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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because: in Fig. 14, the characters of the reference numbers and text labels are of a small size and poor quality, making reading to the drawing difficult. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 recites:
An inspection circuit, comprising:
a plurality of inspection devices; and
a plurality of pathway switching circuits, input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test, and output ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to the plurality of inspection devices;
wherein:
the pathway switching circuit is configured to connect, according to an inspection signal, an inspection device corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test; and
the inspection device is configured to obtain an inspection result of the battery cell under test.
Regarding the language “input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test”, the meaning of the term “a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test” in light of the specification and drawings is unclear. With references to Figs. 1-2, for example, a test terminal 3 corresponding to a battery cell 2 under test is shown, with the test terminal 3 itself including terminals, e.g., test terminals 31 corresponding to the positive electrodes of the battery cells 2 under test and test terminals 32 corresponding to the negative electrodes of the battery cells 2 under test such as shown in Fig. 2. It is therefore unclear whether the language “a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test” as recited in claim 1 refers to a terminal having a structure such as test terminal 3 (which includes other terminals, such as a positive electrode terminal 31 and a negative electrode terminal 32), or whether this language refers to a terminal having a structure such as a positive electrode terminal 31 or a negative electrode terminal 32. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear. For purposes of the present examination, the language “a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test” is construed as having a scope that includes a structure such as test terminal 3 that includes other terminals, e.g., test terminals 31 corresponding to the positive electrodes of the battery cells 2 under test and test terminals 32 corresponding to the negative electrodes of the battery cells 2 under test such as shown in Fig. 2.
Regarding the language “input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test”, it is unclear whether the different test lines and the test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test are to be regarded as required elements of the inspection circuit. For purposes of the present examination, the different test lines and the test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test are construed to be required elements of the inspection circuit. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Claim 1 first recites “a plurality of pathway switching circuits”, and then subsequently recites “wherein: the pathway switching circuit is configured …”. In the subsequent recitation, it is unclear to which of the plurality of pathway switching circuits “the pathway switching circuit” is intended to refer. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Claim 1 recites “the pathway switching circuit is configured to connect, according to an inspection signal, an inspection device corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test”. For purposes of the present examination, “an inspection device” in this recitation is understood to mean an inspection device of the previously-recited plurality of inspection devices, and “a test terminal” in this recitation is understood to mean the previously-recited test terminal. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Claims 2-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “the inspection device comprises an insulation inspection device and a voltage inspection device”. As best understood by the examiner in light of the disclosure, the language is intended to mean the plurality of inspection devices comprise an insulation inspection device and a voltage inspection device. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
In claim 2, regarding the language “a plurality of battery cells under test are present” it is unclear if “present” means that the plurality of battery cells under test is a required element of the inspection circuit. For purposes of the present examination, ““a plurality of battery cells under test” is interpreted as a required element of the inspection circuit. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Claim 1 first recites “a plurality of pathway switching circuits”, while claim 2 recites “the pathway switching circuit is configured …”. In claim 2, it is unclear to which of the plurality of pathway switching circuits “the pathway switching circuit” is intended to refer. The analogous issue is also present in claims 4, 6-8, 10-12, 14 and 18-19, all of depend from claim 1 and recite “the pathway switching circuit”. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Claims 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) by virtue of their dependence from claim 2.
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 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 1-2, 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2024/0402257 to Lee et al. (Lee).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses an inspection circuit, comprising:
a plurality of inspection devices (Lee, e.g., Fig. 5, voltage sensing circuit 300, insulation voltage sensing circuit 400); and
a plurality of pathway switching circuits, input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test, and output ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to the plurality of inspection devices (Lee, e.g., Fig. 5, plurality of pathway switching circuits in the form of first switch 510 and second switch 520 of selection switch 500, with common terminal 51a (input end) of first switch 510 and common terminal 52a (input end) of second switch 520 connected to a power terminal T10 of the battery device 1);
wherein:
the pathway switching circuit is configured to connect, according to an inspection signal, an inspection device corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test (Lee, e.g., Fig. 5, first switch 510 and second switch 520 of selection switch 500 are configured to connected, according to an inspection signal SC1 and/or SC2 provided by switching control unit 600, an inspection device in the form of voltage sensing unit 300 or insulation voltage sensing circuit 400 corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal (T10) corresponding to the battery device 1 under test); and
the inspection device is configured to obtain an inspection result of the battery cell under test (Lee, e.g., Fig. 5, inspection device in the form of voltage sensing unit 300 or insulation voltage sensing circuit 400 obtains an inspect result of the battery device 1 under test).
PNG
media_image1.png
562
507
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee, Fig. 5
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses wherein:
the inspection device comprises an insulation inspection device and a voltage inspection device (see Lee as applied to claim 1 above);
a plurality of battery cells under test are present (Lee, e.g., paragraph 48, with a battery module or battery pack implicitly including a plurality of battery cells);
the pathway switching circuit comprises an insulation test path and a voltage test path (see Lee as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 5, with selection switch including an insulation test path to insulation voltage sensing circuit 400 and a voltage test path to voltage sensing circuit 300);
an input end of the insulation test path is connected to test terminals corresponding to positive electrodes of the plurality of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the insulation test path is connected to the insulation inspection device (see Lee as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 5, with selection switch including an insulation test path to insulation voltage sensing circuit 400 and a voltage test path to voltage sensing circuit 300; an input end of the insulation test path is connected to test terminals corresponding to positive electrodes of the battery device 1, and an output end of the insulation test path is connected to insulation voltage sensing circuit 400);
an input end of the voltage test path is connected to test terminals corresponding to positive electrodes of the battery cells under test and test terminals corresponding to negative electrodes of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the voltage test path is connected to the voltage inspection device (see Lee as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 5, with selection switch including an insulation test path to insulation voltage sensing circuit 400 and a voltage test path to voltage sensing circuit 300; an input end of the voltage test path is connected to test terminals corresponding to positive electrodes of the battery device 1, and an output end of the voltage test path is connected to voltage sensing circuit 300);
the insulation inspection device is configured to obtain an insulation inspection result of the battery cells under test with the insulation test path connected (Lee, e.g., Figs. 10 and 12); and
the voltage inspection device is configured to obtain a voltage inspection result of the battery cells under test with the voltage test path connected (Lee, e.g., Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses wherein:
the voltage test path comprises a first voltage test path and a second voltage test path (Lee, e.g., Fig. 8);
an input end of the first voltage test path is connected to first test terminals corresponding to the positive electrodes of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the first voltage test path is connected to the voltage inspection device (Lee, e.g., Fig. 8); and
an input end of the second voltage test path is connected to first test terminals corresponding to the negative electrodes of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the second voltage test path is connected to the voltage inspection device (Lee, e.g., Fig. 8).
Claim 20 recites an inspection method, comprising:
obtaining an inspection signal;
controlling, according to the inspection signal, a corresponding inspection device to connect to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test; and
inspecting, according to the inspection signal, the battery cell under test to obtain an inspection result,
and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as anticipated Lee for reasons analogous to those discussed above in connection with rejection of claim 1.
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.
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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
Regarding claim 19, Lee is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing a protection circuit; wherein: a first end of the protection circuit is connected to the inspection device, and a second end of the protection circuit is connected to the pathway switching circuit; and the protection circuit is configured to provide current limiting protection during inspection of the battery cell under test. The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use of protection circuits such as fuses, resettable breakers and the like for protecting electrical instrumentation from overcurrent condition resulting from short circuits, especially in the context of battery measurements, was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. It 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 to modify Lee to include a protection circuit, with a first end of the protection circuit being connected to the inspection device, with a second end of the protection circuit being connected to the pathway switching circuit, and with the protection circuit being configured to provide current limiting protection during inspection of the battery cell under test. In this way, the inspection devices of Lee can be protected from overcurrent conditions caused by inadvertent short circuits and the like.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of US 3,780,274 to Thompson et al. (Thompson).
Regarding claim 18, Lee is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing a filter circuit; wherein: a first end of the filter circuit is connected to the inspection device, and a second end of the filter circuit is connected to the pathway switching circuit; and the filter circuit is configured to perform filtering during inspection of the battery cell under test. The use of filtering to reduce the effects of noise on electrical measurements is known (Thompson, e.g., col. 1, lines 48-50). It 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 to modify Lee to include a filter circuit, with a first end of the filter circuit being connected to the inspection device, with a second end of the filter circuit being connected to the pathway switching circuit; and with the filter circuit being configured to perform filtering during inspection of the battery cell under test. In this way, the effects of electrical noise upon the electrical measurements of Lee can be reduced.
Claims 1-2, 5 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hioki Battery Insulation Tester BT5525, Product Brochure, 2/14/2022, available at https://hioki.co.id/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1.pdf (Hioki) in view of US 2009/0128173 to Wong et al. (Wong).
Teachings of Hioki and prior art battery testing principles are considered at the outset. Hioki relates to a battery insulation tester. Hioki’s tester is a 2-lead device suitable for performing insulation testing between module and pack electrodes and battery enclosures (Hioki, e.g., page 2, top figure captioned “Measuring insulation resistance between electrodes”). Additionally, the examiner takes Official notice of the fact that battery testing using other types of 2-lead devices, e.g., a voltmeter for measuring a battery voltage, was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Likewise, the examiner takes Official notice of the fact that batteries comprising multiple cells connected in parallel, series or a combination of parallel and series, were well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that performing battery insulation testing using an instrument such as Hioki’s tester in conjunction with performing battery voltage testing using a voltmeter would be useful for inspecting/diagnosing battery performance both during battery production and/or after the battery is placed into service. Such understanding falls well within the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ in light of their knowledge of battery testing instrumentation specifically and electrical testing generally.
Turning now to claim 1, Hioki taken in combination with well-known and conventional use of voltmeters for measuring battery voltage discloses a plurality of inspection devices. Although this prior art at least suggests to one of ordinary skill the use of such inspection devices as separate instruments for evaluating a battery under test, it does not explicitly disclose the integration of these inspection circuits into a common inspection circuit. Accordingly, this prior art is not understood to explicitly disclose:
a plurality of pathway switching circuits, input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test, and output ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to the plurality of inspection devices;
wherein:
the pathway switching circuit is configured to connect, according to an inspection signal, an inspection device corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test; and
the inspection device is configured to obtain an inspection result of the battery cell under test.
Wong relates to a system and a method for testing an electronic device. Wong discloses that electronic devices are always tested before being sold to the public so as to ensure quality assurance of the electronic devices, and that various testing/measuring tools are employed for the test, including multimeters, oscillographs, etc. (Wong, e.g., paragraph 4). Wong discloses that when performing the test on an electronic device using a multimeter or an oscillograph, a tester performing the test has to manually move the electronic device repetitiously according to different test requirements and stages (Wong, e.g., paragraph 4). Accordingly, Wong discloses that manually performing the test is tedious and time consuming and manual testing are subjected to human errors resulting in low-accuracy of the test result (Wong, e.g., paragraph 4). To address these problems, Wong discloses in Figs. 1-2, for example, arrangements in which different instruments units 14 can be coupled to an electronic device 30 to be tested via a switching unit 20. Wong discloses that one or some measuring selectors 204 of the switching unit 20 can be operated to connect corresponding instrument(s) of the instrument unit 14 to corresponding testing point(s) of the electronic device 30 via corresponding input probe(s) 122 of testing port 12 (Wong, e.g., paragraph 21). Wong discloses that the switches of the switching unit may be relays (Wong, e.g., paragraph 20), which the examiner notes implicitly require the use of electrical control signaling. Wong therefore discloses a plurality of pathway switching circuits (e.g., switching units 20 in Fig. 2), input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a device to be tested, and output ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to the plurality of inspection devices (e.g., output ends of switching units 20 respectively connected to instrument units 14). Wong further discloses the pathway switching circuits (e.g., switching units 20 in Fig. 2) are configured to connect, according to an inspection signal (e.g., electrical control signal for controlling relays of switching units 20 in Fig. 2), an inspection device corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal corresponding to an electronic device under test (e.g., Wong’s switching units 20 in Fig. 2 operate to selectively couple instrument units 14 to electric device under test). Wong further discloses the inspection device (e.g., one of the instrument units that has been selectively coupled to an electronic device under test) is configured to obtain an inspection result of the device under test. Wong discloses an advantage of the arrangements of Figs. 1-2 is that the testing systems can automatically test the electronic device 30 without swapping out the test instruments or moving the electronic device 30 to different work benches, thereby shortening testing time and assuring an an accurate test result (Wong, e.g., paragraph 24).
It 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 to modify the plurality of inspection devices disclosed by Hioki in combination with the well-known and conventional use of voltmeters for measuring battery voltage to further include a plurality of pathway switching circuits, input ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to different test lines connected to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test, and output ends of the pathway switching circuits being respectively connected to the plurality of inspection devices, with the pathway switching circuit being configured to connect, according to an inspection signal, an inspection device corresponding to the inspection signal and a test terminal corresponding to the battery cell under test, and with the inspection device is configured to obtain an inspection result of the battery cell under test. In this way, in the same manner disclosed by Wong, integration of the inspection circuits into a common inspection circuit can be realized, with result being a common inspection circuit that can automatically test the battery without swapping out the test instruments or moving the battery to different work benches, thereby shortening testing time and assuring an accurate test result.
Regarding claim 2, Hioki in view of Wong discloses wherein:
the inspection device comprises an insulation inspection device and a voltage inspection device (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1);
a plurality of battery cells under test are present (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1);
the pathway switching circuit comprises an insulation test path and a voltage test path (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1, implicit in order to switch between insulation testing and voltage testing functionalities);
an input end of the insulation test path is connected to test terminals corresponding to positive electrodes of the plurality of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the insulation test path is connected to the insulation inspection device (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1, implicit in the case of insultation testing measurements of a battery comprising parallel-connected cells);
an input end of the voltage test path is connected to test terminals corresponding to positive electrodes of the battery cells under test and test terminals corresponding to negative electrodes of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the voltage test path is connected to the voltage inspection device (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1, implicit in the case of voltmeter measurements of a battery comprising parallel-connected cells);
the insulation inspection device is configured to obtain an insulation inspection result of the battery cells under test with the insulation test path connected (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1, battery insultation tester will obtain insulation inspection result when the plurality of pathway switching circuits is configured to connect battery insultation tester in response to inspection signal); and
the voltage inspection device is configured to obtain a voltage inspection result of the battery cells under test with the voltage test path connected (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 1, voltmeter will obtain battery voltage result when the plurality of pathway switching circuits is configured to connect voltmeter in response to inspection signal).
Regarding claim 5, Hioki in view of Wong discloses wherein:
the voltage test path comprises a first voltage test path and a second voltage test path (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied to claim 2, implicit that voltage test path includes a first voltage test path, e.g., “+” test path, and a second voltage test path, e.g., “-“ test path);
an input end of the first voltage test path is connected to first test terminals corresponding to the positive electrodes of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the first voltage test path is connected to the voltage inspection device (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied above, implicit that “+” voltage test path will be connected to positive electrodes of battery to measure battery voltage, with this test path in turn being connected to “+” input of voltmeter); and
an input end of the second voltage test path is connected to first test terminals corresponding to the negative electrodes of the battery cells under test, and an output end of the second voltage test path is connected to the voltage inspection device (see Hioki in view of Wong as applied above, implicit that “-” voltage test path will be connected to negative electrodes of battery to measure battery voltage, with this test path in turn being connected to “-” input of voltmeter).
Regarding claim 19, Hioki in view of Wong is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing a protection circuit; wherein: a first end of the protection circuit is connected to the inspection device, and a second end of the protection circuit is connected to the pathway switching circuit; and the protection circuit is configured to provide current limiting protection during inspection of the battery cell under test. The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use of protection circuits such as fuses, resettable breakers and the like for protecting electrical instrumentation from overcurrent condition resulting from short circuits, especially in the context of battery measurements, was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. It 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 to modify Hioki in view of Wong to include a protection circuit, with a first end of the protection circuit being connected to the inspection device, with a second end of the protection circuit being connected to the pathway switching circuit, and with the protection circuit being configured to provide current limiting protection during inspection of the battery cell under test. In this way, the inspection devices of Hioki in view of Wong can be protected from overcurrent conditions caused by inadvertent short circuits and the like.
Claim 20 recites an inspection method, comprising:
obtaining an inspection signal;
controlling, according to the inspection signal, a corresponding inspection device to connect to a test terminal corresponding to a battery cell under test; and
inspecting, according to the inspection signal, the battery cell under test to obtain an inspection result,
and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Hioki in view of Wong for reasons analogous to those discussed above in connection with the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hioki in view of Wong, and further in view of Thompson.
Regarding claim 18, Hioki in view of Wong is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing a filter circuit; wherein: a first end of the filter circuit is connected to the inspection device, and a second end of the filter circuit is connected to the pathway switching circuit; and the filter circuit is configured to perform filtering during inspection of the battery cell under test. The use of filtering to reduce the effects of noise on electrical measurements is known (Thompson, e.g., col. 1, lines 48-50). It 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 to modify Hioki in view of Wong to include a filter circuit, with a first end of the filter circuit being connected to the inspection device, with a second end of the filter circuit being connected to the pathway switching circuit; and with the filter circuit being configured to perform filtering during inspection of the battery cell under test. In this way, the effects of electrical noise upon the electrical measurements of Hioki in view of Wong can be reduced.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 4,397,021 to Lloyd et al. relates to test systems and more specifically to a computerized test system in which a plurality of instruments each having associated therewith a dedicated programmable processor, each dedicated processor communicating with a central computer for the purpose of transferring test program instructions written in a high level compiler language to the instrument for execution; see, e.g., Fig. 2.
US 4,760,330 to Lias et al. relates to a test system in which test instruments are shared by a plurality of test stations; see, e.g., Fig. 1.
US 5,036,479 to Prednis et al. relates to modular test workstations useful for testing electronic avionics equipment both in the factory during production and in the field for maintenance and repair; see, e.g., Fig. 1b.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL R MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1964. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/DANIEL R MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863