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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11 August 2026.
Summary
This non-final office action for application 18/487,252 is in response to Applicant’s election filed on 11 August 2026, which was a reply to an election/restriction requirement dated 28 July 2026. Per Applicant’s reply, claims 1-16 are under full consideration.
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 1-6, 9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pomerleau (US-20200080417-A1) in view of Porterfield et al. (US-20240204271-A1), hereinafter “Porterfield”.
Regarding Claim 1, Pomerleau discloses an apparatus comprising (a system, assembly, module, and method are disclosed; see Abstract): a processor (processor 224; see [0024]); and a memory (memory unit 112; see [0024]) storing instructions thereon that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: collect one or more metrics associated with an energy storage device in response to one or more criteria (The processor can transmit the information received from the sensor 230 to the communications unit, which may transmit the information through the first connector to the battery, particular to the memory unit, when the module is connected to the battery; see [0036]), and transmit the one or more metrics based on a comparison of the one or more metrics to a target threshold value (the processor may be configured to analyze the information received from the sensor 230 and determine whether the information related to the battery falls within an acceptable range of operation; see [0036]).
Pomerleau does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more metrics comprise a concentration level of a noxious gas. However, Porterfield discloses wherein the one or more metrics comprise a concentration level of a noxious gas (controller 144 receives signals from first detector 124 and second detector 140 regarding the conditions of first battery pack 112 and the conditions of second battery pack 128. Conditions include presence of gas (for example, decomposition byproducts like hydrogen gas or carbon monoxide); see [0039]).
Pomerleau and Porterfield are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery monitoring. Monitoring noxious gases, as disclosed by Porterfield, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Porterfield discloses the motivation of monitoring decomposition byproducts and thereby indicating a fire event of gas leak; see [0069]).
Regarding Claim 2, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1. Pomerleau further discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: collect one or more second metrics associated with the energy storage device, a tool electrically coupled to the energy storage device, or both based on the comparison of the one or more metrics to the target threshold value; and transmit the one or more second metrics (The sensor 230 may include one sensor, or more than one sensor as desired. For example, the sensor 230 may include a current sensor, a temperature sensor, a voltage sensor, and/or an accelerometer… the processor may be configured to analyze the information received from the sensor 230 and determine whether the information related to the battery falls within an acceptable range of operation; see [0036]).
Regarding Claim 3, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 2. Pomerleau further discloses wherein the one or more second metrics comprise at least one of: an internal pressure value associated with the energy storage device; a temperature value associated with the energy storage device; an electrical shock value associated with the energy storage device; a vibration value associated with the energy storage device, the tool, or both; an acceleration value associated with the energy storage device, the tool, or both; a rotation speed value associated with the energy storage device; a bending value associated with the energy storage device (The sensor 230 may include one sensor, or more than one sensor as desired. For example, the sensor 230 may include a current sensor, a temperature sensor, a voltage sensor, and/or an accelerometer… the processor may be configured to analyze the information received from the sensor 230 and determine whether the information related to the battery falls within an acceptable range of operation; see [0036]).
Regarding Claim 4, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1. Pomerleau further discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: provide power to circuitry comprised in the apparatus in association with transmitting the one or more metrics (the processor can transmit the information received from the sensor to the communication unit, which may transmit the information through the first connector to the battery; see [0036] and “the battery cell is electrically connected to the first connector, such that power is transferred to the downhole tool powered by the battery assembly”; see [0031]), based on the comparison of the one or more metrics to the target threshold value (the processor may be configured to analyze the information received from the sensor 230 and determine whether the information related to the battery falls within an acceptable range of operation; see [0036]).
Regarding Claim 5, Pomerleau and Portfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1. Pomerleau further discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: activate one or more functions based on at least one of: one or more control signals received at the apparatus; and the comparison of the one or more metrics to the target threshold value, wherein the one or more functions comprise at least one of: a first function associated with venting the energy storage device; and a second function associated with decoupling the energy storage device from a tool electrically coupled to the energy storage device (once the processor 224 in step 412 determines that the remaining capacity of the battery 20 a is depleted to the predetermined level, the method 400 proceeds to step 420. In step 420, a signal is sent to the controller 306b of the battery assembly 10b (also referred to as the second battery assembly 10b) that directs the controller 306b to activate the switch 234b, which transitions the battery 20b (second battery 20b) to an activated state… After the second battery 20b is transitioned to the activated state in response to the signal sent in step 420, the battery system 300 powers the downhole tool 60 in step 428 using the second battery 20b. During step 428, both the first and second batteries 20a and 20b may be simultaneously in an activated state, and thus both may power the downhole tool 60 for a period of time. This overlap may be desirable to ensure that there is no gap in power supplied to the downhole tool 60. Once step 428 has fully commenced, and the second battery 20b has begun powering the downhole tool 60, the method can proceed to step 432, in which the controller 306a directs the switch 304 a to transition the first battery 20a to a deactivated state, in which the first battery 20a no longer powers the downhole tool 60; see [0048]).
Regarding Claim 6, Pomerleau and Portfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1. Pomerleau further discloses wherein the one or more criteria comprise a detection of at least one of: a motion event associated with the energy storage device, a tool associated with the energy storage device, or both; a shock event associated with the energy storage device, the tool, or both; a rotation event associated with the energy storage device, the tool, or both; a bending event associated with the energy storage device, the tool, or both (the sensor may include an accelerometer that monitors vibration and/or shock of the battery; see [0036]).
Regarding Claim 9, Pomerleau and Portfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1. Pomerleau further discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to at least one of: transmit an alert notification based on the comparison of the one or more metrics to the target threshold value (a signal may be sent from the master bus to a surface system, where the drilling operator may be notified that the charge of the first battery has been depleted to the predetermined level; see [0048]).
Regarding Claim 14, Pomerleau discloses a system comprising: an energy storage device (a battery assembly; see [0004]); a monitoring device (a processor configured to monitor information related to the battery; see [0004]), and a computing device configured to generate one or more notifications based on the one or more metrics (a signal may be sent from the master bus to a surface system, where the drilling operator may be notified that the charge of the first battery has been depleted to the predetermined level; see [0048]). The remaining limitations of this claim do not exceed those of claim 1. Please refer to the claim 1 rejection as the rejection of the shared limitations follows the same rationale as those in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 15, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the system of claim 14. Pomerleau further discloses a set of sensor devices configured to collect the one or more metrics (The sensor may include one sensor, or more than one sensor as desired; see [0036]), wherein the set of sensor comprise at least one of: a first sensor device configured to detect the noxious gas, measure a concentration level of the noxious gas, or both; a second sensor device configured to measure an internal pressure value associated with the energy storage device; a third sensor device configured to measure a temperature value associated with the energy storage device; a fourth sensor device configured to detect an electrical shock associated with the energy storage device; a fifth sensor device configured to measure a vibration amount associated with the energy storage device, a tool electrically coupled to the energy storage device, or both; a sixth sensor device configured to measure an acceleration amount associated with the energy storage device, the tool, or both; a seventh sensor device configured to measure a rotation amount associated with the energy storage device; and an eighth sensor device configured to measure a bending amount associated with the energy storage device (the sensor 230 may include a current sensor that measures a current draw of the battery 20 of a period of time, a temperature sensor that monitors the temperature of the battery 20, a voltage sensor that monitors voltage data of the battery 20 over a period of time, and/or an accelerometer that monitors vibration and/or shock of the battery 20 over a period of time when the module 30 is connected to the battery 20; see [0036]).
Regarding Claim 16, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the system of claim 14. Pomerleau further discloses an access node (master bus 100 may serve as a central hub for communication between all of the battery assemblies; see [0045]) configured to at least one of: relay the one or more metrics from the monitoring device and the computing device (processor can transmit the information to the communications unit… communications unit may also transmit the information received to a master bus, which may further transmit the information to the drilling operator; see [0036]); and relay one or more control signals from the computing device to the monitoring device (the operator may send a signal to the master bus. This signal may direct the master bus to instruct the controller; see [0052]).
Claims 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pomerleau (US-20200080417-A1) in view of Porterfield et al. (US-20240204271-A1), hereinafter “Porterfield” and Sivakumaran et al. (US-11477736-B1), hereinafter “Siv”.
Regarding Claim 7, Pomerleau and Portfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Pomerleau does not explicitly teach an active or sleep state of the processor. However, Siv discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to at least one of: enter an active state associated with collecting the one or more metrics, based on the one or more criteria; and remain in the active state or enter a sleep state based on the comparison of the one or more metrics to the target threshold value (wherein the program instructions, when executed by the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to… in response to determination that the buffer usage threshold has been satisfied: transition the one or more processors from the low power state to the active state; see Claim 2).
Pomerleau and Siv are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery monitoring. Incorporating a function enabling the processor to transition from between a low power state and an active state, as disclosed by Siv, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Siv discloses the motivation of reducing battery consumption based on a determined state (see Col. 1 Lines 49-50).
Regarding Claim 13, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Pomerleau does not explicitly teach a temporal threshold. However, Siv discloses wherein the one or more criteria comprise a temporal threshold (sensor data collected during each of the plurality of intervals having a first interval duration and transmitting periodically and upon completion of each of the first plurality of intervals, the sensor data stored in the buffer during the first interval duration; see Claim 6). Incorporating a temporal threshold would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Siv offers the motivation of allowing the one or more processors to be maintained in the lower power state for longer periods of time (see Col. 6 Lines 3-5).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pomerleau (US-20200080417-A1) in view of Porterfield et al. (US-20240204271-A1), hereinafter “Porterfield” and Leonard et al. (US-20090144001-A1), hereinafter “Leonard”.
Regarding Claim 8, Pomerleau and Portfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Pomerleau does not explicitly teach a communication protocol socket associated with remotely connecting to the apparatus. However, Leonard discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: establish a communication protocol socket associated with remotely connecting to the apparatus (The communication networks over which the battery network controller can communicate with a battery sub network include… TCP/IP over the internet, TCP/IP over an intranet; see [0014]-[0018]), wherein establishing the communication protocol socket is based on the comparison of the one or more metrics to the target threshold value (The battery network controller will compare each value as it is collected and generate an alarm log which will contain the identifier of the cell or block that is out of tolerance, the value recorded, and the limit value against which it was compared; see [0024]).
Pomerleau and Leonard are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery monitoring. Establishing a communication protocol socket associated with remotely connecting to the apparatus, as disclosed by Leonard, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Leonard offers the motivation of enabling the alert of personnel to take appropriate action (see [0025]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pomerleau (US-20200080417-A1) in view of Porterfield et al. (US-20240204271-A1), hereinafter “Porterfield” and Thandiwe (US-6456036-B1).
Regarding Claim 10, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Pomerleau does not explicitly disclose generation and transmission of a data packet. However, Thandiwe discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: generate a data packet comprising the one or more metrics; and transmit the data packet (If the device communication interface is not idle, then the battery microprocessor returns to a monitoring state. Upon the absence of device communication and presence of communication pathway idleness, the battery microprocessor transmits data packets across the network; see Col. 3 Lines 29-34).
Pomerleau and Thandiwe are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery monitoring. Incorporating the generation and transmission of a data packet, as disclosed by Thandiwe, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Thandiwe offers the motivation of establishing communication with a site (see Col. 3 Line 34).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pomerleau (US-20200080417-A1) in view of Porterfield et al. (US-20240204271-A1), hereinafter “Porterfield” and Lin (CN-204650329-U).
Regarding Claim 11, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Pomerleau does not explicitly teach monitoring sulfur oxides. However, Lin discloses wherein a concentration level of a noxious gas is monitored, and wherein the noxious gas comprises one or more sulfur oxides (the data acquisition device in this embodiment of the present invention also includes a sulfur dioxide gas sensor to detect the emission of sulfur dioxide gas. When the concentration is too high, the exhaust equipment is activated; see [0010]).
Pomerleau and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery monitoring. Monitoring for sulfur dioxide, as disclosed by Lin, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Lin offers the motivation of preventing excessively high concentrations of sulfur dioxide from corroding the battery (see [0010]).
Regarding Claim 12, Pomerleau and Porterfield together disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Pomerleau does not explicitly teach monitoring sulfur dioxide. However, Lin discloses wherein a concentration level of a noxious gas is monitored, and wherein the noxious gas comprises sulfur dioxide (the data acquisition device in this embodiment of the present invention also includes a sulfur dioxide gas sensor to detect the emission of sulfur dioxide gas. When the concentration is too high, the exhaust equipment is activated; see [0010]). Monitoring for sulfur dioxide, as disclosed by Lin, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Lin offers the motivation of preventing excessively high concentrations of sulfur dioxide from corroding the battery (see [0010]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA LEE KUYKENDALL whose telephone number is (571)270-3806. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/A.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774
