CTNF 18/962,368 CTNF 84743 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 21-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites the limitation, accumulate an end voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells over time to form an end voltage trend. This limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the performance of the limitation in the mind. The claim recites the limitation, detect a defect in at least one battery cell among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend. This limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the performance of the limitation in the mind. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites an additional element: a processor, however said processor is recited at a high-level of generality, i.e. as a generic computer component, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, the additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaning limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible. Independent claim 33 recites subject matter that is similar or analogous to that of claim 21, and therefore, the claim is also patent ineligible. Dependent claims 22-32 and 34-36 fail to incorporate anything significantly more than the abstract idea. The claims recite additional steps of further data manipulation/calculation, which are considered part of the expanded abstract idea of independent claims 21 and 33, respectively, and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The dependent claims are also patent ineligible. 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 21, 23, 33, 37 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Chun et al. (KR 101779245) . Regarding claims 21, 23 and 33, Chun teaches a battery system diagnosing apparatus (100) configured to diagnose a battery system including a plurality of battery cells (abstract), the apparatus comprising: a processor configured to: accumulate an end voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells over time to form an end voltage trend (pg. 3, para. 2-4); and detect a defect in at least one battery cell among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend (pg. 3, para. 11-12); and wherein the end voltage comprises an open circuit voltage measured after a predetermined amount of time after a charging or discharging each of the plurality of battery cells ends (after the formation process, i.e. charge/discharge of the battery, the open circuit voltage is taken, pg. 4, para. 4-5) [claim 23]. Regarding claims 37 and 40, Chun teaches a battery system, comprising: a plurality of battery cells (abstract); and a battery system diagnosing apparatus comprising: a processor configured to: generate an end voltage trend based on data related to end voltages for the plurality of battery cells accumulated over time (pg. 3, para. 2-4); and detect a defect in at least one battery cell among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend (pg. 3, para. 11-12); and wherein the end voltage comprises an open circuit voltage measured after a predetermined amount of time after a charging or discharging each of the plurality of battery cells ends (after the formation process, i.e. charge/discharge of the battery, the open circuit voltage is taken, pg. 4, para. 4-5) [claim 40] . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun in view of Jung et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0321945) . Regarding claim 38, Chun teaches all the claimed limitations except for the plurality of battery cells are at least one of a pouch-type secondary battery or a can-type secondary battery. Jung teaches a plurality of secondary batteries of at least one of a pouch-type secondary battery or a can-type secondary battery (para 4). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate pouch type for said plurality of battery cells since they are frequently used and are easily stacked . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 22 and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun in view of Kwon (KR 20140141289) . Regarding claims 22 and 39, Chun teaches all the claimed limitations except for the defect in at least one battery cell comprises a defect in the electrode tabs of the at least one battery cell. Kwon teaches a battery diagnose system comprising: detecting a defect in at least one battery cell comprises a defect in the electrode tabs of the at least one battery cell (abstract). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a step of detecting a defect in the electrode tabs within Chun’s step of detecting battery defect in order to obtain a defect free secondary battery . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims of Patent No. 12,181,532 Claims of Current Application 1. A battery system diagnosing apparatus, which diagnoses a battery system including a plurality of battery cells having electrode tabs therein, the apparatus comprising: a voltage measuring unit configured to measure an end voltage at every charging or discharging for each of the plurality of battery cells; and a processor configured to accumulate the end voltage of each battery cell measured by the voltage measuring unit over time to form an end voltage trend for each battery cell and detect a battery cell having a defect in one of the electrode tabs among the plurality of battery cells based on the accumulated end voltage trend. 2. The battery system diagnosing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to separately detect a disconnection defect and an incomplete contact defect as the defect of one of the electrode tabs. 3. The battery system diagnosing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to obtain a deviation trend between the end voltage trend and a reference trend and detect whether each battery cell has the defect in one of the electrode tabs based on the obtained deviation trend. 9. A battery system, comprising the battery system diagnosing apparatus according to claim 1. 10. A battery system diagnosing method, which diagnoses a battery system including a plurality of battery cells having electrode tabs therein, the method comprising: measuring an end voltage at every charging or discharging for each of the plurality of battery cells; accumulating the end voltage of each battery cell measured in the measuring step over time to form an end voltage trend; and detecting a battery cell having a defect one of the electrode tabs among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend formed in the forming step. 21 . A battery system diagnosing apparatus configured to diagnose a battery system including a plurality of battery cells, the apparatus comprising: a processor configured to: accumulate an end voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells over time to form an end voltage trend; and detect a defect in at least one battery cell among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend. 22 . The battery system diagnosing apparatus of claim 21, wherein the plurality of battery cells have electrode tabs, and the defect in at least one battery cell comprises a defect in the electrode tabs of the at least one battery cell. 24 . The battery system diagnosing apparatus of claim 21, wherein the processor is configured to: generate a deviation trend based on a difference between the end voltage trend and a reference trend; and detect whether any one of the battery cells has the defect based on the generated deviation trend. 37 . A battery system, comprising: a plurality of battery cells; and a battery system diagnosing apparatus comprising: a processor configured to: generate an end voltage trend based on data related to end voltages for the plurality of battery cells accumulated over time; and detect a defect in at least one battery cell among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend. 33 . A method of diagnosing a battery system including a plurality of battery cells, the method comprising: accumulating an end voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells over time to form an end voltage trend; and detecting a defect in at least one battery cell among the plurality of battery cells based on the end voltage trend. 08-34 AIA Claim s 21-22, 24, 33 and 37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-3 and 9-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,181,532 (hereinafter Patent ‘532) . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-3, 9-10 of Patent ‘532 anticipate claims 21-22, 33 and 37 of the current application . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH Q PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3898. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm. 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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. MINH Q. PHAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2852 /MINH Q PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 2 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 3 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 4 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 5 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 6 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 7 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 8 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 9 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 10 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 11 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 12 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/962,368 Page 13 Art Unit: 2852
Prosecution Insights