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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a thickness measurement value acquisition unit ; a charged state estimation unit ; a deterioration state estimation unit ; and an output unit that outputs the calculated deterioration index estimation value in claim 1. The corresponding structure for these elements can be found in [0084] of the published application.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Since a computer program is merely a set of instructions capable of being executed by a computer, the computer program itself is not a process and without the computer-readable medium used to realize the computer’s functionality, the claim has been interpreted as functional descriptive material.
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.
Claim 3 is 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 “ wherein in a case where the charge index estimation value does not indicate either after full charge or after complete discharge, the deterioration state estimation unit calculates, as the deterioration index estimation value, the deterioration index set such that, when the thickness in the deterioration characteristic information after full charge is set to a thickness after full charge and the thickness in the deterioration characteristic information after complete discharge is set to a thickness after complete discharge, a ratio of a difference between the thickness measurement value and the thickness after complete discharge to a difference between the thickness after full charge and the thickness after complete discharge is equal to the charge index estimation value”. The examiner is unclear of the scope of this claim. The recited “wherein in a case where the charge index estimation value does not indicate either after full charge or after complete discharge” (emphasis added) appears to be missing concepts. What does it no indicate? There appears to missing words between “indicate” and “either”. Further, the logic is “the deterioration state estimation unit calculates, as the deterioration index estimation value, the deterioration index set such that, when the thickness in the deterioration characteristic information after full charge is set to a thickness after full charge and the thickness in the deterioration characteristic information after complete discharge is set to a thickness after complete discharge” is convoluted. What is being set? What is the significance between “the deterioration index estimation value” and “the deterioration index”. It seems like the claim appears to state these two values are the same? The examiner is unable to apply art to this claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukuda et al. (2017/0210488).
With respect to claim 1, Fukuda et al. teaches in Fig. 1 a deterioration state estimation device comprising: a thickness measurement value acquisition unit (5) that acquires a thickness measurement value (i.e. a deformation caused by swelling; [0031] [0064]) which is a measurement value of a thickness (i.e. z direction) of a predetermined portion (i.e. a predetermined portion that includes an electrode group 22; [0064]) including at least a negative electrode (24) of a secondary battery (2) whose negative electrode (24) does not contain a negative electrode active material (as Fukuda et al. teaches using graphite in the negative electrode; [0037]); a charged state estimation unit (i.e. a portion of 6) that calculates a charge index estimation value which is an estimation value of a charge index indicating a charged state of the secondary battery (as Fukuda et al. teaches in [0042] the first curved line L1 from which the second curved line L2 is derived, is obtained as a relationship between, the discharged capacity Q from the fully charged state and the deformation amount T of the secondary battery 2); a deterioration state estimation unit (i.e. a portion of 6) that, by referring to the deterioration characteristic information (as the examiner considers the deterioration characteristic information to be the data used to form line L2) after full charge that defines a relationship (the disclosed second curve line L2) between the thickness (T) after full charge and a deterioration index (i.e. the disclosed discharge capacity Q from the fully charge state; [0043]) indicating a deterioration state of the secondary battery (2), calculates a deterioration index estimation value (i.e. a deterioration value) which is an estimation value of the deterioration index for the secondary battery (2), based on the thickness measurement value (T) and the charge index estimation value (the ratio between discharge capacity Q from the fully discharge state derived from the reference data) and an output unit (i.e. a portion of 6) that outputs the calculated deterioration index estimation value (in order to understand the current state of the secondary battery 2).
The method of claim 9 is performed during the operation of the rejected structure of claim 1.
With respect to claim 10, Fukuda teaches a program (i.e. steps 1-6) causing a computer (6) to function as the claimed units and their operations as rejected in claim 1.
With respect to claim 2, Fukuda et al. teaches the deterioration state estimation device in Fig. 1 wherein the deterioration state estimation unit (i.e. the portion of 6) calculates, as the deterioration index estimation value (i.e. the value of deterioration), a deterioration index corresponding to the thickness measurement value (T) in the deterioration characteristic information (i.e. data used to generate second curve L2) after full charge (i.e. using discharge capacity data from a fully charge state; [0010]) in a case where the charge index estimation value (the ratio Qc/Qs derived from the reference data) indicates after full charge, and calculates, as the deterioration index estimation value, a deterioration index corresponding to the thickness measurement value (T) in the deterioration characteristic information (data used to create curve L2) after complete discharge (i.e. after a cycle between fully charge and to discharge) in a case where the charge index estimation value (the ratio Qc/Qs derived from the reference data) indicates after complete discharge (i.e. steps 1-5).
With respect to claim 4, Fukuda et al. the deterioration state estimation device in Fig. 1 wherein the charged state estimation unit (i.e. the portion of 6) calculates the charge index estimation value (the ratio Qc/Qs derived from the reference data) by acquiring charge and discharge history information (i.e. history information used to derive line Ls1; [0035] [0043]) showing a charge and discharge history of the secondary battery (2; of the secondary battery before shipping; [0043]), and comparing the charge and discharge history information (Ls1) with charge and discharge characteristic information (Ls) showing charge and discharge characteristics of the secondary battery (2).
With respect to claim 5, Fukuda et al. the deterioration state estimation device in Fig. 1 wherein the deterioration index is calculated based on a first full charge capacity of the secondary battery (2) which is not in a deterioration state (as the deterioration index uses data from Ls1 to calculate the deterioration index) and a second full charge capacity of a current secondary battery (2 after shipping and when being in operation).
With respect to claim 6, Fukuda et al. the deterioration state estimation device in Fig. 1 wherein the deterioration index is a ratio of the second full charge capacity to the first full charge capacity (the ratio Qc/Qs as taught by Fukuda et al.).
With respect to claim 7, Fukuda et al. the deterioration state estimation device in Fig. 1 the charge index is a state of charge (as [0042] teaches the charged/discharged capacity Qc is determined from the second curved line L2, and the first curved line L1 from which the second curved line L2 is derived, is obtained as a relationship between, the discharged capacity Q from the fully charged state and the deformation amount T of the secondary battery 2).
With respect to claim 8, Fukuda et al. the deterioration state estimation device in Fig. 1 wherein a carrier metal of the secondary battery is lithium [0030].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Araki (2012/0158330) which teaches a detecting the deterioration of a lithium secondary battery.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW G MARINI whose telephone number is (571)272-2676. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/MATTHEW G MARINI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights