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 Status
Claims 1-7 are currently pending and are presented for examination on the merits.
Priority
Applicant's claim of foreign priority to Korean patent applications KR10-2023-0040012 filed 3/27/2023, and KR10-2023-0133688 filed 10/06/2023, under 35 U.S.C. 119(a-d) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/16/2025 was filed before the filing of a first office action on the merits. As such, the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Objections
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to for merely being a repeat of the broadest claim. A brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole is required. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Correction is required.
Claim objections
The claims are objected to for use of line numberings within the set. Please remove line numbering in future claim sets, to reduce confusion and facilitate preparation of the office action.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
a. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
b. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
c. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
d. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0195016 to Kimoto, alone.
With respect to Claim 1, Kimoto teaches a battery pack (FIG. 1) comprising: first and second pack terminals (battery pack teaches plus-minus terminals); a battery having battery cells (FIG. 1 (2)); a first switch (FIG. 1, 28, “SMR-P”) and a precharging (Abstract; see “precharg[e/ing] throughout”) resistor (26) connected to each other in series between the battery and the first pack terminal (FIG. 1, (4)); a second switch (FIG. 1 (22, “SMR-B”) connected between the battery and the second pack terminal (FIG. 1 (6)); and a protection circuit configured to open at least one of the first switch or the second switch based on a discharging current flowing through the precharging resistor being maintained to be greater than a second reference value for more than a reference time from a point in time based on the discharging current being greater than a first reference value ([0041];FIG. 2, steps: S150, S160, S210, S220, S230, and corresponding passages of the description).
Kimoto teaches an equivalent system operable to perform the method recited in the instant invention, but does not use the same schematic configuration or verbiage, such as “second pack terminals,” “reference value,” etc., however, the applied reference(s) need not use the same terminology, or disclose the limitations verbatim. Kimoto teaches a battery (pack), plural relays (switches), positive and negative terminal (sides), a current sensor, and an ECU controlling each relay in a precharge controller that is operable to perform the same function as the instant system. Measuring a voltage threshold is taught by measuring a current value. As such, the configurations are substitutable for each other. See, KSR international Co. v. Teleflex Inc. Moreover, it is noted that mere redundancy, duplicity, or repetition of existing structure or steps has been deemed obvious under § 103 analysis. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. See also, MPEP § 2144.05 which states: In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kimoto to include the specified verbiage and recited configuration.
Claim 2-4, 6, and 7 are rejected under § 103, as being unpatentable over Kimoto, in view of US 2021/0231707 to Ock et al.
With respect to Claim 2, Kimoto teaches a delay capacitor connected in parallel to the third resistor ([0002];[0004]). Kimoto fails to expressly teach, but Ock teaches wherein the protection circuit is further configured to include: first and second nodes having the precharging resistor therebetween (FIGS. 1-11); first, second, and third resistors connected in series to the first node (FIGS. 1-11); a first switching switch connected in series between the first, second, and third resistors (FIGS. 1-11); a comparator (FIGS. 1-11 (150, voltage measuring unit, 160 control unit) configured to turn the first switching switch on if a voltage across the precharging resistor is greater than a voltage across the first resistor (Abstract;[0007];[0012];[0067];[0074]); and a second switching switch controlled based on a voltage across the third resistor (FIGS. 1-11).
With respect to Claim 3, Kimoto fails to expressly teach, cut Ock teaches wherein the comparator (VMU and/or CU) has a positive input terminal and a negative input terminal (FIG. 1); the first resistor (140) is connected between the first node and the positive input terminal, and the negative input terminal is connected to the second node (CU could be second node). Under the same rationale as Claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kimoto to include this limitation taught by Ock.
With respect to Claim 4, Kimoto fails to expressly teach, but Ock teaches wherein the first reference value is determined in proportion to a reciprocal number of a sum of a resistance value of the first resistor, a resistance value of the second resistor, and a turn-on resistance value of the first switching switch, and the second reference value is determined based on the resistance value of the first resistor, the resistance value of the second resistor, a threshold voltage of the second switching switch, and the turn-on resistance value of the first switching switch. ([0044];[0092-93];[0104-05], showing reciprocal of sum of resistances). Under the same rationale as Claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kimoto to include this limitation taught by Ock.
With respect to Claim 6, Kimoto teaches wherein at least one of the first switch or the second switch is configured to be opened if the second switching switch is turned on. (FIG. 1; [0021])
With respect to Claim 7, Kimoto teaches wherein at least one of the first switch or the second switch is a relay switch that is configured to be closed based on an operation voltage being applied thereto (FIG. 1; [0021-23]), and the battery pack further includes a switch control circuit (ECU) including a control switch configured to transmit the operation voltage to the relay switch, and the control switch is configured to be turned off based on the second switching switch being turned on (FIG. 1;[0032]).
Claim 5 is rejected under § 103, as being unpatentable over Kimoto, in view of Ock, and further in view of US 5,883,495 to Smith et al.
With respect to Claim 5, Kimoto teaches wherein the reference time is determined based on a resistance value of the third resistor, capacitance of the delay capacitor, and a threshold voltage of the second switching switch ([0004-05];[0018]). Kimoto fails to expressly teach, but Smith teaches the second switching switch is configured to be turned on based on the voltage across the third resistor being greater than the threshold voltage (col 7, ln 35-44; col 8, ln 60-col 9, ln 8). Smith discusses the desire to maintain a “safe operating condition” and using the threshold voltage to recognize same (col 8, ln 60-67). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kimoto to include switching were the voltage across a third resister exceeds a voltage threshold.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-3082. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00, alternating Fri. off.
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, Matthew Gart can be reached on 5712723955. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIAM J JACOB/ Examiner, Art Unit 3696
Prosecution Insights