DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on March 14, 2025 and November 07, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a magnetic field generating means in claims 1 and 8.
a shielding means in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claim(s) 1 and 8 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. KR20220095294A (called Hwang hereinafter, applicant disclosed art and the examiner has provided a English machine translation).
Regarding independent claim 1, Hwang teaches a quality inspection device (Fig. 2) for a pouch-type secondary battery cell (para [0057]; battery cell being evaluated may be a pouch-type), comprising:
an AC signal generating unit (para [0063-0064]) that generates an AC signal (para [0063-0064]);
a magnetic field generating means (Fig. 2; para [0063-0064]; transmitting coil 1111) that generates a magnetic field (Fig. 2; para [0063-0064]) according to the AC signal and induces a current to flow in the pouch-type secondary battery cell (para [0064]);
at least one inductive current detection sensor (Fig. 2; para [0063-0065]; receiving coil 1211) for detecting a signal of the inductive current flowing into the pouch-type secondary battery cell (para [0063-0065]); and
a control/judgment unit (Fig. 2; para [0055-0056]; the battery cell is evaluated for cracks based on the measurement of the battery cell) for comparing the induced current signal detected by the inductive current detection sensor with a value within a preset judgment range (Fig. 2; para [0055-0056]) and determining the quality of the pouch-type secondary battery cell based on the comparison result (Fig. 2; para [0055-0056]; determine if there is a crack or not in the battery cell).
Regarding independent claim 8, Hwang teaches a method (Fig. 2; para [0001]) for inspecting the quality of a pouch-type secondary battery cell (para [0057]; battery cell being evaluated may be a pouch-type), comprising:
a step in which an AC signal generating unit (para [0063-0064]) generates an AC signal (para [0063-0064]), and a magnetic field generating means (Fig. 2; para [0063-0064]; transmitting coil 1111) generates a magnetic field (Fig. 2; para [0063-0064]) according to the generated AC signal and induces a current to flow in the pouch-type secondary battery cell (para [0064]);
a step in which an inductive current detection sensor (Fig. 2; para [0063-0065]; receiving coil 1211) detects a signal of an induced current flowing into the pouch-type secondary battery cell (para [0063-0065]); and
a step of in which a control/judgment unit (Fig. 2; para [0055-0056]; the battery cell is evaluated for cracks based on the measurement of the battery cell) compares the signal of the induced current detected by the inductive current detection sensor with a value within a judgment criterion range (Fig. 2; para [0055-0056]) to determine the quality of the pouch-type secondary battery cell (Fig. 2; para [0055-0056]; determine if there is a crack or not in the battery cell).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 3 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Yang US2018/0081004.
Regarding claim 3, Hwang teaches the quality inspection device for a pouch-type secondary battery cell according to claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the magnetic field generating means comprises: a transformer that transmits the AC current generated by the AC signal generating unit; a series resonant unit that resonates in series with the low frequency of the AC current to cause a coil to generate a magnetic field; and a parallel resonance unit that resonates in parallel with the high frequency of the AC current to cause the coil to generate a magnetic field.
Yang teaches wherein the magnetic field generating means comprises: a transformer (Fig. 6; para [0053]) that transmits the AC current generated by the AC signal generating unit (Fig. 6; para [0052-0053]; current source 600); a series resonant unit that resonates in series with the low frequency of the AC current to cause a coil to generate a magnetic field (Fig. 6; para [0053]; series resonances at 57 MHz and 71 MHz); and a parallel resonance unit that resonates in parallel with the high frequency of the AC current to cause the coil to generate a magnetic field (Fig. 6; para [0053]; parallel resonance at 90 MHz).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Hwang with the current source as described by Yang for the purpose of improving the time for transmitter power adjustments and impedance tuning (para [0023]).
Claim 4 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Anzai JP2009252644A (applicant disclosed art and the examiner has provided a English machine translation).
Regarding claim 4, Hwang teaches the quality inspection device for a pouch-type secondary battery cell according to claim 1, but fails to teach further comprising at least one signal processing unit for outputting a signal of the induced current detected by the inductive current detection sensor to the control/judgment unit; wherein the AC signal generating unit generates an AC signal with dual frequencies, comprising both a low frequency and a high frequency; wherein the signal processing unit comprises: a low-frequency detection filter for detecting the low-frequency AC current signal and outputting it to the control/judgment unit; and a high-frequency detection filter for detecting the high-frequency AC current signal and outputting it to the control/judgment unit.
Anzai teaches at least one signal processing unit (Figs. 1-3; para [0029]; control panel 24) for outputting a signal of the induced current detected by the inductive current detection sensor to the control/judgment unit (Figs. 1-3; para [0026, 0029 and 0040]); wherein the AC signal generating unit generates an AC signal with dual frequencies (Figs. 1-3; para [0029]), comprising both a low frequency and a high frequency (para [0029 and 0040]; 15 kHz and 2 Mhz); wherein the signal processing unit comprises: a low-frequency detection filter for detecting the low-frequency AC current signal and outputting it to the control/judgment unit (para [0029 and 0040]; 15 kHz); and a high-frequency detection filter for detecting the high-frequency AC current signal and outputting it to the control/judgment unit (para [0029 and 0040]; 2 Mhz).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Hwang with the dual frequency measurements as described by Anzai for the purpose of detecting surface damage of a battery based on impedance of induced current (para [0001]).
Claim 5 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Lee et al. KR102020005290A (called Lee hereinafter, applicant disclosed art and the examiner has provided a English machine translation).
Regarding claim 5, Hwang teaches the quality inspection device for a pouch-type secondary battery cell according to claim 1, but fails to teach wherein, the at least one inductive current detection sensor moves and scans the pouch-type secondary battery cell to detect an induced current signal, when the pouch-type secondary battery cell is positioned at a starting position.
Lee teaches wherein, the at least one inductive current detection sensor moves and scans the pouch-type secondary battery cell to detect an induced current signal (Figs. 2 and 4; para [0058]), when the pouch-type secondary battery cell is positioned at a starting position (Figs. 2 and 4; para [0058]; first side 51).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Hwang with the sensor moving to measure a battery as described by Lee for the purpose of improving the time it takes to inspect a battery while maintaining high accuracy (para [0001]).
Claim 6 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Kim et al. US2022/0268734 (called Kim hereinafter and is a US equivalent art to applicant disclosed art KR20210020576A).
Regarding claim 6, Hwang teaches the quality inspection device for a pouch-type secondary battery cell according to claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the pouch-type secondary battery cell and the at least one inductive current detection sensor are fixed, and the pouch-type secondary battery cell moves such that the induced current signal is detected by being scanned by the at least one inductive current detection sensor.
Kim teaches wherein the pouch-type secondary battery cell and the at least one inductive current detection sensor are fixed (Figs. 4-6; para [0074-0076]; battery cell B is fixed on transfer die 1210 and eddy current sensor 1100 is fixed), and the pouch-type secondary battery cell moves such that the induced current signal is detected by being scanned by the at least one inductive current detection sensor (Figs. 4-6; para [0074-0076]; battery cell B is moved on transfer die 1210 and detected by the current sensor 1100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Hwang with the eddy current sensing system as described by Kim for the purpose of enabling one-point sensing so the detection resolution is high and all areas are checked (para [0023]).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Kook KR100821885B1 (applicant disclosed art and the examiner has provided a English machine translation).
Regarding claim 7, Hwang teaches the quality inspection device for a pouch-type secondary battery cell according to claim 1, but fails to teach further comprising a shielding means for shielding the magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generating means, located between the magnetic field generating means and the inductive current detection sensor.
Kook teaches a shielding means (Fig. 2; shielding plates 31-35) for shielding the magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generating means (Fig. 2; pg. 4, paragraph starting with “Thus, the shielding plates 31, 32, 33, 34 and 35”; magnetic field is induced by electromotive force from unit 11), located between the magnetic field generating means and the inductive current detection sensor (Figs. 2 and 3; current detection unit 170 in charging unit 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Hwang with the shielding plates as described by Kook for the purpose of preventing temperature rise in the battery cell to stop battery cell malfunction due to thermal conduction (see Tech-problem and Tech-solution paragraphs).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest:
“further comprising a power loss detection unit for detecting power loss in the AC signal generated by the AC signal generating unit; wherein the control/judgment unit can determine, based on a detection signal of the power loss detection unit, whether the at least one induced current detection sensor is positioned at a start position where it starts detecting an induced current from the pouch-type secondary battery cell.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. discloses “Battery inspection apparatus” (see US2023/0038456)
Refko et al. disclose “Apparatus and method for determining service life of electrochemical energy sources using combined ultrasonic and electromagnetic testing” (see US2008/0028860)
Jung et al. discloses “System and methods for rechargeable battery diagnostics” (see US2022/0190614)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID B FREDERIKSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8152. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am - 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, Huy Phan can be reached at (571)272-7924. 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.
/DAVID B FREDERIKSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/RAUL J RIOS RUSSO/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights