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 .
Status of the Claims
In the communication dated February 16, 2024, claims 1-20 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the voltage drain circuit including a power consuming load and a switching device of claim 20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 3, 12 and 18 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 3 recites “a chemical fuse that can transition from the first state to the second state” where the first state is interpreted as being “open” and the second state is interpreted as being “closed” from claim 1. However, the typical meaning of a chemical fuse is a fuse with a built-in heater that will blow and disable the battery when an overvoltage event occurs. From the specification, the chemical fuse is configured to open creating an open circuit (PGPUB - ¶29/37). However, the application does state “In an embodiment in which the discharge switching device 22 is a chemical fuse, the closed switch provides a direct path for current to flow through the discharge switching device” (see ¶28 of the PGPUB) but the Examiner is uncertain as to how this fits with the ordinary meaning of the chemical fuse.
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 (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.
(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, 5-6, 10-11, 14 and 16-17 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shipp US8466659B2 (cited by the applicant in the IDS dated 2/16/2024).
Regarding claim 1. Shipp discloses a system (FIG. 7) for rendering a battery pack (102) safe for shipping or disposal (column 2, lines 6-7 - “an apparatus for rendering a battery safe for disposal.”), the system comprising:
a voltage drain circuit (114) connected to battery cells (120) of the battery pack (100).
a discharge switching device (112) operable to transition from a first state to a second state (open vs. closed), wherein the voltage drain circuit (114) discharges the battery cells only when the discharge switching device is in the second state (column 7 lines 6-9 – “Upon closure of relay 112, the battery 120 is discharged through resistance 114 until substantially all of the chemistry in the battery is used up and zero volts appear at the terminal”); and
an activation device (104) operable to cause the discharge switching device to transition from the first state to the second state (column 7, lines 9-12 - “The program contained in device controller 104 decides when to signal relay 112 for closure via a preprogrammed decision-making loop”).
Regarding claim 2. Shipp discloses that the discharge switching device permanently transitions from the first state to the second state based on the activation device (column 7, lines 14-17 - “the drill was not used for a period of 30 minutes, the software located in device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close”).
Regarding claim 5 and claim 14. Shipp discloses a power consuming load (116) that is connected to ground (FIG. 1 via negative terminal 17) through the voltage drain circuit (114) when the discharge switching device is in the second state (column 7, lines 6-9 - “Upon closure of relay 112, the battery 120 is discharged through resistance 114 until substantially all of the chemistry in the battery is used up and zero volts appear at the terminal.”- when the switch 112 is closed, the power consuming load is connected to the negative terminal which is in turn connected to ground).
Regarding claim 6 and claim 17. Shipp discloses that the activation device (104) includes a battery management system included in the battery pack (60) (column 3, line 61-column 4, line 5 - “an integral battery encoder 65, which provides the means in battery pack 60 for the electrical storage of battery identification data, and for communicating that battery identification data externally through a data terminal 66 attached to battery pack enclosure 64” ; column 6, lines 23-26 - “a data terminal 110 is connected to the device controller. Data terminal 110 is connected to a battery identification circuit” – because the controller and the encoder are connected, it follows that the activation device includes a battery management system).
Regarding claim 10. Shipp discloses a system for rendering a battery pack (202) including battery cells (120) safe for shipping or disposal (column 2, lines 6-7 - “an apparatus for rendering a battery safe for disposal.”), the system comprising:
a voltage drain circuit (114) connected to a positive terminal (106) of the battery cells (120) (see FIG. 7);
a discharge switching device (112) operable to permanently transition from a first state to a second state (column 7, lines 14-17 - “the drill was not used for a period of 30 minutes, the software located in device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close”), wherein the voltage drain circuit discharges the battery cells when the discharge switching device permanently transitions from the first state to the second state (column 7 lines 6-9 – “Upon closure of relay 112, the battery 120 is discharged through resistance 114 until substantially all of the chemistry in the battery is used up and zero volts appear at the terminal”); and
an activation device (104) operable to cause the discharge switching device to transition from the first state to the second state(column 7, lines 9-12 - “The program contained in device controller 104 decides when to signal relay 112 for closure via a preprogrammed decision-making loop”).
Regarding claim 11. Shipp discloses the discharge switching device prevents charging of the battery cells when the discharge switching device is in the second state (column 7, lines 13-19 - “device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close. This would result in the discharge of the battery which would in effect use the chemistry that was still available in the otherwise partially discharged battery”).
Regarding claim 16. Shipp discloses a method of rendering a battery pack (102) including battery cells (120) safe for shipping or disposal (“an apparatus for rendering a battery safe for disposal.”), the method comprising the steps of:
operating an activation device (104) upon a decision to discharge the battery cells (column 7, lines 13-19 - “device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close. This would result in the discharge of the battery which would in effect use the chemistry that was still available in the otherwise partially discharged battery.”);
transitioning a discharge switching device (112) from a first state to a second state (open vs. closed) upon operation of the activation device (column 7, lines 15-16 - “device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close”), wherein the discharge switching device permanently transitions from the first state to the second state (column 7, lines 15-16 - “device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close”); and
discharging the battery cells through a voltage drain circuit (114) only when the discharge switching device is in the second state (120) (FIG. 7; column 7, lines 6-9 - “Upon closure of relay 112, the battery 120 is discharged through resistance 114 until substantially all of the chemistry in the battery is used up and zero volts appear at the terminal”).
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.
Claims 3, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipp US8466659B2 (cited by the applicant in the IDS dated 2/16/2024).
Regarding claim 3 and claim 12 and claim 18. Although Shipp discloses a discharge switching device that can transition from the first state to the second state only one time (column 7, lines 14-17 - “the drill was not used for a period of 30 minutes, the software located in device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close” – permanently implying that it is only switched one time), Shipp does not explicitly disclose that the discharge switching device is a chemical fuse.
However, a switch that is permanently closed performs the same function as a fuse that is chemically closed, thus, Shipp discloses a switch that performs the same function as a chemical fuse.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a permanent fusion, as would chemically occur, in order to keep the switch permanently in the closed position to ensure the battery is drained and rendered safe for disposal.
Claims 4, 8-9, 13, 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipp US8466659B2 in view of Stewart et al. US10622816B2 (cited by the applicant in the IDS dated 2/16/2024).
Regarding claim 4 and claim 13. Shipp does not explicitly disclose that the activation device includes a manually operated engagement device.
Stewart discloses that the activation device includes a manually operated engagement device (column 2, lines 48-54 - “a control switch, which may be user operable, such as a normally-open pushbutton 20. The pushbutton 20 may provide a signal to the CPU 16a to alternately activate and deactivate the battery's ‘shipping mode,’ . . . causing the CPU 16a to alternately open and close, respectively, the contactor 19.”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide user activation, as taught by Stewart, to the system of Shipp in order to provide user access to place batteries in a shipping mode which safely stores the battery.
Regarding claim 9 and claim 15. Shipp does not explicitly disclose a visual indicator operable to indicate the state of the discharge switching device.
Stewart discloses a visual indicator (21) operable to indicate the state of the discharge switching device (column 2, lines 55-60 - “The indicator light 21 may be a multi-color LED, which may display multiple colors of light upon control of the CPU 16a”; column 3, lines 52-62 - “Solid Green—90%-100% battery charge; Flashing Green—50%-90% battery charge; Solid Yellow—35%-50% battery charge; Flashing Yellow—20%-35% battery charge; Solid Red—10%-20% battery charge; and Flashing Red—0%-10% battery charge”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the indicator light of Stewart to the system of Shipp in order to indicate to a user when the battery is sufficiently discharged for safe disposal.
Regarding claim 8. Shipp does not explicitly disclose that the activation device includes a manually operated engagement device that communicates with the battery management system.
Stewart discloses that the activation device (20) includes a manually operated engagement device that communicates with the battery management system (16a) (column 2, lines 48-54 - “a control switch, which may be user operable, such as a normally-open pushbutton 20. The pushbutton 20 may provide a signal to the CPU 16a to alternately activate and deactivate the battery's ‘shipping mode,’ . . . causing the CPU 16a to alternately open and close, respectively, the contactor 19.”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide user activation, as taught by Stewart, to the system of Shipp in order to provide user access to place batteries in a shipping mode which safely stores the battery.
Regarding claim 19. Shipp does not explicitly teach the step of visually indicating the discharge of the battery cells through the voltage drain circuit.
Stewart discloses the step of visually indicating the discharge of the battery cells through the voltage drain circuit (column 2, lines 55-60 - “The indicator light 21 may be a multi-color LED, which may display multiple colors of light upon control of the CPU 16a”; column 3, lines 52-62 - “Solid Green—90%-100% battery charge; Flashing Green—50%-90% battery charge; Solid Yellow—35%-50% battery charge; Flashing Yellow—20%-35% battery charge; Solid Red—10%-20% battery charge; and Flashing Red—0%-10% battery charge”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the indicator light of Stewart to the system of Shipp in order to indicate to a user when the battery is sufficiently discharged for safe disposal.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipp US8466659B2 in view of Singer et al. US20200251915A1.
Regarding claim 7. Shipp discloses that the battery management system transitions the discharge switching device to the second state (column 7, lines 14-17 - “the drill was not used for a period of 30 minutes, the software located in device controller 104 would then signal the relay 112 through data terminal 110 to permanently close”).
Shipp does not explicitly disclose this occurs when the battery pack is in a severe fault condition.
Singer discloses discharging a battery to a safe state of charge when the battery pack is in a severe fault condition (¶20).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to discharge the battery of Shipp to a safe level of charge when a fault event occurs, as taught by Singer, in order to prevent dangerous conditions associated with fault events (Singer; ¶20).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipp US8466659B2 in view of Leimbach et al. US20170086826A1
Regarding claim 20. Shipp discloses that the voltage drain circuit (114) includes a power consuming load (114) and a discharge path from the battery cells through the power consuming load when the discharge switching device is in the second state (column 7, lines 7-8 - “the battery 120 is discharged through resistance 114 ” – the resistor acting as a load ).
Shipp does not explicitly teach the voltage drain circuit including a switching device, wherein the switching device provides a discharge path.
Leimbach discloses that the voltage drain circuit (1052) including a switching device (1080), wherein the switching device provides a discharge path (¶89 – drain circuit includes a resistor element and a switch element; ¶91 – MOSFET transistor 1080 closes the circuit across the resistor to drain the batteries).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill at the time of filing to provide the switching device of Leimbach to the system of Shipp in order to allow for effective draining form the batteries (Leimbach; ¶91).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhao et al. CN107359374B – discloses a fuse that may be permanently closed however, is silent as to a chemical fuse.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights