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 1-17 are pending.
Specification
3. The specification is objected to due to the following informality.
In paragraph 35 of the specification, it appears that the reference numeral following the element “third waveform” in line 4 should be revised from 504 to 506.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Goto et al. (US 2019/0041466 – hereinafter “Goto”) and Brorein et al. (US 2018/0164363 – hereinafter “Brorein”).
Per claim 1, Goto teaches a method comprising:
connecting a power source (Fig. 1; direct current electric power supply 4; ¶28) to a
battery cell (Fig. 1; battery 1; ¶28);
adjusting an output voltage of the power source to match a voltage of the battery cell (A measuring device 2 including a direct current electric power supply 4, an ammeter 5, and a voltmeter 6 is connected to a battery 1. An output voltage VS of the direct current electric power supply 4 is adjusted to match an initial battery voltage VB1 of the battery 1 (Fig. 1; ¶29-30)); and
removing the battery cell from a manufacturing line responsive to a magnitude of current flow from the power source to the battery cell being greater than a predefined threshold after a predefined period of time that begins with the connecting (A circuit current IB flows from the direct current electric power supply 4 to the battery 1 as the battery voltage VB decreases from the initial battery voltage VB1. At a time T2 after the connection of the battery 1 to the measuring device 2, if an acquired circuit current IB is higher than a reference value IK, the battery 1 is deemed to be a defective product. A defective product may be removed during a manufacturing process (Figs. 1 and 3; ¶32, 36, 64, and 68)).
However, Goto is silent on performing the adjusting step before the connecting step. In contrast, Brorein teaches a method for determining a self-discharge current characteristic of a storage cell 115 wherein a voltage of a DC power source 105 is adjusted to match a voltage of the storage cell 115, which is measured using a voltmeter 125, and a switch 120 is closed to connect the DC power source 105 to the storage cell 115 (Fig. 1; ¶18).
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 method of Goto such that the adjusting step is performed before the connecting step. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of matching a voltage a DC power source to a voltage of a storage cell to create a state where no current flows when the DC power source is connected to the storage cell (Brorein; ¶18).
Per claim 2, Goto in view of Brorein teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising flagging the battery cell as operable responsive to the magnitude being less than the predefined threshold after the predefined period of time (When the circuit current IB is lower than the reference value IK, the battery 1 is deemed to be a normal product (¶36)).
Per claim 3, Goto in view of Brorein teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the output voltage is at least equal to and no more than 3 μV greater than the voltage (An output voltage VS of the direct current electric power supply 4 is adjusted to match an initial battery voltage VB1 of the battery 1 (Fig. 1; ¶29-30)).
Per claim 4, Goto in view of Brorein teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising charging the battery cell to a predefined voltage (The battery 1 is charged before it is connected to the measuring device 2 (¶29)).
Per claim 6, Goto in view of Brorein teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising measuring the voltage (In the method of Goto in view of Brorein, the voltage of the battery 1 would be measured by a voltmeter (Brorein; ¶18)).
Per claim 7, Goto in view of Brorein teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising measuring the magnitude (An ammeter 5 measures the circuit current IB (Fig. 1; ¶32)).
6. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Goto and Brorein, in further view of Liu et al. (US 2019/0305384 – hereinafter “Liu”).
Per claim 5, Goto in view of Brorein does not explicitly teach the method of claim 4, wherein the predefined threshold is based on the predefined voltage.
In contrast, Liu teaches a battery micro-short detection method wherein a leakage current value of a target battery is compared to a preset current threshold. The preset current threshold is based on a self-discharge current value of a battery in a normal operating state. The preset current threshold can be set according to battery feature parameters such as battery performance stability and voltage detection precision (¶137).
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 method of Goto in view of Brorein such that the predefined threshold is based on the predefined voltage. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of setting a preset current threshold according to a battery feature parameter to prevent erroneous fault determination (Liu; ¶137).
7. Claims 8-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Goto and Sazhin et al. (US 2017/0153290 – hereinafter “Sazhin”).
Per claim 8, Goto teaches a test apparatus comprising:
a power source (Fig. 1; direct current electric power supply 4; ¶28) having an output voltage matched to a voltage of, and connected with, a battery cell (An output voltage VS of a direct current electric power supply 4 is adjusted to match an initial battery voltage VB1 of a battery 1 (Fig. 1; ¶28-30));
a current meter (Fig. 1; ammeter 5; ¶28) configured to measure a magnitude of current flow from the power source to the battery cell (An ammeter 5 is configured to measure a circuit current IB that flows from the direct current electric power supply 4 to the battery 1 (Fig. 1; ¶32));
wherein the battery cell is flagged as operable responsive to the magnitude being less than a predefined threshold after a predefined period of time that begins with the power source being connected with the battery cell (A circuit current IB flows from the direct current electric power supply 4 to the battery 1 as the battery voltage VB decreases from the initial battery voltage VB1. At a time T2 after the connection of the battery 1 to the measuring device 2, if an acquired circuit current IB is less than a reference value IK, the battery 1 is deemed to be a normal product (Figs. 1 and 3; ¶32 and 36)).
However, Goto does not explicitly teach the test apparatus comprising a controller programmed to flag the battery cell as operable. In contrast, Sazhin teaches a system for determining self-discharge currents in energy storage cells comprising control circuitry 140 configured to receive a measured current signal 122 from a current measuring device 120 disposed in a circuit comprising an energy storage cell 110 and a DC voltage source 130. The control circuitry 140 is configured to determine a self-discharge current of the energy storage cell 110 and provide an output 152 indicating a state of health of the energy storage cell 110 to a user interface 150. The user interface 150 may indicate that the energy storage cell 110 should be maintained (Fig. 1; ¶31 and 41-44).
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 test apparatus of Goto such that it comprises a controller programmed to flag the battery cell as operable. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of determining whether to maintain an energy storage cell based on a determined self-discharge current of the energy storage cell (Sazhin; ¶41-44).
Per claim 9, Goto in view of Sazhin teaches the test apparatus of claim 8, wherein the controller is further programmed to command removal of the battery cell from a manufacturing line responsive to the magnitude being greater than the predefined threshold after the predefined period of time (If an acquired circuit current IB is higher than a reference value IK, the battery 1 is deemed to be a defective product. A defective product may be removed during a manufacturing process (Figs. 1 and 3; ¶32, 36, 64, and 68)).
Per claim 10, Goto in view of Sazhin teaches the test apparatus of claim 8, wherein the controller is further programmed to command charging of the battery cell to a predefined voltage (The battery 1 is charged before it is connected to the measuring device 2 (¶29)).
Per claim 12, Goto in view of Sazhin teaches the test apparatus of claim 8, wherein the output voltage is at least equal to and no more than 3 μV greater than the voltage (An output voltage VS of the direct current electric power supply 4 is adjusted to match an initial battery voltage VB1 of the battery 1 (Fig. 1; ¶29-30)).
8. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Goto and Sazhin, in further view of Liu.
Per claim 11, Goto in view of Sazhin does not explicitly teach the test apparatus of claim 10, wherein the predefined threshold is based on the predefined voltage.
In contrast, Liu teaches a battery micro-short detection method wherein a leakage current value of a target battery is compared to a preset current threshold. The preset current threshold is based on a self-discharge current value of a battery in a normal operating state. The preset current threshold can be set according to battery feature parameters such as battery performance stability and voltage detection precision (¶137).
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 test apparatus of Goto in view of Sazhin such that the predefined threshold is based on the predefined voltage. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of setting a preset current threshold according to a battery feature parameter to prevent erroneous fault determination (Liu; ¶137).
9. Claims 13-14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Brorein and Goto.
Per claim 13, Brorein teaches a method comprising:
adjusting an output voltage of a power source to a voltage of a battery cell such that the output voltage is at least equal to and no more than a predefined value greater than the voltage (A voltage of a DC power source 105 is adjusted to match a voltage of a storage cell 115, which is measured using a voltmeter 125 (Fig. 1; ¶18)); and
connecting the power source to the battery cell (A switch 120 is closed to connect the DC power source 105 to the storage cell 115 (Fig. 1; ¶18)).
However, Brorein does not explicitly teach the method comprising grading the battery cell according to a magnitude of current flow from the power source to the battery cell. In contrast, Goto teaches an inspection method wherein, if a circuit current IB flowing between a direct current electric power supply 4 and a battery 1, which initially have the same voltage, is greater than a reference value IK, the battery 1 is deemed to be a defective product. If the circuit current IB is lower than the reference value IK, the battery 1 is deemed to be a normal product (Fig. 1; ¶28 and 36).
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 method of Goto such that the battery cell is graded according to a magnitude of current flow from the power source to the battery cell. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of determining the quality of a battery (Goto; ¶36).
Per claim 14, Brorein in view of Goto teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the battery cell is a lithium-ion battery cell (The storage cell 115 is a lithium ion cell (¶17)).
Per claim 16, Brorein in view of Goto teaches the method of claim 13 further comprising measuring the voltage of the battery cell (A voltmeter 125 is configured to measure a voltage of the storage cell 115 (¶17)).
Per claim 17, Brorein in view of Goto teaches the method of claim 13 further comprising measuring the current flow (An ammeter 110 is configured to measure the current flow between the DC power source 105 and the storage cell 115 (¶17)).
10. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Brorein and Goto, in further view of Sazhin.
Per claim 15, Brorein in view of Goto does not explicitly teach the method of claim 13 further comprising charging the battery cell to a predefined voltage.
In contrast, Sazhin teaches a system for determining self-discharge currents in energy storage cells wherein a self-discharge current of an energy storage cell 110 is determined at different states of charge. The self-discharge current of the energy storage cell 110 may vary depending upon the state of charge of the energy storage cell 110 (Fig. 1; ¶63).
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 method of Brorein in view of Goto such that it further comprises charging the battery cell to a predefined voltage. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification because a self-discharge current of an energy storage cell may vary depending on its state of charge (Sazhin; ¶63).
Conclusion
11. 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