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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 01/30/2024 and 11/04/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. [US 12,322,766].
With respect to claim 1, Lee discloses a power storage device comprising a battery stack and a deformation detection sensor that detects an amount of deformation of the battery stack [Fig. 1], wherein an average expansion rate of the battery stack [Fig. 7] at a charging rate in a range of 80 to 100% is 2.8 times or more of an average expansion rate of the battery stack at a charging rate in a range of 0 to 80% [Fig. 3; further note the statement that an average expansion rate is a certain value relates in a functional manner, i.e. apparatus claims cover what a device is and not what it does, in this case Lee discloses the structure required to determine an average expansion rate and compare between two ranges as disclosed in Figs 1 and 7].
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. [US 12,322,766] in view of Tooyama [US 2026/0058134].
With respect to claim 2, Lee does not detail the layers of the measure battery. However, the instant claim recites a well-known battery structure in the art. Specifically, Tooyama relates to a battery pack and teaches the battery stack includes a positive electrode current collector layer, a positive electrode active material layer, a separator layer or a solid electrolyte layer, a negative electrode active material layer, and a negative electrode current collector layer arranged in this order; and the negative electrode active material layer includes at least artificial graphite [Fig. 4; par. 0043 discloses negative artificial graphite].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before filing date of the instant invention to utilize the claimed battery as taught by Tooyama for the benefit of utilizing a battery structure/material that improves the battery performance and durability as explicitly stated by Tooyama.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. [US 12,322,766] in view of Ringuette et al. [US 2020/0203783].
With respect to claim 3, while Lee discloses adjusting the charging/discharging based on the amount of deformation, he fails to explicitly state wherein charging of the power storage device is stopped. Ringuette relates to battery swelling detection and teaches stopping charging when the amount of deformation detected by the deformation detection sensor during the charging exceeds a predetermined value [par. 0032, Fig. 3].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before filing date of the instant invention to stop charging when the swelling gets greater than a threshold for the benefit of preventing permanent damage to the batteries.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL R PELTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/NATHANIEL R PELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights