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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 701.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 8-9, and 17-18 are objected to because of the following informalities.
Regarding claims 3 and 18, term “a power cut-off operation” is believed to be in error for - - [[a]]the power cut-off operation - -; and term “an oxygen cut-off operation” is believed to be in error for - - [[an]]the oxygen cut-off operation - -
Regarding claims 8-9, term “the battery cell set” is believed to be in error for - - the at least one battery cell set - -
Regarding claim 17, term “a waterproof sheet” is believed to be in error for - - [[a]]the waterproof sheet - -
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). It is required to provide the definition/meaning for term “fire extinguishing patch”.
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.
Claims 2, 6, 10, 12, 17, and 19-20 are 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.
Regarding claims 2 and 17, recitation “a plurality of triggering conditions respectively corresponding to the power cut-off operation, the oxygen cut-off operation, and the cooling operation comprised in the fire hazard response sequence are satisfied” is indefinite because:
i) it is unclear whether “a plurality of triggering conditions” means a) the at least one triggering condition claimed in claim 1 is a plurality of triggering conditions; or b) a plurality of triggering conditions include the at least one triggering condition claimed in claim 1; or c) a plurality of triggering conditions are different conditions in addition to the at least one triggering condition claimed in claim 1;
ii) it is unclear whether a) a respective triggering condition of a plurality of triggering conditions corresponding to a respective operation of the power cut-off operation, the oxygen cut-off operation, and the cooling operation; or b) a respective plurality of triggering conditions corresponding to a respective operation of the power cut-off operation, the oxygen cut-off operation, and the cooling operation.
Regarding claims 4, 6, 12, and 19 and its dependent, term “fire extinguishing patch” is indefinite, specifically,
i) said term is not a term of art and the specification generally discloses the fire extinguishing patch release fire extinguishing fluid to cut-off oxygen and cool the battery cell by passively or actively control based on a temperature (p. 9, ll. 20-25, p. 19, ll 5-20, and p. 21, 5-8);
ii) thus, it is unclear what is the definition of term “fire extinguishing patch”, i.e., what device or structure can be called “fire extinguishing patch”.
Regarding claim 6, it is unclear whether “a triggering condition” refers to a) the at least one triggering condition claimed in claim 1; or b) a different condition.
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear whether “a battery cell set” refers to a) the at least one battery cell set claimed in claim 1; or b) an additional battery cell set of the plurality of battery cell sets other than the least one battery cell set claimed in claim 1; or c) an additional battery cell set other than the plurality of battery cell sets claimed in claim 1.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 10, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song CN110665148 in view of Xu CN112604204.
Regarding claim 1, Song teaches the invention as claimed: A method (Fig. 2) comprising:
monitoring, based on sensing data (temperature and smoke) from a plurality of fire hazard detection sensors (7s and 8s, Fig. 1) configured to detect a fire hazard (p. 12, ll. 8-10 and from p. 12, l. 14 to p. 13, l. 15), a state of a plurality of battery cell sets (4s) in a battery system (Fig. 1) of a data center (p. 15, ll. 1-3);
detecting, based on the monitoring, a fire hazard state of at least one battery cell set (one 4 in Fig. 1) of the plurality of battery cell sets (from p. 12, l. 14 to p. 13, l. 15); and
controlling, by a controller (control system, p. 5, ll. 14-16) and based on at least one triggering condition associated with the fire hazard state (the temperature is higher than a first threshold T1), a fire hazard response sequence corresponding to the at least one battery cell set (one 4 in Fig. 1),
wherein the fire hazard response sequence (p. 13, ll. 1-15) comprises a series of operations comprising an oxygen cut-off operation (turning off air inlet valve 12 when the smoke is detected, p. 13, ll. 1-4 and Fig. 2 with translation) and a cooling operation (opening water inlet valve 32, p. 13, ll. 4-15 and Fig. 1), and
wherein the cooling operation comprises injecting, by the controller (the control system opens water inlet valve 32), a coolant (water, p. 13, ll. 8-15) in an inner portion (annotated Fig. 1) of the battery system (p. 13, ll. 4-15 and Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
636
872
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Song does not teach said fire hazard response sequence comprises a series of operations comprising a power cut-off operation, said oxygen cut-off operation, and said cooling operation.
However, Xu teaches a fire hazard response sequence (from step S260 to step S300 in Fig. 2) comprises a power cut-off operation (in step S260 when a smoke is not detected, p. 19, l. 14 to p. 20, l. 5) operated prior to both of an oxygen cut-off operation (in step S300, stop providing fresh air, p. 22, ll. 2-6) and a cooling operation (in step S300, injecting liquid, p. 22, ll. 7-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to providing Song with Xu’s teaching of operating the power cut-off operation prior to the oxygen cut-off operation and the cooling operation in order to timely maintain the abnormal battery cell set in early stage and restart the battery system (p. 20, ll. 12-16 and p. 2, ll. 14-18).
Regarding claim 3, Song in view of Xu further teaches wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: in response to the fire hazard state of the at least one battery cell set being detected, controlling a power cut-off operation of the at least one battery cell set (Xu at p. 19, ll. 9-11 and p. 19, l. 25 to p. 20, l. 5 teaches controlling the power cut-off operation when the latent stage is detected) and an oxygen cut-off operation of the at least one battery cell set (Song at p. 13, ll. 1-7 teaches operating the oxygen cut-off operation when the measured temperature is larger than T1 and the smoke is detected).
Regarding claim 4, Song further teaches wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: based on an intensity of the fire hazard state (determined by the temperature and the smoke) reaching a first threshold intensity (temperature is higher than T1 and lower than T2 with the smoke being detected, p. 13, ll. 1-6), controlling a fire extinguishing patch activation operation (opening gas inlet valve 22; note: fire extinguishing patch is interpreted as an area in the gas valve 22 able to hole fire extinguishing gas) of the cooling operation (providing gas to 6 to cool down and extinguish fire) for the at least one battery cell set (6; p. 13, ll. 4-6).
Regarding claim 5, Song further teaches wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: based on the intensity of the fire hazard state reaching a second threshold intensity (temperature is higher than T2 with the smoke being detected, p. 13, ll. 8-15) higher than the first threshold intensity (temperature is higher than T1 and lower than T2 with the smoke being detected, p. 13, ll. 1-6), controlling a coolant injection operation (opening coolant inlet valve 32, p. 13, ll. 8-15) associated with the at least one battery cell set (one 6).
Regarding claim 7, Song further teaches wherein an intensity of the fire hazard state is determined based on a temperature of the at least one battery cell set (p. 12, l. 20 to p. 13, l. 15).
Regarding claim 10, Song further teaches wherein a battery cell set (one 4 in Fig. 1) comprises a first unit (6) comprising at least one battery cell (because sensor 7 is used to monitor the temperature of the battery, p. 12, ll. 1-10).
Regarding claim 12, Song further teaches wherein the cooling operation comprises a coolant injection operation (p. 13, ll. 4-15 and Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Song further teaches wherein the at least one triggering condition comprises a triggering condition corresponding to an intensity of the fire hazard state (determined by whether the temperature is higher than T1 or T2 and with or without the smoke being detected, p. 12, l. 20 to p. 13, l. 15).
Claims 2, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song CN110665148 in view of Xu CN112604204, and in further view of YANG CN111714811.
Regarding claim 2, Song in view of Xu further teaches wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises:
determining whether a plurality of triggering conditions respectively corresponding to the power cut-off operation (Xu teaches according to sensing data, p. 10, ll. 12-15, determining whether a latent stage, e.g., the smoke is not detected, see p. 19, ll. 9-19, corresponding to the power cut-off operation is satisfied, p. 19, l. 25 to p. 20, l. 5), the oxygen cut-off operation (Song at p. 13, ll. 1-4 and Fig. 2 with translation teaches determining whether the temperature is higher than T1 and lower than T2 with smoke corresponding to the oxygen cut-off operation is satisfied), and the cooling operation (Song at p. 13, ll. 8-15 teaches determining whether the temperature is higher than T2 with smoke corresponding the cooling operation is satisfied) comprised in the fire hazard response sequence are satisfied; and
controlling, by the controller (the control system taught by Song at p. 5, ll. 14-16 and Xu at Fig. 1 and p. 9, ll. 8-9), an execution of an operation of the fire hazard response sequence corresponding to a satisfied triggering condition among the plurality of triggering conditions (operating one of the power cut-off operation, the oxygen cut-off operation, and the cooling operation when one of the latent stage at Xu, p. 19, ll. 9-11 and p. 19, l. 25 to p. 20, l. 5, the temperature is higher than T1 and lower than T2 with smoke at Song p. 13, ll. 1-4 and Fig. 2 with translation, and the temperature is higher than T2 with smoke at Song p. 13, ll. 8-15, is satisfied).
Song in view of Xu does not teach wherein the cooling operation comprises moving, by the controller, a sheet to surround at least the inner portion of the battery system, wherein the inner portion of the battery system surrounds at least a portion of the at least one battery cell set.
However, YANG teaches a cooling operation (p. 11, l. 21 to p. 13, l. 9) comprises moving (by controlling actuator 47), by a controller (a controller to activate waterproof sheet 46 by controlling 47 according to sensing data), a waterproof sheet (46) to surround at least an inner portion (annotated Fig. 1) of an electrical system (Fig. 1), wherein the inner portion of the electrical system surrounds at least a portion of an electronic device (10, p. 7, ll. 15-17).
PNG
media_image2.png
476
588
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide Song in view of Xu with YANG’s waterproof sheet moving by the controller to surround at least the inner portion of the battery system, wherein the inner portion of the battery system surrounds at least a portion of the at least one battery cell set in order to prevent the fire extinguishing water to spray on and damage the surrounding equipment (YANG, p. 13, ll. 7-9).
Regarding claim 15, the claimed limitation is taught by Song in view of XU and YANG, see rejection for claims 1-2.
Regarding claim 17, Song in view of XU and YANG further teaches the claimed limitation, see the teaching in rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, Song in view of XU and YANG further teaches the claimed limitation, see the teaching in rejection for claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, Song further teaches the claimed limitation, see the teaching in rejection for claim 4.
Regarding claim 20, Song further teaches the claimed limitation, see the teaching in rejection for claim 5.
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song CN110665148 in view of Xu CN112604204, and in further view of Roychoudhury 20240058635.
Regarding claim 6, Song further teaches wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: based on a triggering condition (when temperature is higher than T1 and lower than T2 with the smoke being detected, p. 13, ll. 1-6) for a fire extinguishing patch activation operation (opening gas inlet valve 22; note: fire extinguishing patch is interpreted as an area in the gas valve 22 able to hole fire extinguishing gas) of the cooling operation (providing gas to 6 to cool down and extinguish fire) being satisfied, controlling the fire extinguishing patch activation operation (by opening gas inlet valve 22); and
based on an intensity of the fire hazard state (determined by temperature and smoke) reaching a threshold intensity (when temperature is higher than T2 with the smoke being detected, p. 13, ll. 8-15), controlling a coolant injection operation (opening coolant inlet valve 32, p. 13, ll. 8-15) associated with the at least one battery cell set (4).
Song in view of Xu does not teach based on a duration of said fire hazard state reaching a threshold time, controlling said coolant injection operation associated with said at least one battery cell set.
However, Roychoudhury teaches based on a duration of the fire hazard state (a duration of flame) reaching a threshold time ([0077]) and an intensity of the fire hazard reaching a threshold intensity (determined by temperature and smoke, [0074 and 0076] and Fig. 8), controlling a coolant injection operation (activate extinguisher, [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide Song in view of Xu with Roychoudhury’s teaching of controlling coolant injection operation based on a duration of the fire hazard state reaching a threshold time in addition to an intensity of the fire hazard reaching a threshold intensity in order to accurately determine the hazard level of the fire and selectively activate extinguisher and/or alarm based on the determined hazard level (Roychoudhury, [0077]).
Regarding claims 14, Song further teaches wherein the plurality of fire hazard detection sensors comprise: an internal sensor (annotated Fig. 1) of the at least one battery cell set (annotated Fig. 1); a heat detection sensor (a senor 7 in a different battery cell set 4); a smoke detection sensor (8).
PNG
media_image3.png
636
872
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Song in view of Xu does not teach a thermal imaging camera.
However, Roychoudhury teaches a thermal imaging camera (301, [0039]) is used in addition to the internal sensor (402b) and smoke detection sensor (402a; also see Fig. 8 and [0074 and 0076-0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide Song in view of Xu with Roychoudhury’s thermal imaging camera in order to accurately determine the hazard level of the fire and selectively activate extinguisher and/or alarm based on the determined hazard level (Roychoudhury, [0077]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song CN110665148 in view of Xu CN112604204, and in further view of YANG CN111714811 and KO KR102503331.
Regarding claim 9, Song further teaches wherein the cooling operation comprises a coolant injection operation (as taught by Song at p. 13, ll. 4-15 and Fig. 1).
Song in view of Xu does not teach the cooling operation comprises a waterproof arrangement operation and said coolant injection operation, wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: controlling the coolant injection operation based on whether the waterproof arrangement operation corresponding to the battery cell set is executed.
However, YANG teaches a cooling operation (p. 11, l. 21 to p. 13, l. 9) comprises a waterproof arrangement operation (activate waterproof sheet 45 by controlling actuator 47, p. 12, l. 18 - p. 13, l. 9) and a coolant injection operation (water-cooling injection, p. 12, ll. 9-18), wherein a controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: controlling the coolant injection operation (by controlling water valve 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide Song in view of Xu with YANG’s waterproof arrangement operation corresponding to the battery cell set in order to prevent the coolant, e.g., the fire extinguishing water, to spray on and damage the surrounding equipment (YANG, p. 13, ll. 7-9).
Song in view of Xu and YANG does not teach controlling said coolant injection operation based on whether said waterproof arrangement operation is executed.
However, KO teaches controlling (by controller 160) a coolant injection operation (injecting water by controlling valve 154) based on whether a waterproof arrangement operation (providing a waterproof sheet 124) corresponding to a battery cell set (in electric car EV) is executed (in order to form a space to contain the coolant; [0065-0067 and 0069] and Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide Song in view of Xu and YANG with KO’s controlling the coolant injection operation based on whether the waterproof arrangement operation corresponding to the battery cell set is executed to form a space to contain coolant (KO, [0069]) in order to prevents the coolant (water as taught by Song and YANG) from spraying on and damaging the surrounding equipment (YANG, p. 13, ll. 7-9).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song CN110665148 in view of Xu CN112604204, YANG CN111714811, and in further view of Roychoudhury 20240058635.
Regarding claim 16, Song further teaches wherein the plurality of fire hazard detection sensors comprise: an internal sensor (annotated Fig. 1) of the at least one battery cell set (annotated Fig. 1); a heat detection sensor (a senor 7 in a different battery cell set 4); a smoke detection sensor (8).
PNG
media_image3.png
636
872
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Song in view of Xu and YANG does not teach a thermal imaging camera.
However, Roychoudhury teaches a thermal imaging camera (301, [0039]) is used in addition to the internal sensor (402b) and smoke detection sensor (402a; also see Fig. 8 and [0074 and 0076-0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide Song in view of Xu and Yang with Roychoudhury’s thermal imaging camera in order to accurately determine the hazard level of the fire and selectively activate extinguisher and/or alarm based on the determined hazard level (Roychoudhury, [0077]).
Claims 1, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHANG 20240050789 in view of Song CN110665148.
Regarding claim 1, CHANG teaches the invention as claimed: A method (Fig. 1B) comprising:
monitoring, based on sensing data (temperature) from a plurality of fire hazard detection sensors (sensor positioned in each 210, [0037 and 0040] and sensor in each 110, [0042]) configured to detect a fire hazard (Fig. 1B and [0037-0042]), a state of a plurality of battery cell sets (20s) in a battery system (1, Fig. 1);
detecting, based on the monitoring, a fire hazard state (S11, S13, S15, S17 in Fig. 1B) of at least one battery cell set (one 20) of the plurality of battery cell sets (20s, Fig. 1 and [0037-0038]); and
controlling, by a controller (80, [0033]) and based on at least one triggering condition associated with the fire hazard state (the temperature in 120 exceeds T1, S11 in Fig. 1B), a fire hazard response sequence corresponding to the at least one battery cell set (one 20),
wherein the fire hazard response sequence comprises a series of operations comprising a power cut-off operation (S12 in Fig. 1B), an oxygen cut-off operation (S14 in Fig. 1B, injecting fire extinguishing gas into 210 reduce oxygen concentration in 210, i.e., cut-off oxygen; note: such interpretation is consistent with the instant application), and a cooling operation (S16 and S18 in Fig. 1B), and
wherein the cooling operation comprises injecting (by opening coolant injecting valve 510 or 410), by the controller (80), a coolant (from 400) in an inner portion (S1) of the battery system (1, see Fig. 1A).
CHANG does not teach a battery system of a data center.
However, Song teaches a data center (p. 15, ll. 1-3) comprises a battery system (Fig. 1A) comprising a fire hazard response system (the control system p. 5, ll. 14-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide CHANG with Song’s teaching of using CHANG’s battery system for a data center in order to provide energy to an importation facility that is not suitable for a long-term power outages or capacity reduction (Song, p. 15, ll. 1-3).
Regarding claim 8, CHANG further teaches wherein the controlling of the fire hazard response sequence comprises: controlling (inlet valve 410), based on whether a fire extinguishing agent (the liquid injected via 410 into space S1 to flood the battery in the fire hazard) corresponding to the battery cell set (20) remains (a remaining level of the liquid in the space S1 measured by 70s, [0032]), the injecting of the coolant in the inner portion of the battery system (the injecting of the liquid is controlled according to the remaining level in order to prevent flood the management system 230, [0032]).
Regarding claim 11, CHANG further teaches wherein the oxygen cut-off operation comprises a fire extinguishing agent spraying operation, see rejection of claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINGCHEN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-6639. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-4:30.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/JINGCHEN LIU/ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741