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
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.
(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 1-4, 9, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)& (a)(2) as being anticipated by Song (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0046162, hereinafter Song).
With respect to Claim 1, Song discloses a battery system [see fig 5 unless otherwise noted] comprising:
at least one pack [130] in which an all-solid-state battery cell is sealed [para 4 indicates solid state; sealed via heat shrink film in para 24]; and
a sensing unit [220] configured to sense deformation of the at least one pack due to change in internal pressure of the at least one pack [para 66 shows general operation of the sensing unit; para 8 indicates that the swelling is caused pressure],
wherein the at least one pack includes a portion [145; fig 6 shows expansion] formed to be expandable as internal pressure of the at least one pack increases.
With respect to Claim 2, Song discloses that the at least one pack includes a plurality of packs; and the sensing unit is configured to sense deformation of each of the packs [Each 130 is monitored via pairs of optical transmitters and sensors 224/226 to check for swelling; fig 6].
With respect to Claim 3, Song discloses that the sensing unit is configured to sense deformation of the at least one pack, in a non-contact state with the at least one pack. The optical sensors [226] are known to operate without contact.
With respect to Claim 4, Song discloses that the sensing unit [220] includes an imaging unit [226]; and the sensing unit is configured to detect deformation of the at least one pack, based on an image of the at least one pack imaged by the imaging unit [The light received at 226 determines the deformation, para 66 and figure 6.].
With respect to Claim 9, Song discloses an abnormality sensing method for a battery system equipped with an all-solid-state battery cell [para 4], the abnormality sensing method comprising: preparing a pack in which the all-solid-state battery cell is sealed; and sensing deformation of the pack due to change in internal pressure of the pack [deformation determined via 220, see para 66 and para 8 indicates swelling due to pressure] wherein the at least one pack includes a portion [145; fig 6 shows expansion] formed to be expandable as internal pressure of the at least one pack increases.
With respect to Claim 12, Song discloses that the portion has lower rigidity than portions of the at least one pack other than the portion. See figure 6 and para 63, 145 designed to split first.
With respect to Claim 13, Song discloses that the sensing unit includes an imaging unit [226]; and the sensing unit is configured to sense the deformation of the at least one pack based on an image, imaged by the imaging unit, indicating that the portion is expanded. The plurality of light sensors 226 can be considered to be a low resolution monochrome image.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song.
With respect to Claim 10, Song discloses a battery system comprising: a pack in which an all-solid-state battery cell is sealed [figure 5 shows multiple cells 130, para 4 indicates solid state]; and sensing deformation of the pack due to change in internal pressure of the pack [deformation determined via 220, see para 66 and para 8 indicates swelling due to pressure] wherein the at least one pack includes a portion [145; fig 6 shows expansion] formed to be expandable as internal pressure of the at least one pack increases.
While Song does not explicitly recite using a processor to determine the deformation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that using a processor to analyze the output of 220 would be the most efficient and reliable way to analyze the digital output of 220
6. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of CN202110437386, hereinafter CN.
With respect to Claim 6, Song discloses that the at least one pack includes an array of packs arrayed in a predetermined direction [clear from fig 5, arrayed in the z direction].
Song uses a series of imagining units, one for each pack, rather than moving one imaging unit along a predetermined direction.
CN shows using one imaging unit that moves to analyze a battery. See page 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that Song could use a single pair of 224/226 and move it to each of the battery packs for the benefit of not needing a plurality of 224s/226s.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Sakai et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0258582, hereinafter Sakai).
With respect to Claim 11, Song does not disclose that
the sensing unit includes a storage device that stores an image of the at least one pack in a state in which the at least one pack is not deformed; and the sensing unit is configured to detect the deformation of the at least one pack by comparing the image stored in the storage device with the image of the at least one pack imaged by the imaging unit, and to determine that the at least one pack is deformed when expansion of the portion is sensed based on the comparison.
Sakai discloses analyzing degree of deformation by comparing images of deformed batteries to images of new batteries [see para 43].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace Song’s rudimentary, binary image comparison with a sensing unit includes a storage device that stores an image of the at least one pack in a state in which the at least one pack is not deformed; and the sensing unit is configured to detect the deformation of the at least one pack by comparing the image stored in the storage device with the image of the at least one pack imaged by the imaging unit, and to determine that the at least one pack is deformed when expansion of the portion is sensed based on the comparison for the benefit of accurately determining the degree of battery deformation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to Claim 5, U.S. Publication No. 2022/0131230 shows that using discharge valves in solid state batteries is known, but no prior art shows sensing deformation of the at least one pack based on the image indicating that the discharge valve is open.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 27 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 6, the applicant argues “as agreed to during the interview, Song fails to disclose “a portion formed to be expandable as internal pressure of the at least one pack increases.” The examiner does not agree with this. Batteries bulging is always due to an increase in internal pressure. Para 14 correlates the deformation to a change in pressure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX T DEVITO whose telephone number is (571)270-7551. The examiner can normally be reached 12pm- 8 pm EST M-S.
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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/ALEX T DEVITO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/SUMAN K NATH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights