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 Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 4, “is detected” should be “being detected”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim 12 recitation “a computer program, wherein a computer program product comprises instructions which, when the program is executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the steps of the method of claim 1” and the claim 13 recitation “a computer-readable data carrier, wherein the computer-readable data carrier has stored there on the computer program of claim 12” each have a scope that includes subject matter such as transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as “signals per se”), such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave, with this subject matter not being directed to any of the statutory categories.
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 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.
(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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by applicant-cited US 2020/0152960 to Grunwald et al. (Grunwald).
Regarding claim 1, Grunwald discloses a method for quality testing of a battery, the method comprising:
performing a battery formation process on the battery (Grunwald, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, see paragraph 68 for example, formation stage 121 during which a charge/discharge system controlled by controller 105 as a charging management module, may be configured to carry out formation cycles comprising multiple charging and discharging steps of battery 90, typically characterized as a first cycle 120A and consecutive cycles 120B);
acquiring data of the battery from the battery formation process, wherein the data of the battery temporally relates electrical characteristics of the battery (Grunwald, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, see paragraph 70 for example, during formation 121 and/or during operation 141, feedback concerning dQ/dV curves 110 and/or maps 120 may be used on optimizing the charging and/or discharging processes in either or both formation 121 and operation 141; examples for dQ/dV-related feedback comprise charging/discharging profiles and ranges 131 during formation processes 121; also see paragraph 72 for example, the locations and intensities of peaks 130 may be analyzed during the cell's early cycles and/or using representative reference cells, to manipulate the peak patterns to a desired behavior of the cells; also see paragraph 73 for example, formation and/or operation may be adjusted to maintain any peaks during charging or discharging below the specified level, and peak intensities may be monitored during these manipulations to indicate their efficiency, to transform the peaks into the desired pattern, and to determine a time point when standard cycling procedure can be applied; Grunwald therefore discloses acquiring data of the battery from the battery formation process, e.g., dQ/dV-related feedback, analyzed locations and intensities of peaks 130, and monitored peak intensities); and
quality testing of the battery by phase-wise comparing and/or cycle-wise comparing the acquired data with reference battery data, and a phase is one of: a charge phase, a transitional phase and a discharge phase of the battery formation process, and a cycle comprises consecutive phases of the charge phase, the transitional phase and the discharge phase (Grunwald, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, see paragraph 72 for example, locations and intensities of peaks 130 may be analyzed during the cell's early cycles and/or using representative reference cells, to manipulate the peak patterns to a desired behavior of the cells, having improved cycling lifetime; for example, altered current intensities may be applied at the voltage ranges of peak(s) 130, during cycling and/or formation to modify peaks 130 into peaks 135; regarding this reference to “peaks 135”, see, e.g., paragraph 37 in connection with Fig. 3C, peaks 130 providing acceptable cycling lifetime of the cell are denoted by numeral 135; also see paragraph 73 for example, formation and/or operation may be adjusted to maintain any peaks during charging or discharging below the specified level, and peak intensities may be monitored during these manipulations to indicate their efficiency, to transform the peaks into the desired pattern, and to determine a time point when standard cycling procedure can be applied; Grunwald therefore discloses comparing the acquired data on at least a phase-wise basis with reference battery data for the purpose of modifying/conforming the measured data to the reference battery data; in this regard, the examiner points out that Grunwald’s “representative reference cells” and/or peaks 135 providing acceptable cycling lifetime of the cell fall within the scope of “reference battery data” as claimed; the examiner also points out that Grunwald’s process of modifying/conforming the measured data to the reference battery data is performed during the charging phase and during the discharging phase of the formation stage 121).
Although not presently relied upon in connection with any rejection, US 20180011143 to Bruch et al. (see Conclusion section below) also appears to be anticipatory as to claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Grunwald discloses wherein the method follows a mechanical production process of the battery (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, it is implicit in Grunwald’s arrangement of Fig. 11 that the formation stage 121 is performed after mechanical production of the battery/cell 90).
Regarding claim 3, Grunwald discloses refraining from performing an End-Of-Line Test process of the battery; and/or the quality testing of the battery is performed during the battery formation process (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, Grunwald’s quality testing of the battery, e.g., comparing the acquired data at least on a phase-wise basis with reference battery data for the purpose of modifying/conforming the measured data to the reference battery data, is performed during the battery formation process).
Regarding claim 4, Grunwald discloses wherein the quality testing of the battery and/or the acquiring the data of the battery is performed upon an initial state of the battery is detected (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, examples for cycle characteristics which may be determined by controller 105 are the end of charging (C-end) criterion, the extent of charging (maximal capacity or voltage) and discharging (depth of discharge DoD), as well as rates and profiles of charging and discharging; these criteria may be variously defined to optimize the formation process, e.g., by initially measuring lithiation capacities of the anodes and cathodes in half cells and using the measured quantities to define the formation criteria, as well as optionally providing feedback from the formation charging/discharging curve(s) of battery 90 to modify the formation criteria during formation 121 itself, or as a way to derive formation parameters for formation processes 121 of batteries that follow).
Regarding claim 5, Grunwald discloses wherein the battery formation process further comprises steps of periodically charging the battery during the charge phase and discharging the battery during the discharge phase (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1), that the acquiring the data of the battery during the battery formation process comprises acquiring the data stepwise according to the steps of periodically charging and discharging (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1), and that the transitional phase is between the charge phase and the discharge phase, the charge phase to another charge phase, the discharge phase to another discharge phase, from the discharge phase to the charge phase or to the other discharge phase and/or from the charge phase to the discharge phase or to the other charge phase (the examiner notes in connection with claim 1 that the language “cycle-wise comparing” and “a cycle comprises consecutive phases of the charge phase, the transitional phase and the discharge phase” pertain to optional limitations of claim 1 because claim 1 requires only one of “phase-wise comparing and/or cycle-wise comparing”; this language of claim 6 also pertains to aspects of the optional subject matter of claim 1 and therefore is also interpreted as optional and without patentable weight).
Regarding claim 6, Grunwald discloses wherein the reference battery data is data gathered from a historical battery data set of at least one battery batch and/or data from a current battery data set of a same batch (Grunwald, e.g., paragraph 68, examples for cycle characteristics which may be determined by controller 105 are the end of charging (C-end) criterion, the extent of charging (maximal capacity or voltage) and discharging (depth of discharge DoD), as well as rates and profiles of charging and discharging; these criteria may be variously defined to optimize the formation process, e.g., by initially measuring lithiation capacities of the anodes and cathodes in half cells (construed as reference battery data is data gathered from a historical battery data set of at least one battery batch as claimed) and using the measured quantities to define the formation criteria, as well as optionally providing feedback from the formation charging/discharging curve(s) of battery 90 to modify the formation criteria during formation 121 itself (construed as data from a current battery data set of a same batch), or as a way to derive formation parameters for formation processes 121 of batteries that follow; also see, e.g., paragraph 72, the locations and intensities of peaks 130 may be analyzed during the cell's early cycles (construed as data from a current battery data set of a same batch) and/or using representative reference cells (construed as reference battery data is data gathered from a historical battery data set of at least one battery batch as claimed), to manipulate the peak patterns to a desired behavior of the cells, having improved cycling lifetime).
Regarding claim 7, Grunwald discloses wherein the quality testing of the battery is performed while the acquiring of the data of the battery is carried out (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, see paragraph 70 for example, during formation 121 and/or during operation 141, feedback concerning dQ/dV curves 110 and/or maps 120 may be used on optimizing the charging and/or discharging processes in either or both formation 121 and operation 141; for example, the charging and/or discharging profiles may be modified, e.g., charging may be configured to be more gradual, or current ramping may be more or less gradual to avoid too high normalized dQ/dV rates in order to extend the battery's cycling lifetime; also see paragraph 72 for example, the locations and intensities of peaks 130 may be analyzed during the cell's early cycles and/or using representative reference cells, to manipulate the peak patterns to a desired behavior of the cells, having improved cycling lifetime; for example, altered current intensities may be applied at the voltage ranges of peak(s) 130, during cycling and/or formation to modify peaks 130 into peaks 135; Grunwald’s quality testing of the battery, e.g., comparing the acquired data at least on a phase-wise and/or cycle-wise basis with reference battery data for the purpose of modifying/conforming the measured data to the reference battery data, is performed concurrently with the acquisition of dQ/dV feedback); and/or
the quality testing of the battery is performed on the acquired data according to a fixed step in the battery formation process, during a subsequent step of the battery formation process.
Regarding claim 8, Grunwald discloses wherein the method further comprises extracting one or more functional profiles from the acquired data; and
the quality testing further comprises comparing the one or more functional profiles of the acquired data and corresponding one or more functional profiles of the reference battery data (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, with Grunwald’s dQ/dV feedback being an extracted functional profiled from the acquired data that is compared to corresponding one or more functional profiles of the reference battery data (e.g., peaks 135 providing acceptable cycling lifetime of the cell as denoted by numeral 135 in Fig. 3C) for the purpose of modifying/conforming the measured data to the reference battery data).
Regarding claim 9, Grunwald discloses wherein the quality testing further comprises triggering one or more indicators when respective one or more differences between the one or more functional profiles of the acquired data and the corresponding one or more functional profiles of the reference battery data exceed corresponding one or more predetermined thresholds (see Grunwald as applied to claim 1, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, see paragraph 74 for example, controller(s) 105 further derives the expected cell cycling lifetime by comparing the at least one monitored peak to a specified threshold; for example, the specified threshold may be a peak value of 1.3 1/V during charging and/or a peak value of 1.0 1/V during discharging, when normalized with respect to a corresponding cell capacity; system 100 may be further configured to assuring a quality of produced lithium ion cells 90 by separating produced lithium ion cells having the expected cell cycling lifetime longer than a specified requirement from the cells with shorter expected cycle life, wherein the specified requirement is any of 500, 1000 and 1500 hours; also see paragraphs 29-30 for example, certain embodiments comprise monitoring dQ/dV during charging and/or discharging cycle(s) of the formation process, and using voltages associated with the maximal values of the monitored dQ/dV to either - control the formation process, preventing dQ/dV values above the specified threshold and/or using the maximal values of the monitored dQ/dV as a quality control tool to estimate the expected cycling lifetime of the corresponding cell(s); at least in the case of Grunwald’s comparison of monitored maximal dQ/dV values to predetermined dQ/dV threshold for purposes of determining cycle life, Grunwald triggers/generates one or more indicators pertaining to cycle life depending on whether a difference between monitored maximal dQ/dV values and the predetermined dQ/dV threshold exceeds a predetermined value; for example, a monitored maximal dQ/dV that exceeds the predetermined dQ/dV threshold result in an indication of shortened lifetime; also see, for example, e.g., Figs. 3A-3C and paragraph 38 regarding using the maximal values of the monitored dQ/dV as a quality control tool; Grunwald uses such indicators to, for example, sort/classify cells according to lifetime as disclosed in paragraph 30).
Regarding claim 10, Grunwald discloses wherein the data or the functional profile includes at least one or more of:
derivatives of a charge of the battery with respect to a terminal voltage of the battery per the respective charge and discharge phases (see Grunwald as applied to claim 8, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, Grunwald’s dQ/dV feedback comprises derivatives of a charge of the battery/cell 90 with respect to a terminal voltage of the battery/cell 90 per the respective charge and discharge phases) and/or derivatives of the terminal voltage of the battery with respect to the charge of the battery per the respective charge and discharge phases;
the charge and/or an energy throughput per the respective charge and discharge phases;
internal resistances per the respective transitional phases;
electrical circuit models per the respective transitional phases and/or the electrical circuit models per the respective charge phases and/or discharge phases; and
coulomb/energy/voltaic efficiencies per the respective cycles.
Regarding claim 11, Grunwald discloses wherein the quality testing is performed by:
respectively comparing at least one maximum and/or at least one minimum of the derivatives against at least one maximum and/or at least one minimum of derivatives in the reference battery data (see Grunwald as applied to claim 10, e.g., Fig. 11 and paragraphs 67-74, see paragraph 74 for example, system 100 may comprise at least one controller 105 configured to monitor at least one charging and/or discharging peak during at least one initial or consecutive cycle of cells 90, with the charging and/or discharging peak defined with respect to a corresponding dQ/dV curve during the at least one initial or consecutive cycle; controller(s) 105 further derives the expected cell cycling lifetime by comparing the at least one monitored peak to a specified threshold; for example, the specified threshold may be a peak value of 1.3 1/V during charging and/or a peak value of 1.0 1/V during discharging, when normalized with respect to a corresponding cell capacity; also see paragraph 29, for example), and/or respectively comparing the derivatives to corresponding statistical upper and lower boundary curves associated with the derivatives in the reference battery data;
respectively comparing the charge and/or the energy throughput against at least one first statistical boundary condition of the reference battery data;
comparing the internal resistances against at least one second statistical boundary condition of the reference battery data;
fitting parameters of the electrical circuit models to the data or the functional profile and respectively comparing the parameters of the electrical circuit models against corresponding parameters of an equivalent electrical circuit model of the reference battery data and/or respectively comparing the parameters against at least one third statistical boundary condition associated with the corresponding parameters of the reference battery data; and/or
comparing the coulomb and/or energy and/or voltaic efficiencies against at least one fourth statistical boundary condition of the reference battery data, and
wherein the at least one first, second, third and fourth boundary conditions are independent from one another.
Regarding claim 12, Grunwald discloses a computer program, wherein a computer program product comprises instructions which, when the program is executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the steps of the method of claim 1 (Grunwald, e.g. paragraphs 80-83).
Regarding claim 13, Grunwald discloses a computer-readable data carrier, wherein the computer-readable data carrier has stored there on the computer program of claim 12 (Grunwald, e.g. paragraphs 80-83).
Claim 14 recites a battery formation system for quality testing of a battery, the battery formation system comprising:
a monitor/control unit configured to measure electrical characteristics of the battery and further configured to instruct a battery formation process on the battery;
a processing unit is configured to acquire data of the battery based on the measured electrical characteristics during the battery formation process, wherein the data of the battery temporally relates the measured electrical characteristics of the battery; and
the battery formation system is configured to quality test the battery by phase wise comparing and/or cycle wise comparing the acquired data with reference battery data, and a phase is one of: a charge phase, a transitional phase and a discharge phase of the battery formation process, and a cycle comprises consecutive phases of the charge phase, the transitional phase and the discharge phase,
and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as anticipated by Grunwald for reasons analogous to those discussed above in connection with claim 1, recognizing in Fig. 11 of Grunwald that controller(s) 105 necessarily include a monitor/control unit configured to measure/monitor electrical characteristics (e.g., current/voltage characteristics for determining dQ/dV) of the battery and further configured to instruct a battery formation process on the battery (e.g., through the use of suitable battery charging/discharging circuitry), and a processing unit configured to acquire data of the battery based on the measured electrical characteristics during the battery formation process (e.g., to acquire/determine dQ/dV data based on the measured current/voltage characteristics and suitably control charging/discharging circuitry based at least in part on dQ/dV).
Claim 15 recites wherein the battery formation system is a legacy battery formation system, and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as anticipated by Grunwald as applied to claim 14, recognizing that the term “legacy” does not add any further structural limitations beyond those recited in claim 14 and merely characterizes the nature of the technology being used, e.g., and older or outdated technology.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2018/0011143 to Bruch et al. relates to methods for determining a reference energy profile, to a device for forming a battery, to a method for forming a battery, to a usage of a reference energy profile and to a computer program, see, e.g., Fig. 8 and paragraph 101:
[0101] FIG. 8 shows a schematic block circuit diagram of a device 80 which, compared to the device 70, additionally comprises a memory 38 configured to store a reference current profile and/or a preset default value of a course (like the course 12 or 14) or a physical state. The reference current profile may comprise preset default values for the electrical energy to be provided to the battery and/or the physical state for at least one of the plurality of time intervals of the charge cycle. Control means 34′ is, for example, configured to control the controllable energy source 28 based on the reference current profile stored in the memory 38.
PNG
media_image1.png
393
733
media_image1.png
Greyscale
US 2022/0099748 to Ye et al. relates to controlling a battery current during battery formation and/or testing, see, e.g., Fig. 2 and paragraphs 45-48.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL R MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1964. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST 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, Lee Rodak, can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/DANIEL R MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights