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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1, 5 , 8 , 12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hardy (US 2017/0214256 A1)
As to claims 1 and 15-16, Hardy discloses in figures 1-11, a method comprising: monitoring an ambient temperature associated with a battery pack [plurality of temperature sensors are disclosed; see ¶0081 and ¶0084];
in response to detecting that the ambient temperature exceeds a temperature threshold, initializing an excursion timer [see ¶00176-0177; a first fault when a threshold value of 2 recorded for 10 seconds and which implies that the clock is imitated when the temperature exceeds and the timer sets or initialize for 10 second]
determining whether the excursion timer exceeds a time threshold [determining if it persisted for 10 seconds]; and when the excursion timer exceeds the time threshold, executing a mitigation action at the battery pack [see ¶180].
As to claim 5, Hardy discloses in figures 1-11, after initializing the excursion timer: in response to detecting that the ambient temperature has fallen below the temperature threshold, terminating the excursion timer [see ¶0177 ; the battery operating at 200 amps and 300 volts a level 10 fault might be an absolute temperature of 100 degrees. the level 1 fault would only be recorded if it persisted for 10 second and it is implicit that timer is included and the timer is ending after 10seconds].
As to claim 8, Hardy discloses in figures 1-11, battery pack [see ¶003]
comprising: a temperature sensor [see ¶0081 and figure 2] ; and
a controller configured to monitor an ambient temperature associated with the battery pack [see ¶0081 and master unit 25];
in response to detecting that the ambient temperature exceeds a temperature threshold, initializing an excursion timer [see ¶00176-0177; a first fault when a threshold value of 2 recorded for 10 seconds and which implies that the clock is imitated when the temperature exceeds and the timer sets or initialize for 10 second].
determining whether the excursion timer exceeds a time threshold [determining if it persisted for 10 seconds].; and when the excursion timer exceeds the time threshold, executing a mitigation action at the battery pack [see ¶180].
As to claim 12, Hardy discloses in figures 1-11, wherein the controller is configured to, after initializing the excursion timer: in response to detecting that the ambient temperature has fallen below the temperature threshold, terminate the excursion timer [ a level 10 fault might be an absolute temperature of 100 degrees. the level 1 fault would only be recorded if it persisted for 10 seconds and it is implicit ant the timer ends after 10seconds; see ¶171, ¶177 and ¶80].
As to Claims 15 and 16 and the device and the method claims are disclosed by the device as disclosed above.
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.
Claims 2-4, 6,9-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Hardy in view of Rees et al. ( US 2005/0017685 A10. hereinafter Rees.
As to claim 2, Hardy discloses all of the claim limitations except,: prior to initiating monitoring of the ambient temperature, determining that the battery pack is idle.
Rees discloses in figures 1-7, a battery monitoring system, discloses determining that the battery pack is idle for temperature monitoring [see ¶0078 ].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have the method of Hardy and comprise prior to initiating monitoring of the ambient temperature, determining that the battery pack is idle as taught by Rees in order to accurately measuring the temperature and prevent battery degradation.
As to claim 3, Hardy discloses in figures 1-7, wherein executing the mitigation action includes: controlling a wireless communications interface of the battery pack to transmit a beacon containing an indication that the excursion timer has exceeded the time threshold.
Rees discloses in figures 1-7. wherein executing the mitigation action includes: controlling a wireless communications interface of the battery pack to transmit a beacon containing an indication that the excursion timer has exceeded the time threshold [battery data and environment information is communicated; see ¶0093].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to add wireless communications for communication of battery characteristics and environment information such as temperature in Hardy’s apparatus as taught by Rees in order to enhance battery performance and prolong battery life.
As to claim 4, Hardy in view of Rees discloses , the beacon further contains an excursion severity indicator based on at least one of (i) a current value of the excursion timer, and (ii) a difference between the ambient temperature and the temperature threshold [see ¶0177 ].
As to claim 9, Hardy discloses all of the claim limitations except, the controller is configured to: prior to initiating monitoring of the ambient temperature, determine that the battery pack is idle.
Rees discloses in figures 1-7, a battery monitoring system, discloses determining that the battery pack is idle for temperature monitoring [see ¶0078 ].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have the method of Hardy and comprise prior to initiating monitoring of the ambient temperature, determining that the battery pack is idle as taught by Rees in order to accurately measuring the temperature and prevent battery degradation.
As to claim 10, Hardy discloses all of the claim limitations except, the battery pack of claim8, and further discloses creating a beacon containing an indication that the excursion timer has exceeded the time threshold
However, Rees discloses in figures 1-7, a mitigation action of controlling a wireless communications interface to transmit operational data of the battery and its environment (para [0093].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to add wireless communications interface for the battery beacon as taught by Rees in order to allow for analysis of battery history.
As to claim 11, Hardy in view of Rees discloses, , the beacon further contains an excursion severity indicator based on at least one of (i) a current value of the excursion timer, and (ii) a difference between the ambient temperature and the temperature threshold [see ¶0177 and the level 1 fault would only be recorded if it persisted for 10 seconds].
As to claims 6 and 13, Hardy discloses all of the claim limitations except, in response to detecting that the state of charge exceeds a charge threshold, adjusting the time threshold.
Rees disclose in figures 1-7, detecting an ambient temperature of a battery pack [ see FIG. 6, step 210] a state of charge of a battery pack [FIG. 6, step 220 and also ¶0088] and adjusting a charging threshold [see FIG. 6, step 230 and ¶0089].
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
over Hardy in view of Kim et al. ( US 2016/0201634A1), hereinafter Kim.
As to claim 7, Hardy discloses all of the claim limitations except, initiating an active self-discharge operation at the battery pack.
Kim discloses in figures 1-6, initiating an active self-discharge operation at the battery pack [self-discharging signal is send by the controller based on battery temperature; see ¶0017-0048].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have self-discharging action in Hardy’s apparatus as taught by Kim in order to prevent thermal runaway.
As to claim 14, Hardy discloses all of the claim limitations except, the controller is configured to execute the mitigation action by: initiating an active self-discharge operation at the battery pack.
Kim discloses in figures 1-6, initiating an active self-discharge operation at the battery pack [self-discharging signal is send by the controller based on battery temperature; see ¶0017-0048].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have self-discharging action in Hardy’s apparatus as taught by Kim in order to prevent thermal runaway.
-Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights