CTNF 19/152,893 CTNF 93592 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. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA 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. 07-30-05 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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations in claim 1 in light of the specification includes: “A server comprising: a communication unit configured to receive first data including first identification information and physical property information of a battery cell from a first device included in a first process of manufacturing the battery cell, and receive second data including second identification information of the battery cell from a second device included in a second process which differs from the first process ([0046] The first device 200 may transmit the first data datal to the server 100. The first device 200 may transmit the first data datal including first identification information and physical property information of the battery cell to the server 100. Here, the first identification information may include identification numbers of the battery cells. In addition, the physical property information may include an open-circuit voltage) and capacity of the battery cell, but is not limited thereto. In other words, the physical property information included in the first data datal may include not only the OCV and capacity); and a controller configured to identify the first data corresponding to the second data based on the first identification information and the second identification information, and transmit the first data to the second device ([0051] The second device 300 may identify the identification marks included in the battery cells. Since the second device 300 is included in the pack process and the pack process is performed after the assembly process and the activation process, the battery cells identified by the second device 300 may include the identification marks. Therefore, the second device 300 may acquire the information about the battery cell by identifying the identification mark disposed on the surfaces of the battery cell. In other words, the second device 300 may acquire identification information of the battery cell by identifying the identification mark)”. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 Claim s 1, 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 ( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Morita (U.S Pub # 20220292441) . With regards to claim 1, Morita discloses a server comprising: a communication unit configured to receive first data including first identification information and physical property information of a battery cell from a first device included in a first process of manufacturing the battery cell, and receive second data including second identification information of the battery cell from a second device included in a second process which differs from the first process ([0075] information registration section provides an interface for registering (including uploading) the information input from the storage battery manufacturers and the information input from the storage battery mounted device providers described above. [0069-0074] information includes battery material information and various other battery related information); and a controller configured to identify the first data corresponding to the second data based on the first identification information and the second identification information, and transmit the first data to the second device ([0101] battery mounted device provider can acquire information provided by storage battery manufacturer). Claims 11 and 12 correspond to claim 1 and is rejected accordingly. With regards to claim 10, Morita further discloses: a storage configured to store the first data ([0030] platform including a storage section for collected data) . 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 2-7, 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita (U.S Pub # 20220292441) in view of Murphy (U.S Pub # 20210249702) . With regards to claim 2, Morita does not disclose however Murphy discloses: wherein the to identify the first data corresponding to the second data the controller determines that the second data corresponds to the first data when the second identification information and the first identification information are the same ([0166] finds a matching battery record). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita by Murphy to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive updated information concerning batteries from a remote network (Murphy [0021]). Claim 13 corresponds to claim 2 and is rejected accordingly. With regards to claim 3, Morita does not disclose however Murphy discloses: wherein the second device acquires the second identification information by recognizing an identification mark included on the battery cell ([0166] extract data from battery barcode). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita by Murphy to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive updated information concerning batteries from a remote network (Murphy [0021]). Claim 14 corresponds to claim 3 and is rejected accordingly. With regards to claim 4, Morita does not disclose however Murphy discloses: wherein the identification mark is a 1-dimensional (lD) barcode ([0166] extract data from battery barcode). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita by Murphy to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive updated information concerning batteries from a remote network (Murphy [0021]). Claim 15 corresponds to claim 4 and is rejected accordingly. With regards to claim 5, Morita further discloses: wherein the second device acquires the physical property information by receiving data from the communication unit ([0101] battery mounted device provider can acquire information provided by storage battery manufacturer who uploaded to a data platform). With regards to claim 6, Morita further discloses: wherein the first identification information includes an identification number of the battery cell, and the physical property information includes a capacity of the battery cell ([0072] storage battery ID information and battery capacity). Morita does not disclose however Murphy discloses: an open-circuit voltage (OCV) ([0146] open circuit voltage). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita by Murphy to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive updated information concerning batteries from a remote network (Murphy [0021]). Claim 16 corresponds to claim 6 and is rejected accordingly. With regards to claim 7, Morita does not disclose however Murphy discloses: wherein the second identification information includes the identification number of the battery cell ([0116] battery ID within a battery database). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita by Murphy to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive updated information concerning batteries from a remote network (Murphy [0021]). Claim 17 corresponds to claim 7 and is rejected accordingly . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita (U.S Pub # 20220292441) in view of Murphy (U.S Pub # 20210249702) and in further view of Yamaguchi (U.S Pub # 20200130647) . With regards to claim 8, Morita does not disclose however Murphy discloses: transmit the first data including the first identification information to the second device when the database includes the first identification information corresponding to the second identification information ([0166] extract data from battery barcode by looking up matching battery ID on the database). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita by Murphy to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive updated information concerning batteries from a remote network (Murphy [0021]). Yamaguchi discloses: generate a database including the first data ([0070] generate database); transmit a loss signal to the second device when the database does not include the first identification information corresponding to the second identification information ([0092, 0095] send message indicating no match). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita and Murphy by Yamaguchi to identify when no matching records are found. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to where information on multiple manufacturing bases capable of manufacturing the mechanical key are acquired (Yamaguchi [0005]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita (U.S Pub # 20220292441) in view of Kim (U.S Pub # 20240353348) . With regards to claim 9, Morita does not disclose however Kim discloses: wherein the first process is an assembly process or an activation process, and the second process is a pack process ([0024] assembly process and packaging process). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Morita and Murphy by Yamaguchi to lookup identification information received from another device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to monitor a battery manufacturing process (Kim [0008]). Claim 18 corresponds to claim 9 and is rejected accordingly. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY WU whose telephone number is (571)272-2033. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5). 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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at (571) 272-4098. 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. /TONY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 2 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 3 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 4 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 5 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 6 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 7 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 8 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 9 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 10 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 11 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/152,893 Page 12 Art Unit: 2166
Prosecution Insights