DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks (pages 1-3), filed 07/14/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 6-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535).
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.
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 –
(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.
Claims 6-7, 11, 15 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535).
Regarding claim 6, Mische teaches a method for operating an energy module, comprising: monitoring temperatures of a plurality of electrical energy storage cells (621) respectively by a plurality of temperature sensors (643) (as shown in fig. 6), wherein the plurality of temperature sensors (643) are arranged in a network such that each temperature sensor (643) shares a current or voltage with at least another temperature sensor (643) in the plurality of temperature sensors (643) (as shown in fig. 6-11); allowing a voltage value at a measurement tap (641) to change responsive to a change of the shared current or voltage (as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33), wherein the change in the shared current or voltage is caused by the temperatures of the plurality of electrical energy storage cells (621) being monitored (as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33); and comparing the voltage value to a reference voltage to detect an occurrence of a temperature error (thermal run-away) that is associated with one or more of the plurality of electrical energy storage cells (621) (as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33).
Regarding claim 7, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6, in addition, Mische teaches selecting the reference voltage based on a qualitative correlation between possible measured temperature values of the plurality of temperature sensors (643) and a threshold temperature value (presence of a high-temperature that exceeds the operating parameters of one of the battery cells) (as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33).
Regarding claim 11, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6, in addition, Mische teaches wherein the temperature error (thermal run-away) comprises an over temperature or an undertemperature of the energy module (620) or one of the plurality of temperature sensors (643) (as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33).
Regarding claim 15, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6, in addition, Mische teaches a system (100) comprising means for performing the method of claim 6 (as shown in fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6, in addition, Mische teaches wherein the voltage value at the measurement tap (641) indicates a combined temperature of the plurality of electrical energy storage cells (621) (an average temperature of the subset of battery cells 621 can be obtained, as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) in view of MATSUDA (US PGPUB 2025/0060417).
Regarding claim 8, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6.
Mische fails to specifically teach wherein the network comprises a voltage divider. However, MATSUDA teaches wherein the network comprises a voltage divider (as disclosed in para. 0042).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the network comprise a voltage divider as taught by MATSUDA with the invention of Mische in order to attenuate high-voltage signals to safe measurable levels.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) and MATSUDA (US PGPUB 2025/0060417) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Leow et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0153149).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Mische and MATSUDA teaches the limitations of claim 8, in addition, Mische teaches the plurality of temperature sensors (843) connected in parallel or series between the measurement tap (841) and a second input line (849) (as shown in fig. 8).
The combination of Mische and MATSUDA fails to specifically teach wherein the voltage divider comprises a resistor connected between a first input line and the measurement tap, the first or second input line being connected to a reference potential and the other input one to a voltage or current source. However, Leow et al. teaches wherein the voltage divider comprises a resistor (104) connected between a first input line (114A) and the measurement tap(114B) (as shown in fig. 1), the first (114A) or second input line (114C) being connected to a reference potential (ground) and the other input one to a voltage or current source (108) (as shown in fig. 1).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the voltage divider comprises a resistor connected between a first input line and the measurement tap, the first or second input line being connected to a reference potential and the other input one to a voltage or current source as taught by Leow et al. with the invention of the combination of Mische and MATSUDA in order to accurately measure temperature.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) in view of Bertness et al. (US PGPUB 2002/0193955).
Regarding claim 10, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6, in addition, KUKREJA et al. teaches wherein the plurality of temperature sensors (843) are connected in parallel or series between the measurement tap (841) and a second input line (849) (as shown in fig. 8).
Mische fails to specifically teach wherein the network comprises a current source connected between a first input line and the measurement tap. However, Bertness et al. teaches wherein the network comprises a current source (50) connected between a first input line and the measurement tap (as shown in fig. 5).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the network comprise a current source connected between a first input line and the measurement tap as taught by Bertness et al. with the invention of Mische in order to provide constant and reliable power.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) in view of ERHART et al. (US PGPUB 2021/0372861).
Regarding claim 12, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 11.
Mische fails to specifically teach wherein the over temperature is detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in parallel or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in series. However, ERHART et al. teaches wherein the over temperature is detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors (14a-14n) connected in parallel (as shown in fig. 2 and disclosed in para. 0066-0067) or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in series.
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the over temperature detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in parallel or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in series as taught by ERHART et al. with the invention of Mische in order to use an effective and reliable temperature sensing device.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) in view of de Bock et al. (US PGPUB 2020/0146112).
Regarding claim 13, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 11.
Mische fails to specifically teach wherein undertemperature is detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in series or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in parallel. However, de Bock et al. teaches wherein undertemperature is detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in series or positive temperature coefficient sensors (110) connected in parallel (as disclosed in para. 0027, 0030, 0036, 0042).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the undertemperature detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in series or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in parallel as taught by de Bock et al. with the invention of Mische in order to allow for thermal regulation of temperature-sensitive electronic components without requiring a controller or computer-executed software (de Bock et al. para. 0042).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) in view of YANG (US PGPUB 2017/0244138).
Regarding claim 14, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6.
Mische fails to specifically teach wherein each of the plurality of temperature sensors comprises a sensor mounted to a surface of a circuit board that is (i) internal to the energy module and (ii) spaced apart from the plurality of electrical energy storage cells, and a temperature and/or resistance of a respective temperature sensor of the plurality of temperature sensors changes responsive to heat thermally communicated from one or more of the plurality of energy storage cells to a substrate of the circuit board. However, YANG teaches wherein each of the plurality of temperature sensors (131 or 132) comprises a sensor (131) mounted to a surface of a circuit board (130) that is (i) internal to the energy module (100) and (ii) spaced apart from the plurality of electrical energy storage cells (as disclosed in para. 0038), and a temperature and/or resistance of a respective temperature sensor (131) of the plurality of temperature sensors (131 or 132) changes responsive to heat thermally communicated from one or more of the plurality of energy storage cells to a substrate of the circuit board (130) (as disclosed in para. 0034, 0038 and 0039).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the plurality of temperature sensors comprise a sensor mounted to a surface of a circuit board that is (i) internal to the energy module and (ii) spaced apart from the plurality of electrical energy storage cells, and a temperature and/or resistance of a respective temperature sensor of the plurality of temperature sensors changes responsive to heat thermally communicated from one or more of the plurality of energy storage cells to a substrate of the circuit board as taught by YANG with the invention of Mische in order to exert a relatively small thermal influence in balancing voltages of the battery cells or controlling the charge/discharge states of the battery cells (YANG para. 0039).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) and ERHART et al. (US PGPUB 2021/0372861) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of de Bock et al. (US PGPUB 2020/0146112).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Mische and ERHART et al. teaches the limitations of claim 12.
The combination of Mische and ERHART et al. fails to specifically teach wherein undertemperature is detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in series or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in parallel. However, de Bock et al. teaches wherein undertemperature is detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in series or positive temperature coefficient sensors (110) connected in parallel (as disclosed in para. 0027, 0030, 0036, 0042).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the undertemperature detected using negative temperature coefficient sensors connected in series or positive temperature coefficient sensors connected in parallel as taught by de Bock et al. with the invention of the combination of Mische and ERHART et al. in order to allow for thermal regulation of temperature-sensitive electronic components without requiring a controller or computer-executed software (de Bock et al. para. 0042).
Claims 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mische (US Pat. 11,569,535) in view of Souza et al. (US PGPUB 2011/0210703).
Regarding claim 21, Mische teaches the limitations of claim 6.
Mische fails to specifically teach allowing heat to flow from at least one storage cell of the plurality of electrical energy storage cells to a substrate of a circuit board via a conductive terminal. However, Souza et al. teaches allowing heat to flow from at least one storage cell (101a-101n or 102a-102n) of the plurality of electrical energy storage cells (101a-101n and 102a-102n) to a substrate of a circuit board (103) via a conductive terminal (107 and 109) (as shown in fig. 1 and 2A and disclosed in para. 0031).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and allow heat to flow from at least one storage cell of the plurality of electrical energy storage cells to a substrate of a circuit board via a conductive terminal as taught by Souza et al. with the invention of Mische in order to provide adequate support and efficient thermal coupling.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Mische and Souza et al. teaches the limitations of claim 21, in addition, Souza et al. teaches wherein the conductive terminal (107 and 109) has a distal end in direct physical contact with the at least one storage cell (101a-101n or 102a-102n) (as shown in fig. 1 and 2E), and an elongate body (110b) that extends through a hole formed in the circuit board (103) and is coupled to the circuit board (103) by a conductive connection (106) (as shown in fig. 1 and 2E and disclosed in para. 0047).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and have the conductive terminal has a distal end in direct physical contact with the at least one storage cell, and an elongate body that extends through a hole formed in the circuit board and is coupled to the circuit board by a conductive connection as taught by Souza et al. with the invention of Mische in order to have greater thermal conductivity (Souza et al. para. 0047).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Mische and Souza et al. teaches the limitations of claim 21, in addition, Souza et al. teaches allowing the heat to flow from the conductive terminal (107 and 109) to a conductive plane (where 106 is disposed on 103) disposed between adjacent substrate layers (side layers of 103, as shown in fig. 2A) of the circuit board (103).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and allow the heat to flow from the conductive terminal to a conductive plane disposed between adjacent substrate layers of the circuit board as taught by Souza et al. with the invention of Mische in order to have greater thermal conductivity (Souza et al. para. 0047).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Mische and Souza et al. teaches the limitations of claim 21, in addition, Souza et al. teaches using the heat from the conductive terminal (107 and 109) and/or conductive plane to increase a temperature of a respective temperature sensor (106) of the plurality of temperature sensors (106, 104a-104n and 105a-105n) (as disclosed in para. 0047).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and use the heat from the conductive terminal and/or conductive plane to increase a temperature of a respective temperature sensor of the plurality of temperature sensors as taught by Souza et al. with the invention of Mische in order to have greater thermal conductivity (Souza et al. para. 0047).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Mische and Souza et al. teaches the limitations of claim 24, in addition, Mische teaches using the increase in the temperature of the respective temperature sensor (643) to cause a change in the voltage value at the measurement tap (641) (as disclosed in col. 9, line 49 through col. 10, line 33).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO VELEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8597. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 5:30am-3:30pm.
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.
/ROBERTO VELEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights