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 .
All Foreign Priority Documents were not received
Certified copies of foreign priority document NOT received include: (1) 10-2023-0112783 and (2) 10-2023-0112786.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
As to claim 5, it not explained how the “unit monitors” a reference values. Specification calls for employing two different reference values, but nothing describes how one (or is it two) reference value is being monitored. There are no examples of monitoring a reference value (or if you will, reference values), no reference explains such, no manner of experimentation is apparent.
As to claim 8, Para 30 (Pub) appears to be in error. That phrase “the second reference value 75 seconds before from the detection of hydrogen production” makes no sense. There is no example of how such occurs, no reference provides for such, no manner or experimentation is apparent.
As to claims 1 and 10, there is no explanation/description of “charging/discharging switches” that allow for charging/discharging a battery cell. Consider that Figure 2 illustrates one “SWITCH” and that “charging/discharging switch” (specification) suggests one switch; both of which are contrary with claims’ 1 and 10s’ “switches”. That there is no description how either one or two separate switches (i.e. a charging switch, a discharging switch; or are there 2 switches where each of the 2 both charge and discharge?) permit for charging/discharging. There is no schematic drawing the provides for such. The “discharging switch” suggests that the battery itself drains the battery without any regard to whether the vehicle is being utilized, causing additional concerns relating to lack of any disclosed circuitry. There are no examples of any circuit per the claims/specification/drawings, no reference provides for such, and no manner of experimentation is apparent as it’s not even apparent if box 124 represents 1 switch (that charges and discharges) or 2 separate switches (one charging, and the other discharging) or something other alternative.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-15 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.
As to claim 1, how is the term module in “modules” (line 3) defined? The application uses terms such as module and device, so they have different definitions. Para 70,71 (Publication) state that the battery cell “corresponds” to the module, but the sensor 111 (Figure 2) does not illustrate a battery. What is Applicant’s meaning of the term module?
As to claim 1, it’s not clear how the adjective “nano” (line 4) limits the noun “sensor (line 4) in the phrase “nano sensor”. Consider that the phrase “nano sensor” has different meanings (i.e. different dimensional ranges, of different elements within that are associated with nano) in relation to sensors in the prior art, but that the term nano lacks any dimensional range. Without a defined dimensional range (associated with gap and/or rod), it’s not clear what the claimed adjective (i.e. nano) might be. Note that the term “nano” by itself means 1 billionth, and lacks any units. That different references provide different ranges for different elements is clear from the citations below. How is Applicant’s defining his “nano sensor”? As such, it appears that any sensor of any dimension may be tagged as a nano sensor, so how does “nano” further define a sensor?
(1) Bhavsar CN 101545371 has gas sensors of different ranges for different “nano” sensors:
“As used herein, the term "nanometer sensor" is a material having at least one feature has nano-grade scales. characteristic of the material can be aperture, diameter, platelet length, particle mean diameter, sensing element or material thickness. material can be functionalized or not functionalized. In one set of embodiments, nano-sensor can be nanometer line or a functionalized nanowire. As used herein, the term "nanometer-scale" represents size can be less than 500 nanometers, in some embodiments, less than 200 nanometers; In other embodiments, less than 150 nanometers, and in other embodiments, less than 100 nanometers, in an exemplary embodiment, less than 70 nanometer, In yet additional embodiment, less than 50 nanometer, in other embodiments, less than 20 nanometers, in further another embodiment, less than 10 nanometer; while in yet another embodiment, less than 5 nanometer. In certain exemplary embodiments, the scale can be less than 2 nanometers or less than 1 nanometers. In one set of embodiments, the features have at least one the scale range of 0.5 nanometer to 200 nanometer. nano-sensor may have a core and an outer region. scale in these, the scale relates to the core. "nanowire" is an elongated nanometer class semiconductor point along any of its length, has at least one cross-sectional dimension and, in some embodiments, two orthogonal cross section scale with the scale. the cross section of the elongated semiconductor may have any arbitrary shape, including, but not limited to round, square, rectangular, elliptical and tubular. comprising a regular or irregular shape. non-limiting list can be prepared by the material examples of beneficial nano-sensor of the present invention given below. nano-tube is a type in the present invention to obtain nano-wire of the application, and may include a level equivalent to the nanotube line. As used herein, the term "nanotube" is a nano-wire with a hollow core. and includes those nanotubes known to those of ordinary skill in the art. "non-nanotube nanowire" is any is not nano-line of nanotubes. In one group of embodiments of the invention, non-nanotube nanowire with an unmodified surface (not including nano tube in the environment of the solid
Lee KR 20230083475 teaches a hydrogen sensor that employs a different range for nanoparticles:
“The diameter of the polymer nanosensor particles is prepared in the range of 350 ± 10 nm, and functional groups having negative charges are attached through surface modification of the polymer nanosensor particles (surface zeta potential -30.0 ± 5.0 mV ).”
Shekhar WO 2019077630 teaches (Para 65) a hydrogen nano sessor with 60 nm thick layer for hydrogen sensing, neither gap nor rod.
“[0065] Sensing characteristics for oxidized 10 nm, 20 nm, 40 nm and 60 nm thick Pt nano-sensor was studied for hydrogen concentration of 100 ppm. All nano-sensors demonstrate a response to hydrogen at room temperature. Among all the nano-sensors, 60 nm thick oxidized nano-sensors showed the maximum response at optimum bias voltage of 0.25 V. This may be due to the optimum Pt to PtO.sub.x ratio formed during oxidation of 60 nm thick nanowires. Fig. 6(c) illustrates a graph depicting results of hydrogen sensing, in accordance with an implementation of the present subject matter. Fig. 6(c) indicates increase in detection of gaseous component with increase nano- sensors on a nano-sensor array from left to right.”
As to claim 1, should “of battery cells” (line 2) have read - - respective battery cells - - ? It’s not clear how “modules” (line 2) and “battery cells” are related to one another in this apparatus claim.
As to claim 2, “wherein the” (line 2) to - - wherein each - - ?
As to claim 5, in what manner does the unit monitor reference values? Paragraph 91 (of Publication) repeats such, but the unit does not seem to measure/scan/check different reference values; it merely employs one reference or the other. How is term “monitors” (line 2) employed in the context of this claim?
As to claim 8, shouldn’t the phrase “before from” (line 3) have read - - after - - for consistency with Para 101 (Publication)? The phrase “75 seconds before” is consistent with Para 30 (Pub), but Para 30 appears to be in error.
As to claim 10, the “if” (lines 7-8) is confusing because it does not add a step in this method claim. A method claim calls for a single or combination of clearly identified steps, but the term “if” loudly repudiates such. How can one of ordinary skill to interpret lines 7-8?
As to claim 10, the “if” (last 2 lines) is confusing because it does not add a step in this method claim. A method claim calls for a single or combination of clearly identified steps, but the term “if” loudly repudiates such. How can one of ordinary skill to interpret lines 7-8?
As to claim 11, it’s not possible to determine if this claim adds a step, or merely structurally defines the sensor, adding a mere intended use for the sensors. Do the last 2 lines merely define what the sensors are configured to do? (If so, use the term configured, or possibly state that the sensor are for some particular use) If this claim adds a step, the step (which must introduce a clearly intended verb) should clearly pronounce such. What is Applicant’s intent?
As to claim 11, does “the palladium-based nano sensor” (line 2) mean - - each palladium-based nano sensor - - ? After all, claim 10 calls for using a plurality of such. What is Applicant’s intent?
As to claim 12, one “sensor” (line 2) cannot comprise a “plurality” (line 2 of the same). What is Applicant’s intent?
As to claim 13, “is used” (lines 2,3) is problematic, as they seem to suggest that the first reference is twice carried out, and use of the second reference is also twice carried out. How is this claim to be grasped in light of the two “if” limitations of claim 10?
As to claim 15, what is to be made of the if-limitation in the last 2 lines? Is there a step to be found somewhere in those last 2 lines, or not. These are method claims, and method claims call for clearly enumerated steps. One of ordinary skill has difficulty in comprehending what step might be, when the step may or may not such that it occurs. What is Applicant’s intent?
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 14 removes the “if” limitations of claim 10. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1,2,3,4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Won KR 102338516 in view of Lee et al (“Design Rules … Sensor”, listed 1449).
Won teaches thermal runaway of lithium-ion battery detection and control device comprising:
sensor modules for detecting and monitoring hydrogen concentrations of battery cells 20 and each having a
a battery cell controller 186 for turning on and off charging/discharging switches 131 of the battery cells according to the hydrogen concentrations detected through the sensor modules and variations in the hydrogen concentrations according to time
“Accordingly, the control unit 186 turns off the unit power switch 131 connected to the battery tray 20 to cut off the current in the first stage of thermal runaway, which is the initial stage of thermal runaway occurrence, according to the progress of thermal runaway. It is possible to prevent a fire explosion by mitigating thermal runaway as the chemical chain reaction is alleviated.”
“In addition, when the hydrogen gas received from the third gas sensor 123 reaches more than the reference concentration as before, or the concentration change rate according to unit time is greater than or equal to the reference change rate, or is out of the normal gas concentration change range determined from the exponential moving average value It is built to judge that it meets the conditions for action.”
Won does not refer to any particular type hydrogen reference.
As to claims 1,2, it would have been obvious to employ Lee’s palladium nanogap sensor that detects as low as 1000 to 5ppm because such will effectively serve to detect the reference concentration of the hydrogen sensor 123 necessary to trigger action.
As to claim 3, sensors have tolerances, suggestive of different ranges.
As to claim 4, the controller compares the sensor outputs with references, and each switch 131 is that of a difference cell 20 (Figure 2).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
He et al CN 108931561 teach a
sensor modules (Figure 1) for detecting and monitoring hydrogen concentrations
a battery cell controller for turning on and off charging/discharging switches of the battery cells
“The mathematical relationship between the physical performance and the hydrogen concentration of the hydrogen sensing element, a signal processing unit uses FPGA and high precision DA DDS signal generator as a sensor for an adjustable reference signal source. signal processing unit not only with analog-to-digital conversion function, and the signal collecting temperature and humidity sensor, the hydrogen sensing element signal collecting processing and nonlinear correction. the detection sensitivity of hydrogen can reach 10-9, the detection limit is less than 5ppb, improve the detecting accuracy and monitoring system for environment adaptability. microprocessor unit uses adaptive control technology with system, remote diagnosis, remote upgrading, data automatic transmission function, to monitor each module of the system through serial communication to realize automatic continuous measuring, data storing and analyzing and network communication. the power supply unit supply power by adopting commercial power and battery power supply of double-path switching power supply mode. charging the storage battery under the condition of commercial power and supplies power for the system, the powerdown of the commercial power under the condition of using battery power for the system, the system power supply. when the battery voltage decreases to the threshold low voltage is automatically cut off the power supply to prevent battery over-discharge phenomenon. power unit adopts alternating and direct current power supply mode system in the field of long-term observation, providing guarantee for continuous and stable operation of the system, ensure the continuous operation time of the system” (Reference),
wherein the palladium-based nano sensor detects the hydrogen concentration between 20 and 400 ppm (The sensor detects 10 ppm or less, and thus 20-400ppm). The modules are connected to the control 21.
Woo ‘859 teach gas sensor employed to determine thermal runaway of a battery, and prevent damage to the battery. However, the nature of the sensor is not nano/hydrogen oriented, and no reference is made that the control unit controls a battery charger based thereon.
Ping CN 117198008 teach employing lower and higher thresholds for a hydrogen gas sensor to provide for an indications that a battery is experiencing thermal runaway, and subsequently providing a safety measures. The sensor is not stated as being palladium-based nano sensor, and a hydrogen range of 20-400 ppm is not expressed as being that which triggers charging/discharging.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Fri from 8am to 4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 303-297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ROBERT R RAEVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights