DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-23 are pending.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 12 states that the plurality of battery voltage measurements comprise a first open circuit battery voltage measured between the first battery pulse and a second open circuit battery voltage measured after the second battery pulse. Claim 12 lacks clarity because it is unclear if claim 12 implies that the first open circuit battery voltage is measured between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse. Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination, the first open circuit battery voltage of claim 12 is interpreted as being measured between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse.
Per claim 21, it is unclear if the limitation “an aerosol generation device” refers to the aerosol generation device recited in line 4 of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination, the limitation “an aerosol generation device” in claim 21 is interpreted as referring to a device other than the aerosol generation device of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada et al. (US 2020/0128883 – hereinafter “Yamada”).
Per claim 1, Yamada teaches an aerosol generation device battery verification system, the system comprising:
a battery measurement module configured to perform a plurality of battery voltage measurements of a battery connected to an aerosol generation device (A voltage sensor 16 is configured to perform a plurality of voltage measurements of a power supply 12 connected to a first cartridge 20 configured to generate an aerosol (Figs. 3 and 5-6; ¶34, 37, and 68));
a battery verification module configured to determine whether a parameter of the battery meets a verification requirement based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements (Based on an open circuit voltage OCV and a closed circuit voltage CCV of the power supply 12, a power supply state diagnosis unit 52 is configured to acquire an internal resistance R of the power supply 12 and determine whether the internal resistance R is less than a threshold Th1 (Fig. 11; ¶80 and 87-88)); and
a controller configured to set the aerosol generation device to an operable state when the parameter meets the verification requirement, and further configured to set the aerosol generation device to a restricted state when the parameter does not meet the verification requirement (In the case where the internal resistance R is less than the threshold Th1, a power control unit 53 performs PWM control to generate an aerosol. In the case where the internal resistance R is greater than or equal to the threshold Th1, the power supply 12 is determined to be deteriorated and a user is notified that it is required to replace the power supply 12 (Fig. 11; ¶88 and 90)).
Per claim 20, Yamada teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 1, wherein the battery measurement module is configured to perform a plurality of battery voltage measurements in response to a battery being connected to the aerosol generation device (In response to the power supply 12 being connected to the first cartridge 20, the OCV and CCV measurements are performed (Fig. 11; ¶87)).
Per claim 21, Yamada teaches an aerosol generation device (Fig. 1; aerosol inhaler; ¶25) comprising the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 1.
Per claim 22, Yamada teaches an aerosol generation device battery verification method, the method comprising:
performing a plurality of battery voltage measurements of a battery connected to an aerosol generation device (A voltage sensor 16 is configured to perform a plurality of voltage measurements of a power supply 12 connected to a first cartridge 20 configured to generate an aerosol (Figs. 3 and 5-6; ¶34, 37, and 68));
determining whether a parameter of the battery meets a verification requirement based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements (Based on an open circuit voltage OCV and a closed circuit voltage CCV of the power supply 12, a power supply state diagnosis unit 52 is configured to acquire an internal resistance R of the power supply 12 and determine whether the internal resistance R is less than a threshold Th1 (Fig. 11; ¶80 and 87-88)); and
setting the aerosol generation device to a operable state when the parameter meets the verification requirement, and setting the aerosol generation device to a restricted state when the parameter does not meet the verification requirement (In the case where the internal resistance R is less than the threshold Th1, a power control unit 53 performs PWM control to generate an aerosol. In the case where the internal resistance R is greater than or equal to the threshold Th1, the power supply 12 is determined to be deteriorated and a user is notified that it is required to replace the power supply 12 (Fig. 11; ¶88 and 90)).
Per claim 23, Yamada teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium (Fig. 5; control unit 50; ¶34) storing instructions that when executed by one or more processors of an aerosol generation device battery verification system cause the one or more processors to perform steps comprising:
performing a plurality of battery voltage measurements of a battery connected to an aerosol generation device (A voltage sensor 16 is configured to perform a plurality of voltage measurements of a power supply 12 connected to a first cartridge 20 configured to generate an aerosol (Figs. 3 and 5-6; ¶34, 37, and 68));
determining whether a parameter of the battery meets a verification requirement based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements (Based on an open circuit voltage OCV and a closed circuit voltage CCV of the power supply 12, a power supply state diagnosis unit 52 is configured to acquire an internal resistance R of the power supply 12 and determine whether the internal resistance R is less than a threshold Th1 (Fig. 11; ¶80 and 87-88)); and
setting the aerosol generation device to a operable state when the parameter meets the verification requirement, and setting the aerosol generation device to a restricted state when the parameter does not meet the verification requirement (In the case where the internal resistance R is less than the threshold Th1, a power control unit 53 performs PWM control to generate an aerosol. In the case where the internal resistance R is greater than or equal to the threshold Th1, the power supply 12 is determined to be deteriorated and a user is notified that it is required to replace the power supply 12 (Fig. 11; ¶88 and 90)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 2-3, 6-8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Liu et al. (US 2016/0178706 – hereinafter “Liu”).
Per claim 2, Yamada does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 1, wherein the aerosol generation device battery verification system is configured to apply a first battery pulse and a second battery pulse at a predetermined time interval after the first battery pulse, and the battery measurement module is configured to measure the plurality of battery voltage measurements based upon the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse.
In contrast, Liu teaches a method for detecting states of a battery wherein a charging internal resistance is calculated by applying a series of charging pulses to a battery, measuring charging pulse voltages VCi and the OCVs of the charging pulses, calculating an average charging pulse voltage and an average OCV and a determining a voltage difference therefrom, and dividing the voltage difference by the charging current. A discharging internal resistance is derived in a similar fashion using a series of discharge pulses (¶32-38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada such that a first battery pulse is applied and a second battery pulse applied at a predetermined time interval after the first battery pulse, and the voltage sensor 16 is configured to measure a plurality of battery voltage measurements based upon the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification as a means to enhance the precision of an internal resistance calculation (Liu; ¶35).
Per claim 3, Yamada in view of Liu teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 2, wherein the aerosol generation device battery verification system is configured to apply the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse as discharging battery pulses in which power flows from the battery to a heater of the aerosol generation device; and/or wherein the aerosol generation device battery verification system is configured to apply the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse as charging battery pulses in which power flows to the battery from a second power source (In the system of Yamada in view of Liu, charging pulses would be supplied to the power supply 12 via an external power supply 60 or discharging pulses would be supplied to the load 21 of a heating mechanism via the power supply 12 (Yamada; ¶30 and 40)).
Per claim 6, Yamada in view of Liu teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 3, wherein the second power source comprises one or more supercapacitors in the aerosol generation device; or wherein the second power source comprises an external power source (Yamada; Fig. 6; external power supply 60; ¶30) to which the aerosol generation device is connected.
Per claim 7, Yamada in view of Liu teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 2, wherein determining whether the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement comprises: calculating an internal resistance of the battery based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements, and determining that the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement when the calculated internal resistance is within a predetermined internal resistance range (In the system of Yamada in view of Liu, the internal resistance is calculated based on the plurality of voltage measurements and the power supply 12 is deemed to be in the normal state when the internal resistance is smaller than the threshold Th1 (Yamada; ¶88)) .
Per claim 8, Yamada in view of Liu teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 7, wherein the plurality of battery voltage measurements comprise battery voltage measurements measured before the first battery pulse, during the first battery pulse, between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse, and during the second battery pulse; and the battery verification module is configured to calculate the internal resistance of the battery based upon the battery voltage measurements before the first battery pulse, during the first battery pulse, between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse, and during the second battery pulse (In the system of Yamada in view of Liu, battery voltage measurements are acquired before a first pulse, during the first pulse, between the first pulse and a second pulse, and during the second pulse to calculate the internal resistance (Liu; ¶32-38)).
Per claim 11, Yamada in view of Liu teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 2, wherein determining whether the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement comprises: calculating a change in voltage of the battery based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements, and determining that the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement when the change in voltage of the battery falls within a predetermined voltage change range (Yamada discloses an embodiment where a difference between the OCV and CCV is compared to a threshold Th2 that is obtained based on the current value and the threshold Th1 (Yamada; ¶95). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu, such that the difference between the average values of the OCV and CCV is used to diagnose the power supply 12. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of enhancing measurement precision (Yamada; ¶95 and Liu; ¶35)).
10. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Liu, in further view of Carlin et al. (US 2008/0024137 – hereinafter “Carlin”).
Per claim 4, Yamada in view of Liu does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 3, wherein the aerosol generation device battery verification system is configured to apply the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse as discharging battery pulses when a state of charge of the battery is greater than a predetermined state of charge threshold.
In contrast, Carlin teaches a pulse-discharge battery testing method and states that, for best results, a battery under test should have a state-of-charge of at least 40% (¶24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu such that the first battery pulse and second battery pulse are discharging battery pulses applied when the state of charge of the power supply 12 is greater than a predetermined state of charge threshold. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification because test results of a pulse-discharge battery test may be unreliable if the battery is almost discharged when the test is performed (Carlin; ¶24).
11. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Liu, in further view of Honma (US 2006/0113959).
Per claim 5, Yamada in view of Liu does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 3, wherein the aerosol generation device battery verification system is configured to apply the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse as charging battery pulses when a state of charge of the battery is not greater than a predetermined state of charge threshold.
In contrast, Honma teaches a method for judging the life of a battery wherein an internal resistance of a battery is calculated when the remaining power of the battery is not greater than 85% of the power of the full charge state (¶25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu such that the first battery pulse and second battery pulse are charging battery pulses applied when the state of charge of the power supply 12 is not greater than a predetermined state of charge threshold. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of calculating the internal resistance of a battery during a charge phase when the battery is in a suitable state of charge (Honma; ¶25).
12. Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Liu, in further view of Knight (US 2014/0125259).
Per claim 9, Yamada in view of Liu does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 7, wherein the predetermined internal resistance range is based upon a state of charge of the battery.
In contrast, Knight teaches a battery system comprising a battery controller 130 having a memory 140 that stores a set of relationships 145 among battery charge state, battery temperature, and estimated internal resistance (¶48-49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu such that the predetermined internal resistance range is based upon a state of charge of the battery. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification because a battery internal resistance may vary based on state of charge as well as temperature (Knight; ¶48-49).
Per claim 10, Yamada in view of Liu in further view of Knight teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 9, wherein the predetermined internal resistance range is based upon a state of charge of the battery and an ambient temperature proximal to the aerosol generation device (In the system of Yamada in view of Liu in further view of Knight, the threshold Th1 would be based on the charge state of the power supply 12 and a temperature proximal to the power supply 12 (Knight; ¶48-49)).
13. Claim 12-14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Liu, in further view of Kim et al. (US 2015/0070024).
Per claim 12, Yamada in view of Liu does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 11, wherein the plurality of battery voltage measurements comprise a first open circuit battery voltage measured between the first battery pulse and a second open circuit battery voltage measured after the second battery pulse; and the change in voltage of the battery is determined as a difference between the first open circuit battery voltage and the second open circuit battery voltage.
In contrast, Kim teaches a method for determining a state of health of a battery based on a current battery capacity that is calculated based on a difference between two OCV values which are obtained before and after a second discharge pulse (Fig. 3A; ¶17 and 117).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu such that the plurality of battery voltage measurements comprise a first open circuit battery voltage measured between the first battery pulse and a second open circuit battery voltage measured after the second battery pulse; and the change in voltage of the battery is determined as a difference between the first open circuit battery voltage and the second open circuit battery voltage. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of determining a current capacity of a battery which would provide an indication of battery health (Kim; ¶17 and 117).
Per claim 13, Yamada in view of Liu does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 2, wherein determining whether the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement comprises: calculating an available capacity of the battery based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements, and determining that the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement when the calculated available capacity of the battery is within a predetermined capacity range.
In contrast, Kim teaches a method for determining a state of health of a battery based on a current battery capacity that is calculated based on a difference between two OCV values which are obtained before and after a second discharge pulse and an integrated current between the times at which the two OCV values are obtained (Fig. 3A; ¶17 and 117).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu such that determining whether the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement comprises: calculating an available capacity of the battery based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements, and determining that the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement when the calculated available capacity of the battery is within a predetermined capacity range. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of providing an indication of battery health based on a determined a current battery capacity (Kim; ¶17 and 117).
Per claim 14, Yamada in view of Liu in further view of Kim teaches the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 13, wherein the plurality of battery voltage measurements comprise a first open circuit battery voltage measured between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse, and a second open circuit battery voltage measured after the second battery pulse; and the battery verification module is configured to calculate the available capacity of the battery based upon the first open circuit battery voltage, the second open circuit battery voltage, and an integrated current during the second battery pulse (Kim; Fig. 3A; ¶117).
14. Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Liu, in view of Kim, in further view of Kim (US 2011/0301891 – hereinafter “Document 2”).
Per claim 15, Yamada in view of Liu does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 2, wherein determining whether the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement comprises: calculating an available capacity of the battery and an internal resistance of the battery based upon the plurality of battery voltage measurements, and determining that the parameter of the battery meets the verification requirement when the calculated available capacity of the battery is within a predetermined capacity range for the calculated internal resistance of the battery.
In contrast, Kim teaches a method for determining a state of health of a battery based on a current battery capacity that is calculated based on a difference between two OCV values which are obtained before and after a second discharge pulse and an integrated current between the times at which the two OCV values are obtained (Fig. 3A; ¶17 and 117).
In contrast, Document 2 teaches a battery system wherein an available capacity is calculated with respect to an estimated internal resistance from a data table (¶32-33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada in view of Liu such that an available capacity of the power supply 12 is calculated and determining that the power supply 12 meets the verification requirement when the calculated available capacity of the battery is within a predetermined capacity range for the calculated internal resistance of the battery. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of providing an indication of normal battery health when a determined current battery capacity (Kim; ¶17 and 117) aligns with a stored capacity that is estimated based on an internal resistance (Document 2; ¶32-33).
Per claim 16, Yamada in view of Liu in view of Kim in further view of Document 2 aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 15, wherein the battery verification module is configured to: calculate the available capacity of the battery based upon a first open circuit battery voltage measured between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse, a second open circuit battery voltage measured after the second battery pulse, and an integrated current during the second battery pulse (Kim; ¶117); and calculate the internal resistance of the battery based upon battery voltage measurements before the first battery pulse, during the first battery pulse, between the first battery pulse and the second battery pulse, and during the second battery pulse (Liu; ¶32-38); wherein the predetermined capacity range based upon a relationship between internal resistance and capacity range of the battery (Document 2; ¶32-33).
15. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Farine et al. (US 2017/0027234 – hereinafter “Farine”).
Per claim 17, Yamada does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 1, wherein the operable state comprises an unlocked state in which an aerosolisation session can be performed, and the restricted state comprises a locked state in which an aerosolisation session cannot be performed.
In contrast, Farine teaches an aerosol generating device comprising a control circuit 50 configured to reduce the supply of power form an electrical energy supply 40 to a heater 30 to zero when a voltage of the electrical energy supply 40 falls below a threshold voltage and generate a “no error” signal when the voltage of the electrical energy supply 40 does not fall below the threshold voltage (¶80).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada such that the operable state comprises an unlocked state in which an aerosolisation session can be performed, and the restricted state comprises a locked state in which an aerosolisation session cannot be performed. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of reducing a power supplied to a heater to zero when aerosolization should not be performed based on a voltage of a power supply (Farine; ¶80).
16. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Robert et al. (US 2020/0037668 – hereinafter “Robert”).
Per claim 18, Yamada does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device of claim 1, wherein the aerosol generation device battery verification system further comprises a temperature sensor module configured to determine an ambient temperature proximal to the aerosol generation device, and the battery measurement module is configured to perform the plurality of battery voltage measurements when the determined ambient temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature threshold, and configured to not perform the plurality of battery voltage measurements when the determined ambient temperature is not greater than a predetermined temperature threshold.
In contrast, Robert teaches a battery system and states that, at a low temperature, the internal resistance of a battery is higher, thereby limiting a maximum discharge current (¶5 and 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada such that a temperature sensor module is provided and configured to determine an ambient temperature proximal to the aerosol generation device, and the battery measurement module is configured to perform the plurality of battery voltage measurements when the determined ambient temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature threshold, and configured to not perform the plurality of battery voltage measurements when the determined ambient temperature is not greater than a predetermined temperature threshold. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification because a low temperature affects the internal resistance of a battery and, consequently, the output voltage of the battery (Robert; ¶5 and 13).
17. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Yamada and Alarcon et al. (US 2015/0333542 – hereinafter “Alarcon”).
Per claim 19, Yamada does not explicitly teach the aerosol generation device battery verification system of claim 1, wherein the system is configured to be communicatively coupled to an external device; the external device is configured to receive an input indicating a type of battery connected to the aerosol generation device, and determine the verification requirement for the battery; and the aerosol generation device battery verification system is configured to receive the verification requirement from the external device.
In contrast, Alarcon teaches an electronic cigarette including a smart battery 308 that is capable of communicating with a charging pack 20 wherein an MCU 304 of the charging pack 20 is configured to receive data describing characteristics of the smart battery 308 and customize charging of the smart battery 308 (Abstract; ¶16-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yamada such that the system is configured to be communicatively coupled to an external device, such as an external charger; the external device being configured to receive an input indicating a type of battery connected to the aerosol generation device and determine the verification requirement for the battery; and the system is configured to receive the verification requirement from the external device. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of customizing an operation of an aerosol-generating device based on its battery characteristics (Alarcon; ¶17).
Claim Objections
18. Claims 22-23 are objected to due to the following informalities.
Per claims 22-23, the phrase “a operable state” in each of these claims should be revised to “an operable state.”
Conclusion
19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAS A. SANGHERA whose telephone number is (571)272-4787. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, alt. Fri, 8-5 EST.
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, WALTER LINDSAY can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/JAS A SANGHERA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852