held power tool and a garden tool [pars. 0081,0115,0132; Fig. 6], the battery pack comprising:
a housing (i.e., outer casing assembly comprising half shells 610,620) selectively connectable to and supportable by the at least one selected from the group of the hand held power tool and the garden tool [pars. 0132-133; Fig. 6]; and
a plurality of battery cells (battery assembly 200 including battery elements 202 of Li-ion polymer cells) located within the housing, the plurality of cells being interconnected to have a combined nominal output voltage (e.g., electrically connected in series or parallel), and each battery cell has a lithium-polymer based chemistry [par. 0115],
wherein a pressure sensing element (pressure sensors – not shown) configured to provide a pressure signal to a battery controller (i.e., to monitor the cells and provide signals to the onboard controller) [pars. 0211,0217],
wherein a cradle frame (housing 110) fitted with a cover (lid assembly 120) is arranged to hold a stack of the plurality of battery cells (assembly 200) [par. 0085; Figs. 1A,2], and
wherein the cradle frame fits within the housing.
Olsson does not explicitly disclose: (a) the plurality of cells being interconnected to have a combined nominal output voltage of at least 4 volts and being capable to produce an average discharge current of greater than 10 amps, wherein each battery cell has a nominal charged internal impedance of less than or equal to approximately 10 milliohms; (b) wherein the pressure sensing element is located between at least two adjacent ones of the plurality of battery cells; and (c) wherein each of the plurality of battery cells is supported within the housing by a resiliently deformable substrate surrounding at least a part of each battery cell, the resiliently deformable substrate configured to conduct thermal energy away from the respective battery cell of the plurality of battery cells.
Pertaining (a) above, White, from the same field of endeavor, discloses a lithium-polymer based battery pack 16 for powering a hand held power tool or a garden tool 12 [pars. 0024-26; Fig. 1] comprising a plurality of battery cells located within a housing (not shown), the plurality of battery cells being interconnected to have a combined nominal output voltage of at least 4 volts (e.g., at least 18V) and being capable to produce an average discharge current of greater than 10 amps, wherein each battery cell has a lithium-polymer based chemistry and a nominal charged internal impedance of less than or equal to approximately 10 milliohms [White – pars. 0025-26,0029-30,0034; Fig. 3]. White further teaches that it can be assumed that such battery characteristics can be assumed to be suitable for most general purpose electronic devices [White – par. 0004]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have employed the teachings of White to have modified the battery pack of Olsson, wherein the plurality of cells are interconnected to have a combined nominal output voltage of at least 4 volts and are capable to produce an average discharge current of greater than 10 amps, and wherein each battery cell has a nominal charged internal impedance of less than or equal to approximately 10 milliohms, as well-known characteristic of a lithium-polymer based battery pack in the art which are suitable for most general purpose electronic devices such as power tools.
Pertaining (b) above, Kritzer, from the same field of endeavor, discloses a discloses a battery pack 18 comprising a plurality of battery cells 11, wherein each of the plurality of battery cells is supported in a resiliently deformable substrate (sealing frame 1 having a flexible and reversibly compressible porous element 20 incorporated therein by attachment to base body 2) surrounding and supporting at least a part of each battery cell, the resiliently deformable substrate configured to conduct thermal energy away from the respective battery cell of the plurality of battery cells in order to conduct thermal energy away from the cells during discharge (claim 32), wherein each resiliently deformable substrate is integrated into a resiliently deformable cradle having side edges so as to provide mechanical protection for sides of each or the plurality of battery cells (claims 34 and 45), such that each of the plurality of battery cells held within its own respective resiliently deformable cradle (claims 35 and 46), wherein the cell cradles mechanically fix the battery cells and suppress leaking of electrolyte from the interior to the exterior of the battery cells, and wherein the resiliently deformable substrate cushions the volume extension of the adjacent cells and establish in each state of extension a thermal contact between itself and the adjacent cells [Kritzer — pars. 0019,0024,026-35,0051,0116,0121-129,0133; Figs. 1a-2,8,11-14,15A,15C]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have employed the teachings of Kritzer to modify the cradle frame of Olsson, wherein each of the plurality of battery cells is supported within the housing by a resiliently deformable substrate surrounding at least a part of each battery cell, the resiliently deformable substrate configured to conduct thermal energy away from the respective battery cell of the plurality of battery cells in order to conduct thermal energy away from the cells during discharge (claim 32), wherein each resiliently deformable substrate is integrated into a resiliently deformable cradle having side edges so as to provide mechanical protection for sides of each or the plurality of battery cells (claim 34), such that each of the plurality of battery cells held within its own respective resiliently deformable cradle (claim 35) in order mechanically fix each of the plurality of battery cells within the cell cradles and suppress leaking of electrolyte from the interior to the exterior of the battery cells, wherein the resiliently deformable substrate cushions the volume extension of the adjacent cells and establish in each state of extension a thermal contact between itself and the adjacent cells in order to conduct thermal energy away from the cells during discharge.
Pertaining (c) above, Kritzer further teaches locating a pressure sensor specifically between adjacent battery cells to actively detect inflating/swelling cells prior to pouch rupture [Kritzer – par. 0064]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have employed the teachings of Kritzer to have further modified the battery pack of Olsson wherein the pressure sensing element is located between at least two adjacent ones of the plurality of battery cells in order to actively detect inflating/swelling cells prior to pouch rupture.
Regarding Claim 33, modified Olsson teaches wherein each resiliently deformable substrate is impregnated with a thermally conductive substance (i.e., Kritzer teaches the sealing frame could be filled with carbon fivers or carbon black as filling material for improved thermal conductivity) [Kritzer – par. 0051].
Regarding Claims 37 and 48, modified Olsson fails to explicitly teach wherein a thickness of the resiliently deformable substrate is between 5% and 10% of a thickness of each of the plurality of battery cells. However, Kritzer explicitly identifies that the battery cells undergo volume expansion during charge/discharge cycling that leads to typical thickness changes of an individual cell of about 5% between charged and uncharged state [Kritzer – par. 0008]. To safely accommodate this cyclic expansion, Kritzer teaches interposing compressible buffer distance and flexible, reversibly compressible elements 20 between adjacent cells to absorb the expansion so that in the event of maximal thickness of the cells… no additional pressure is exerted [Kritzer – pars. 0009,0115,0121]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have further modified the battery pack of Olsson wherein the thickness of the resiliently deformable substrate is between 5% and 10% of a thickness of each of the plurality of battery cells in order to allow the deformable substrate a resting thickness of at least 5% (e.g., 5% to 10%) to provide enough physical travel to fully absorb the 5% swelling without transferring mechanical stress to adjacent cells, as a routine dimensional optimization of a result-effective variable to achieve predictable results, which is well within the ordinary skill in the art [MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claims 38 and 49, modified Olsson discloses further the battery pack includes at least one temperature sensor element (temperature sensor 166) located between at least two adjacent ones of the battery cells providing a temperature signal to a battery controller (battery control element 142) [Olsson – pars. 0100,0107; Fig. 1A].
Regarding Claims 43 and 51, modified Olsson discloses wherein the plurality of battery cells are stacked vertically (i.e., aligned vertically and stacked adjacent to one another) within the housing such that each battery cell is layered with another one of the battery cell [Fig. 5].
Claim(s) 36, 40-41 and 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsson, White and Kritzer, as applied to claims 35 and 46, respectively, and further in view of Carrier (US20080180059A1 – see IDS).
Regarding Claims 36 and 47, Olsson discloses wherein the cradle frame is a case enclosure having a base and four surrounding side walls defining a cavity for holding the stack of the plurality of battery cells, and wherein each of the plurality of terminal tabs are provided with an exposed connection terminal disposed on a surface of the cover, wherein an opening provided in one end side wall of the case enclosure to allow space for and accommodate connection access to a plurality of terminal tabs connecting the plurality of battery cells within the case enclosure [Olsson – Figs. 1A,2]. Olsson fails to disclose wherein an opening is provided in each of two opposed side walls of the case enclosure to allow space for and accommodate connection access to a plurality of terminal tabs connecting the plurality of battery cells within the case enclosure. However, providing the each of two opposed side walls to have an opening each would depend on from which side the terminal tabs of each respective battery are configured to extend from, which is an obvious configuration known in the art. For example, Carrier discloses a plurality of generally flat battery cells 1305 comprising a first terminal tab (tab 1303) connected with an anode sheet of the cell and a second terminal tab (tab 1303) connected with a cathode sheet of the cell (i.e., the tabs being connected to the anode sheet or cathode sheet, respectively, is an inherent feature of all battery call of this configuration), the first terminal tab extending from a first side edge of the cell and the second terminal tab extending from a second side edge of the cell, the second side edge being a different side edge than the first side edge of the cell, for serially connecting the plurality of battery cells [Carrier — par. 0119; Fig. 13A,13B]. Moreover, since Olsson discloses that the plurality of battery cells may be connected in series or parallel [Olsson – par. 0115], it would be further conceivable for an ordinary skilled artisan to configure terminal tabs of at least some of the battery cells to extend from a third side edge and a fourth side edge of the respective battery cells in order to form a parallel connection between sets of battery cells connected in series as a well-known configuration in the art, and further to provide an opening on each of the opposed side walls of the case enclosure to allow space for and accommodate connection access to a plurality of terminal tabs connecting the plurality of battery cells within the case enclosure. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have further modified the battery pack of Olsson, wherein terminal tabs of the battery cells to extend from a third side edge and a fourth side edge of the respective battery cells in order to form a parallel connection between sets of battery cells connected in series as a well-known configuration in the art, and wherein an opening is provided in each of the opposed side walls of the case enclosure to allow space for and accommodate connection access to a plurality of terminal tabs connecting the plurality of battery cells within the case enclosure.
Regarding Claims 40, modified Olsson fails to disclose wherein each of the battery cells includes a first connection lead connected with an anode electrode sheet of the battery cell and a second connection lead connected with a cathode electrode sheet of the battery cell, the first connection lead extending from a first edge of the battery cell and the second connection lead extending from a second edge of the battery cell, the second edge being a different edge than the first edge. However, Carrier discloses a plurality of generally flat battery cells 1305 comprising a first connection lead (tab 1303) connected with an anode sheet of the cell and a second connection lead (tab 1303) connected with a cathode sheet of the cell (i.e., the tabs being connected to the anode sheet or cathode sheet, respectively, is an inherent feature of all battery call of this configuration), the first connection lead extending from a first edge of the cell and the second connection lead extending from a second edge of the cell, the second edge being a different edge than the first edge of the cell, for serially connecting the plurality of battery cells [Carrier — par. 0119; Fig. 13A,13B]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to have employed the teachings of Carrier to have further modified the battery pack of Olsson, wherein each of the battery cells includes a first connection lead connected with an anode electrode sheet of the battery cell and a second connection lead connected with a cathode electrode sheet of the battery cell, the first connection lead extending from a first edge of the battery cell and the second connection lead extending from a second edge of the battery cell, the second edge being a different edge than the first edge, for serially connecting the plurality of battery cells.
Regarding Claim 41, Olsson teaches that the battery cells are connected in series and thus necessarily teaches wherein at least one of the first connection lead and second connection lead are joined with a connection lead of an adjacent battery cell.
Claim(s) 39 and 50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsson, White and Kritzer, as applied to claims 32 and 44, respectively, and further in view of Rasskamp (US 2010/0218386 A1 – see IDS) and Urry (US 2001/0000238 A1 – see IDS).
Regarding Claim 40, modified Olsson fails to disclose wherein the housing defines a housing volume and the plurality of battery cells provides a combined battery volume, and wherein a ratio of the combined battery volume to the housing volume is greater than 80%. However, Rasskamp, from the same field of endeavor, discloses providing a battery pack having a battery pack volume arranged within the compartment of a device housing of a power tool in a space-saving manner [Rosskamp — pars. O007-8]. In particular, Rosskamp discloses that the compartment 16 has a compartment volume 17 that substantially matches the volume of the battery pack 15 such that the battery pack 15 is received within the compartment 16 substantially completely [Rosskamp — pars. 0025: Fig. 2]. Further, Urry teaches a battery pack (battery 10) comprising a battery housing 12 and a plurality of battery cells 30 arranged parallel to each other in a compact relationship to closely abut the interior sides of the housing to fit compactly within the battery housing in order to maximize volume consumption of the housing so the internal volume of housing is fully utilized by the batteries [Urry - par. 0020; Figs. 1-2]. Thus, an ordinary skilled artisan would readily appreciate that the teachings of Rosskamp and Urry establish the size/volume of the battery pack housing relative to the size/volume of the battery cells as result-effective variables in order to arrange the battery pack in the housing in a space-saving manner. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to have employed the teachings of Rosskamp and Urry to have further modified the battery pack of Olsson, wherein the housing defines a housing volume and the plurality of battery cells provide a combined battery volume, and wherein a ratio of the combined battery volume to the housing volume is greater than 80% in order to arrange the battery pack in the housing in a space-saving manner [Rosskamp - par. 0007; MPEP 2145(II)].
Claim(s) 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsson, White, Kritzer and Carrier, as applied to claim 41 above, and further in view of Han (2012/0301747 A1 – see IDS).
Regarding Claim 42, modified Olsson fails to disclose further a guide member having a convex guiding surface abutting the joined connection leads extending between adjacent battery cells. However, Han, from the same field of endeavor, discloses a battery pack (battery stack 110) comprising a plurality of battery cells (battery units 220 u), each battery cells having first and second connection lead (first and second cell tabs 111a,111b} for serially connecting the plurality of battery cells by joining the first and second connection leads of adjacent cells [Han — par. 0038: Figs. 2a,2b], and further a guide member (supports 132) having a convex guiding surface abutting the joined connection leads extending between adjacent cells to support the first and second lead connections as they bend in opposite directions to form the serial connection between adjacent battery cells [Han – pars. 0051-52; Figs. 6b,6c,8c]. Therefore, before the effective fling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to have employed the teachings of Han to have further modified the battery pack of Olsson to have included a guide member having a convex guiding surface abutting the joined connection leads extending between adjacent battery cells in order to support the first and second lead connections as they bend in opposite directions to form the serial connection between adjacent battery cells.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 32-51 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,923,515 B2.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding Claim 32: Granted Claim 1 of the '515 Patent recites a lithium-polymer battery pack for powering a hand-held power tool or garden tool, comprising a housing selectively connectable to and supportable by the tool, and a plurality of lithium-polymer battery cells having a combined nominal output voltage >4 V, capable of producing an average discharge current >10 A, and an internal impedance < 10 milliohms, wherein each cell is supported within the housing in a resiliently deformable cradle. Granted dependent Claim 5 recites that a resiliently deformable substrate defines the resiliently deformable cradle, and granted dependent Claim 6 recites that the resiliently deformable substrate is thermally conductive. Furthermore, granted dependent Claim 7 explicitly recites: "wherein a pressure sensing element is located between at least two adjacent ones of the battery cells, the pressure sensing element configured to provide a pressure sensor signal to a battery controller." Instant independent Claim 32 merely recites the combined subject matter already patented in parent Claims 1, 5, 6, and 7. Accordingly, Claim 32 is a patentably indistinct, obvious variation of the parent claims.
Regarding Claim 44: Independent Claim 44 recites the same power tool housing, plurality of battery cells, inter-cell pressure sensing element, and resiliently deformable, thermally conductive substrate of Claim 32, but broadens the scope by deleting the narrowing electrical parameters > 4 V, discharge current > 10 A, and internal impedance 10 milliohms. Broadening the claims by claiming a sub-combination of previously patented subject matter that lacks patentable distinction over Claims 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the '515 Patent constitutes an improper timewise extension of the monopoly.
Regarding Dependent Claims 33–43 and 45–51: Each of these claims recites auxiliary structural and tab-routing limitations (e.g., cradles, frame enclosures, covers, thickness ratios of 5%–10%, dual temperature sensors, volume fill ratios > 80%, and convex tab guide members that directly correspond to, or represent obvious design variations of, the subject matter patented across dependent Claims 2–6 and 8–20 of the '515 Patent.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAROON S SHEIKH whose telephone number is (571)270-0302. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
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, JONATHAN LEONG can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
HAROON S. SHEIKH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights