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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schaefer et al. (US 2012/0169297), hereinafter Schaefer.
As to claim 9, Schaefer discloses a charging apparatus for charging a rechargeable battery of a mobile power tool [mobile tools’ see ¶008], wherein the charging apparatus is configured to detect a core temperature (TK) of the rechargeable battery [¶0022; claim 18].
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer et al. (US 2012/0169297), hereinafter Schaefer, in view of Varipatis et al. (US 2021/0288373), hereinafter Varipatis.
As to claims 1, 11 and 18, Schaefer discloses , a method for charging a rechargeable battery of a mobile power tool [see Abstract and ¶008], wherein the rechargeable battery has an electrolyte that is liquid at room temperature , wherein charging is carried out at least temporarily at a core temperature (TK) of at least 60° C. and at a charging rate of at least 3 C [¶0022; claim 18].
Schaefer does not disclose explicitly, wherein the rechargeable battery comprises at least one pouch cell.
Varipatis discloses in figure 1, wherein the rechargeable battery comprises at least one pouch cell [¶00088 and ¶0116; using pouch cell is disclosed].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to use pouch cell in Schaefer’s apparatus as taught by Vairpatis to reduce the battery pack size and save cost.
As to claim 2, Schaefer discloses, wherein the charging rate is reduced and/or a charging process is interrupted when the core temperature (TK) reaches or exceeds a limit temperature (TG) [¶0047 and claim 27]
As to claims 3 and 12, Schefer discloses, wherein the rechargeable battery is lithium-based [see abstract and also see ¶006 and ¶0009].
As to claims 4, 13 and 19, Schefer discloses, wherein charging takes place on a basis of an operating state of the rechargeable battery [see ¶0010].
As to claims 5, 14 and 20 , Schefer discloses, wherein charging takes place at the core temperature (TK) of at least 60° C., depending on a state of charge of the rechargeable battery [see ¶0010, ¶0047 and claim 27].
As to claims 6 and 15, Schefer discloses, including measuring the core temperature [see ¶0022. ¶0047 measuring temperature is disclosed].
As to claims 8 and 17, Schefer discloses, wherein an effective thermal resistance of the rechargeable battery is increased and/or reduced at least temporarily during charging [it is implicit that the charging battery is increased or decreased during charging].
As to claim 10, Schefer discloses, wherein the charging apparatus has a temperature sensor and/or an interface for a temperature sensor for measuring a temperature of the rechargeable battery [¶0022, 0047].
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer in view of Varipatis, and in view of Westerby et al. (US 2022/0137147), hereinafter Westerby.
As to claims 7 and 16, Schaefer discloses all of the claim limitations except, including estimating the core temperature (TK).
Westerby discloses in figure 4, including estimating the core temperature (TK) [¶0014, ¶0123 and Claim 17].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to estimate battery temperature in Schefer’s apparatus as taught by Westerby in order to minimize circuit sizes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fauteux et al. (US 2016/0141728) discloses battery pack, tool, battery and battery operated tool.
Degelau et al. (US 2019/0386497) discloses portable rechargeable battery power pack for cordless power tools.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights