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 .
NOTICE OF REOPENED PROSECUTION
In view of prior art that indicates nonpatentability of the appealed claims in which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reversed the Examiner in their decision mailed March 18, 2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED (MPEP 1214.04).
A new ground of rejection set forth below.
A Technology Center Director or designee has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/ANDREA L WELLINGTON/ Andrea Wellington
Director, Technology Center 2800
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-15, 17-19, 21, and 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Books et al (PCT/WIPO publication WO 2020086973 A1;
noted that the US publication USPGPN 20210226267 is a 102[a][2] reference).
Independent Claim 1, Books discloses a multi-bay power supply (Fig. 9 shows system 100 having at least 4 battery bays for a vehicle ¶[01]) comprising:
a plurality of energy storage devices (102A-102D, Fig. 9);
a power output configured to provide power from the plurality of energy storage devices to a peripheral device (voltage bus connecting positive and negative terminals would connect the battery to loads, where as it is an electric vehicle, at least an inherent motor/actuator/vehicular-load would be peripheral to the battery system); and
a controller including an electronic processor configured to (ECM described in ¶[40] to perform methods of Fig. 4, which would be the same processor performing method of Figs. 9-13 as would be implicitly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, specifically looking at Figs. [9-13, esp. 11]):
determine which energy storage device of the plurality of energy storage devices has a highest state of charge (Fig. 11, 402);
provide power to the peripheral device by discharging the energy storage device having the highest state of charge for a first configurable amount of time (Fig. 11 step 412, the storage device with high voltage is discharged, additional storage devices maybe discharged as well if they are within a range, but the high voltage energy storage devices is discharged [applicant claimed comprising], and the description leaves open the possibility that only one highest battery is discharged during this time, where one of ordinary skill in the art understands that the sequence between 412-416 would take a certain configurable amount of time, as described in ¶’s [66, 68] describes that there is a predetermined amount of time of discharging before it may check whether to determine whether another battery may be connected, so 414-424 loop;
noted that abstract & ¶’s [03, 36] describes the use of voltage or SOC is interchangeable, thus the drawings showing voltage would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to be interchangeable with the drawings showing SOC [state of charge]),
determine, after the first configurable amount of time (¶’s [66, 68], wait a period of time and sequence through the remaining batteries), whether any energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices have a state of charge that is within a tolerance of a state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge (¶[66] states process of 414, 416, and 418 is the same as 406, 408, 410, where ¶’s [64, 65] voltage difference is dVmax is a tolerance to safely connect a battery pack during discharge, and if the voltage of the battery pack is less than or equal to dVmax, then close the contact at step 410 and 418); and
provide power to the peripheral device by simultaneously discharging the energy storage device having the highest state of charge and any energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge (fig. 11, step 420, ¶[68]).
Or in the alternative, Banks fails to explicitly show SOC being used in the drawings.
Banks (fig. 11) teaches connecting the battery packs based on the highest voltage of the battery packs, but does not teach determining which battery packs to discharge based on the highest state of charge (SOC) and those within a tolerance of highest SOC. Banks teaches that either the voltage or the state of charge (SOC) can be used to control the discharging of the battery (see abstract and ¶[03]) but does not include an explicit embodiment of discharging based on the SOC. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine the energy storage device with the highest SOC for driving the vehicle and determining whether any energy storage device is within a tolerance of a SOC of the energy storage device with the highest SOC when energy when connecting multiple storage devices together in parallel to safely drive a vehicle with energy storage device, as suggested or implied by Banks. Substituting determination based on SOC instead of voltage would be predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art because Books explicitly states SOC or voltage could be used for determining which battery packs to discharge.
PNG
media_image1.png
405
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note for the Abstract: [“The present disclosure provides a method of selectively charging or discharging a system with multiple battery packs connected in parallel when at least one of the battery packs has a significantly different voltage or states of charge (SOCs) than the other battery packs. The method includes charging or discharging the battery pack(s) with a voltage or state of charge (SOC) farthest from a target value until the voltage(s) or SOC(s) is within a range of another battery pack at which point the battery packs may be connected and charging or discharging can resume for the set of connected packs. This process is repeated until all the battery packs are at a predetermined minimum or maximum voltage or SOC threshold.”]
Note for ¶[03]:
The present disclosure provides a method of selectively charging or discharging a system with multiple battery packs connected in parallel when at least one of the battery packs has a significantly different voltage or states of charge (SOCs) than the other battery packs. The method includes charging or discharging the battery pack(s) with a voltage or state of charge farthest from a target value until the voltage or stated of charge is within a range of another battery pack at which point the battery packs may be connected and charging or discharging can resume for the set of connected packs. This process is repeated until all the battery packs are at a predetermined minimum or maximum voltage or state of charge threshold of the system. In addition, the present disclosure provides a method for selectively operating, and charging at least one of a plurality of battery packs depending on the respective states of the battery packs.
Note for [36]:
Referring now to FIGS. 2A, 2B, and 3, a graphical representation of the charging method further described herein is shown. As shown in FIG. 2A, a battery voltage curve 106 in terms of battery SOC is provided where a battery pack (as denoted by an asterisk) is provided at region A. The battery pack has a substantially lower SOC and battery voltage as compared to the voltages and SOCs of the battery packs at region B. According to the method described herein in further detail, when charging the batteries, the battery pack at region A is charged first. As the battery pack is charged, the SOC and the voltage of the battery pack increase and move along a curve 106 towards the battery packs at region B. Once the battery pack's SOC and voltage are within a predetermined range of or substantially equal to the batteries at region B, the battery packs at region B may be connected to the previously charging pack with an acceptable equalizing current, and all packs begin to charge until the battery packs reach the maximum voltage and SOC at region C along the curve 106.
PNG
media_image2.png
361
680
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Independent Claim 13, Books teaches a method (Fig. 11) of discharging a multi-bay power supply (Fig. 9 shows system 100 having at least 4 battery bays for a vehicle ¶[01]), the multi-bay power supply including a plurality of energy storage devices (102A-102D, Fig. 9), a power output configured to provide power from the plurality of energy storage devices to a peripheral device (voltage bus connecting positive and negative terminals would connect the battery to loads, where as it is an electric vehicle, at least an inherent motor/actuator/vehicular-load would be peripheral to the battery system), and a controller including an electronic processor (ECM described in ¶[40] to perform methods of Fig. 4, which would be the same processor performing method of Figs. 9-13 as would be implicitly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, specifically looking at Figs. [9-13, esp. 11]), the method comprising:
determining, using the controller, which energy storage device in the plurality of energy storage devices has a highest state of charge (Fig. 11, 402);
activating, using the controller, the energy storage device having the highest state of charge to enable power flow from the energy storage device having the highest state of charge to the peripheral device, discharging, using the controller, the energy storage device having the highest state of charge for a first configurable amount of time (Fig. 11 step 412, the storage device with high voltage is discharged, additional storage devices maybe discharged as well if they are within a range, but the high voltage energy storage devices is discharged [applicant claimed comprising], and the description leaves open the possibility that only one highest battery is discharged during this time, where one of ordinary skill in the art understands that the sequence between 412-416 would take a certain configurable amount of time, as described in ¶’s [66, 68] describes that there is a predetermined amount of time of discharging before it may check whether to determine whether another battery may be connected, so 414-424 loop;
noted that abstract & ¶’s [03, 36] describes the use of voltage or SOC is interchangeable, thus the drawings showing voltage would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to be interchangeable with the drawings showing SOC [state of charge]);
determining, using the controller after the first configurable amount of time (¶’s [66, 68], wait a period of time and sequence through the remaining batteries), whether any energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices have a state of charge that is within a tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge (¶[66] states process of 414, 416, and 418 is the same as 406, 408, 410, where ¶’s [64, 65] voltage difference is dVmax is a tolerance to safely connect a battery pack during discharge, and if the voltage of the battery pack is less than or equal to dVmax, then close the contact at step 410 and 418);
activating, using the controller, any energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices having the state of charge that is within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge to enable power flow from the energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance to the peripheral device; and simultaneously discharging, using the controller, the energy storage device having the highest state of charge and the energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance for a second configurable amount of time (fig. 11, step 420, ¶[68]).
Or in the alternative, Banks fails to explicitly show SOC being used in the drawings.
Banks (fig. 11) teaches connecting the battery packs based on the highest voltage of the battery packs, but does not teach determining which battery packs to discharge based on the highest state of charge (SOC) and those within a tolerance of highest SOC. Banks teaches that either the voltage or the state of charge (SOC) can be used to control the discharging of the battery (see abstract and ¶[03]) but does not include an explicit embodiment of discharging based on the SOC. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine the energy storage device with the highest SOC for driving the vehicle and determining whether any energy storage device is within a tolerance of a SOC of the energy storage device with the highest SOC when energy when connecting multiple storage devices together in parallel to safely drive a vehicle with energy storage device, as suggested or implied by Banks. Substituting determination based on SOC instead of voltage would be predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art because Books explicitly states SOC or voltage could be used for determining which battery packs to discharge.
Independent Claim 17, Books teaches a method (Fig. 4) of charging a multi-bay power supply (Fig. 1 shows system 100 having at least 4 battery bays for a vehicle ¶[01]), the multi-bay power supply including a plurality of energy storage devices (102A-102D, Fig. 1), a power input configured to provide power from an external power source to the plurality of energy storage devices (voltage bus connecting positive and negative terminals would connect the battery to source external to the battery system of Fig. 1 which inherently would be required to provide enough voltage to charge the batteries, as if the bus does not have a high enough voltage when one of the batteries is connected, the battery would not charge, as one of ordinary skill in the art understands), and a controller including an electronic processor (ECM described in ¶[40] to perform methods of Fig. 4, which would be the same processor performing method of Figs. [5, 8] as would be implicitly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, specifically looking at Figs. [4, 5, 8, esp. 4]), the method comprising:
determining, using the controller, which energy storage device in the plurality of energy storage devices has a lowest state of charge (Fig. 4, 202);
activating, using the controller, the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge to enable power flow from the external power source to the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge (the storage device with lowest voltage is charged, additional storage devices maybe charged as well if they are within a range, but the high voltage energy storage devices is discharged [applicant claimed comprising], and the description leaves open the possibility that only one lowest battery is charged during this time);
charging, using the controller, the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge for a first amount of time (one of ordinary skill in the art understands that the sequence between 412-416 would take a certain configurable amount of time, as described in ¶’s [43, 45] describes that there is a predetermined amount of time of charging before it may check whether to determine whether another battery may be connected, so 214-224 loop;
noted that abstract & ¶’s [03, 36] describes the use of voltage or SOC is interchangeable, thus the drawings showing voltage would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to be interchangeable with the drawings showing SOC [state of charge]);
determining, using the controller after the first amount of time (¶’s [43, 45], wait a period of time and sequence through the remaining batteries) whether any energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices have a state of charge that is within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge (¶’s [43-45] states process of 214, 216, and 218 is the same as 206, 208, 210, where ¶[41] voltage difference is dVmax is a tolerance to safely connect a battery pack during discharge, and if the voltage of the battery pack is less than or equal to dVmax, then close the contact at step 210 and 218);
activating, using the controller, any energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices having the state of charge that is within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge to enable power flow from the external power source to the energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge (216-220 in Fig. 4);
and simultaneously charging, using the controller, the energy storage devices having the lowest state of charge and the energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge for a second amount of time (¶[45], 220).
Or in the alternative, Banks fails to explicitly show SOC being used in the drawings.
Banks (fig. 4) teaches connecting the battery packs based on the lowest voltage of the battery packs, but does not teach determining which battery packs to charge based on the lowest state of charge (SOC) and those within a tolerance of lowest SOC. Banks teaches that either the voltage or the state of charge (SOC) can be used to control the charging of the battery (see abstract and [03]) but does not include an explicit embodiment of charging based on the SOC. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine the energy storage device with the lowest SOC for driving the vehicle and determining whether any energy storage device is within a tolerance of a SOC of the energy storage device with the lowest SOC when energy when connecting multiple storage devices together in parallel to safely drive a vehicle with energy storage device, as suggested or implied by Banks. Substituting determination based on SOC instead of voltage would be predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art because Books explicitly states SOC or voltage could be used for determining which battery packs to charge.
PNG
media_image3.png
404
680
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
444
682
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Dependent Claim 2, Books discloses the energy storage device having the highest state of charge and the energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices having states of charge that are within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge are discharged for a second configurable amount of time (as noted above, the loop has a certain amount of time, where the loop of Fig. 11 means each cycle would go through this loop before checking again).
Dependent Claim 3, Books discloses the controller is further configured to read updated state of charge values of energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices after the second configurable amount of time has passed (loop returning to 416 would represent this updated SOC reading).
Dependent Claim 4, Books discloses the controller is configured to discharge the energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices having the state of charge that is within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge by turning on switching elements that are provided on respective current paths between the energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices having the state of charge that is within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge and the peripheral device (corresponding to any switch of switches 104A-104D shown in Fig. 9 for the switches, and Fig. 11 [steps 416 & 418]).
Dependent Claim 6, Books discloses the controller is configured to discharge the energy storage device having the highest state of charge by turning on a switching element that is provided on a current path between the energy storage device having the highest state of charge and the peripheral device (corresponding to any switch of switches 104A-104D shown in Fig. 9, and Fig. 11 [steps 416 & 418]).
Dependent Claim 8, Books discloses a plurality of energy storage device bays, wherein each of the plurality of energy storage devices is electrically connectable to a respective one of the plurality of energy storage device bays (see the bays of Fig. 9).
Dependent Claim 9, Books discloses the plurality of energy storage device bays is disposed in a housing of the multi-bay power supply (as the battery system is inside of a vehicle, the battery units would be inside of the overall housing at least of the vehicle, if not the overall packaging of battery systems common in vehicles).
Dependent Claim 10, Books discloses energy storage devices included in the plurality of energy storage devices are electrically connectable in parallel (parallel connections in Fig. 9).
Dependent Claim 11, Books discloses the tolerance is a percentage of the highest state of charge (Book’s dVmax/dSOCmax[in light of considerations described above] would inherently be a percentage of the highest state of charge, it is noted that the applicant did not specify a preset state of charge or a preset percentage of the highest state of charge value in the claims, thus this interpretation is reasonable).
Dependent Claim 12, Books discloses the tolerance is a scalar value representative of an allowable difference between a voltage value of the energy storage device having the highest state of charge and a voltage value of any other of the energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices (Book’s dVmax/dSOCmax[in light of considerations described above] would inherently be a scalar value representative of an allowable difference of the energy storage device having the highest SOC and a voltage value of any other of the energy storage devices in the plurality of energy storage devices, see esp. Fig. 11 416, abstract, ¶’s [03, 36];
it is noted that the applicant did not specify a preset state of charge or preset scalar value in the claims, thus this interpretation is reasonable).
Dependent Claim 14, Books discloses activating the energy storage device having the highest state of charge includes turning on a switch, by the controller, that is provided on a current path from the energy storage device having the highest state of charge to the peripheral device (corresponding 104A-104D shown in Fig. 9, and Fig. 11 [step 404]).
Dependent Claim 15, Books discloses reading, by the controller, updated state of charge values of energy storage devices included in the plurality of energy storage devices after the second configurable amount of time has passed (loop returning to 416 would represent this updated SOC reading,
where as noted above, the loop has a certain amount of time, where the loop of Fig. 11 means each cycle would go through this loop before checking again)
Dependent Claim 18, Books discloses activating the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge comprises turning on a switch, by the controller, that is provided on a current path from the external power source to the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge (corresponding 104A-104D shown in Fig. 1).
Dependent Claim 19, Books discloses reading, by the controller, updated state of charge values of energy storage devices included in the plurality of batteries after the second amount of time has passed (loop returning to 216 would represent this updated SOC reading).
Dependent Claim 21, Books discloses the energy storage devices having the lowest state of charge is a first energy storage device, wherein charging, using the controller, the energy storage devices having the lowest state of charge and the energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance of the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge for the second amount of time further comprises: charging, using the controller, the first energy storage device and a second energy storage device for the second amount of time after charging the first energy storage device for the first amount of time; and charging, using the controller, the first energy storage device, the second energy storage device, and a third energy storage device after the second amount of time (the loop of Fig. 4 would achieve this, esp. loop of 214-222, ¶[36];
as noted above, the loop has a certain amount of time, where the loop of Fig. 4 means each cycle would go through this loop before checking again).
Dependent Claim 23, Books discloses charging, using the controller, a second energy storage device and the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge until full capacity (loop of Fig. 4 has bringing multiple batteries on board to full capacity in 224 & 222).
Dependent Claim 24, Books discloses the controller simultaneously charges a second energy storage device, a third energy storage device, and the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge in response to the second energy storage device and the third energy storage device in the plurality of energy storage devices having states of charge within the tolerance of the state of charge of the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge (¶[36] describes the simultaneous charging which is described by the loop of 214-222).
Dependent Claim 25, Books discloses charging, using the controller, the second energy storage device, the third energy storage device, and the energy storage device having the lowest state of charge until full capacity (loop of Fig. 4 has bringing multiple batteries on board to full capacity in 224 & 222).
Dependent Claim 26, Books discloses the plurality of energy storage devices are selectively connected in parallel (via the switches being turned on in Fig. 1 according to Fig. 4).
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 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Books et al (PCT/WIPO publication WO 2020086973 A1) in view of Schneider et al (USPGPN 20150008879, hereinafter Schne)
Dependent Claim 5, Books is silent to the plurality of energy storage devices includes rechargeable power tool battery packs.
Schne teaches the plurality of energy storage devices includes rechargeable power tool battery packs (Figs. 1-4 demonstrates a multi-bay power supply/charger [title] 10 which can hold up to six battery packs 14A-14F, while ¶’s [20, 36] describes these packs can be used for power tools). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by having easily removable battery packs, it serves to improve the versatility of the system. The six batteries can now be off-boarded and so serve more devices than just the single on-board battery system taught by Books, which would also improve the convenience of the user, since multiple tools unconnected to each other would then be available to use. In addition, a commonly employed strategy for quickly extending the range of electric vehicles like Books is to exchange low charged batteries with fully charged batteries at exchange stations (official notice taken), which can reduce the number of stops a user has to make at a charge station and improve users convenience. Such a setting is directly correlated to the multi-charger for battery packs of Schne.
Schne, Books, and the present application are analogous in that they involve the charging of a plurality of battery packs (see i.e. Books Figs. 1 & 4). A battery being charged and discharged, regardless of the setting/size, will benefit from optimal charging as described in both Books and Schne.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Books with Schne to provide improved convenience, speed, and versatility.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Books in view of Strecker (USPGPN 20170332442)
Dependent Claim 7, Books is silent to the peripheral device is a heated article of clothing (it is noted, however, that many vehicles may have heated seating, which involves the provision of heat cloth covered seats, though Books is silent to that).
Strecker teaches the peripheral device is a heated article of clothing (Figs. 1, 3, 4A, & 4B demonstrates multi-bay power supply [130] containing at least 3 energy storage devices 400, as described in ¶’s [57-59];
Figs. 1-3 demonstrate the article of clothing being powered is a jacket, while at least abstract, ¶[26], and title describes the jacket being heated). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by having a heated jacket (similar comfort to a heated seat ¶[37]) which is more efficient than a heated seat (¶[37]), it can improve comfort to the user [and thus convenience] when they are cold, esp. in colder weather. Furthermore, by having a plurality of batteries, it can improve the versatility and reliability of the system by being hot-swappable (¶’s [60, 63]).
Books and Strecker describe the use of these batteries in a car (at least ¶[37] in Strecker, Books at least ¶[01]). As noted above, while not explicitly described in Books, vehicles typically have heated seats, while Strecker explicitly describes heating of heated seats. Strecker, Books, and the present application are analogous in that they involve the charging of a plurality of battery packs (see i.e. Books Figs. 1 & 4). A battery being charged and discharged, regardless of the setting/size, will benefit from optimal charging/discharging [Fig. 9 in Strecker] as described in both Books and Strecker.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Books with Strecker to provide improved convenience, efficiency, reliability, and versatility.
Dependent Claim 16, Books is silent to the peripheral device is a heated article of clothing (it is noted, however, that many vehicles may have heated seating, which involves the provision of heat cloth covered seats, though Books is silent to that).
Strecker teaches the peripheral device is a heated article of clothing (Figs. 1, 3, 4A, & 4B demonstrates multi-bay power supply [130] containing at least 3 energy storage devices 400, as described in ¶’s [57-59];
Figs. 1-3 demonstrate the article of clothing being powered is a jacket, while at least abstract, ¶[26], and title describes the jacket being heated). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by having a heated jacket (similar comfort to a heated seat ¶[37]) which is more efficient than a heated seat (¶[37]), it can improve comfort to the user [and thus convenience] when they are cold, esp. in colder weather. Furthermore, by having a plurality of batteries, it can improve the versatility and reliability of the system by being hot-swappable (¶’s [60, 63]).
Books and Strecker describe the use of these batteries in a car (at least ¶[37] in Strecker, Books at least ¶[01]). As noted above, while not explicitly described in Books, vehicles typically have heated seats, while Strecker explicitly describes heating of heated seats. Strecker, Books, and the present application are analogous in that they involve the charging of a plurality of battery packs (see i.e. Books Figs. 1 & 4). A battery being charged and discharged, regardless of the setting/size, will benefit from optimal charging/discharging [Fig. 9 in Strecker] as described in both Books and Strecker.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Books with Strecker to provide improved convenience, efficiency, reliability, and versatility.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Books in view of Gilde et al (USPGPN 20210336396; note, provisional application priority #63/013,909’s Figs. 2-11B shows the same USB-C input power as being used below, which was filed April 22 2020)
Dependent Claim 20, Books is silent to the power input includes a USB-C port.
Gilde teaches the power input includes a USB-C port (adapter 46 receives AC power source [e.g. mains utility, ¶|45|], then provides that power via USB-C to input to charger 10, which then provides power via its bay to tool battery 100, see at least Fig. 4). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that USB power provision is convenient since it is standardized (and so manufacturing for a large number of applications can reduce costs for devices at scale, and since many devices use it, it is convenient to not have to carry around multiple cables for users). Further since USB-C itself is less restrictive in the orientation to plug it in which plagued many of its prior USB standards (e.g. USB-A & USB-B required one orientation, while USB-C can be plugged in with either of two orientations), it is vastly more convenient to users.
A commonly employed strategy for quickly extending the range of electric vehicles like Books is to exchange low charged batteries with fully charged batteries at exchange stations (official notice taken), which can reduce the number of stops a user has to make at a charge station and improve users convenience. Such a setting is directly correlated to the charger for battery packs of Gilde.
Gilde, Books, and the present application are analogous in that they involve the charging of battery packs. A battery being charged and discharged, regardless of the setting/size, will benefit from optimal charging as described in both Books and Gilde.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Books with Gilde to provide improved convenience and costs.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights