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 .
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 1-2, 5-7,11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun et al. (US 2019/0027792), hereinafter Sun.
As to claims 1 and 18, Sun discloses in figure 7, monitoring an impedance of the energy source, wherein a capacitance of the impedance includes a double layer sheet capacitance [the lithium batter is disclosed by Sun, and lithium battery has double layer capacitance at its terminal /interface] a method of charging an energy source, comprising [see figure 7]:
applying a preheating signal [see figure 7, preheating charging circuit (600)] comprising a sequence of alternating charge and discharge energy pulses of equal duration to a lithium ion [battery module ( 300); ¶0047] battery module comprising a plurality of cells to induce local heating such that a temperature of the lithium ion battery module increases, wherein (i) the preheating signal is applied until the lithium ion battery module reaches a first temperature, (ii) a frequency of the preheating signal is greater than one kilohertz [see ¶0018 and ¶0047; range of frequency signals disclosed]; (iii) the preheating signal is at a frequency that passes through a double layer sheet capacitance of the energy source [noted that lithium ion battery had double layer capacitance at its terminals or interfaces in order to measure the impedance of the battery the applied frequency signal must pass through the interface (double layer capacitance) so it is implicit] and (iv) application of the preheating signal prevents or suppresses electrochemical charge transfer of a main storage reaction and one or more side reactions of the lithium ion battery module; and responsive to the lithium ion battery module reaching the first temperature, applying a charging signal to the lithium ion battery module such that a charge of the lithium ion battery module increases [¶0017-0018; ¶0021; ¶0027].
As to claim 2, Sun discloses in figure 1, wherein the electrochemical charge transfer is bypassed by the interface capacities of electrodes of the lithium ion battery module to an electrolyte of the energy source [noted that Sun discloses heating the electrolytes which implies that the interface is bypassed]
. As to claim 5, Sun discloses in figure 7, wherein the charging signal is a first charging signal comprising a plurality of pulses, the method further comprising: applying a second charging signal to the lithium ion battery module after applying the first charging signal, wherein the second charging signal is a constant current charging signal [see ¶0022; applying different charging current pulses by adjusting pulse width of the oscillation signal].
As to claim 6, Sun discloses in figure 7, wherein the preheating signal is applied until the lithium ion battery module reaches a first temperature, the first charging signal is applied until the lithium ion battery module reaches a second temperature, and the second charging signal is applied after the lithium ion battery module reaches the second temperature [plurality of temperatures are disclosed by Sun and the charging signal is adjusted based on the battery temperatures; see ¶0021].
As to claim 7, Sun disclose in figures 1-11, wherein the first temperature is 25 degrees Celsius or higher and the second temperature is 45 degrees Celsius or higher [20 degree Celsius, and 50 degrees Celsius].
As to claim 11, Sun discloses in figures 1 and 32 , monitoring the lithium ion battery module for lithium plating [noted that the temperature of the battery and the charging circuit is controlled to manage the lithium plating because it affected by charging and temperature].
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.
Claim 3 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Podrazhansky et al. (US 6,366,056), hereinafter Podrazhansky.
As to claim 3, Sun discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the charging signal comprises a plurality of charge pulses having pulse durations less than or equal to ten milliseconds.
Podrazhansky discloses in figures 1-2, wherein the charging signal comprises a plurality of charge pulses having pulse durations less than or equal to ten milliseconds [see Col. 6, lines 60-65; pulse charging duration is 0.01 to 100 milliseconds].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use different charging pulse duration in Sun’s apparatus as taught by Podrazhansky in order to quickly remove the plating and improve the battery condition.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Podrazhansky, further in view of Hempel et al. ( US 2016/0149430), hereinafter Hempel.
As to claim 4 , Sun and Podrazhansky discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the lithium ion battery module has an open circuit voltage and an upper cutoff voltage, and wherein the plurality of charge pulses are at a voltage between the open circuit voltage and the upper cutoff voltage.
Hempel discloses in figures 1-11, wherein the lithium ion battery module has an open circuit voltage and an upper cutoff voltage, and wherein the plurality of charge pulses are at a voltage between the open circuit voltage and the upper cutoff voltage [see ¶0033; charging voltage being VLmax which is battery cutoff voltage].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use charging pulse voltage between the open and cutoff voltage of the battery in Sun’s apparatus as taught Hempel in order to extended durability of the battery.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Hiraoka et al. (US 2011/0267001), hereinafter Hiraoka.
As to claim 8, Sun discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the first charging signal is applied until the lithium ion battery module reaches a first state of charge, and the second charging signal is applied after the lithium ion battery module reaches the first state of charge.
Hiraoka discloses in figures 1-8, wherein the first charging signal is applied until the lithium ion battery module reaches a first state of charge, and the second charging signal is applied after the lithium ion battery module reaches the first state of charge [see ¶006, ¶0013, ¶0026, ¶0042, ¶0140, charging state of the battery is detected and charging mode or charging signal is shifted from a constant current to a constant voltage ].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to control charging signal of Sun’s apparatus based on battery state of charge as taught by Hiraoka the battery in order to improve the characteristic relating to the service life of the battery.
As to claim 9, Hiraoka discloses in figures 1-8, wherein the second charging signal is applied until the lithium ion battery module reaches a state of charge of 95% or higher [charging the battery until full state; see ¶0042].
Claims 10 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Maluf et al. (US 2014/0021959), hereinafter Maluf
As to claim 12, Sun discloses all of the claim limitation, monitoring an impedance of the lithium ion battery module for an indication of degradation.
Maluf discloses in figures 1-34, monitoring an impedance of the lithium ion battery module for an indication of degradation [¶0080; the charging is adjusted based on the impedance of the battery].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust charging signal of Sun based on battery parameters such as impedance as taught by Maluf in order to increase cycle life of the battery.
As to claim 13, Maluf discloses in figures 1-34, adjusting application of the charging signal in response to the monitored impedance [¶0080].
As to claim 14, Maluf discloses in figures 1-34, wherein monitoring an impedance of the lithium ion battery module is performed intermittently during a charging phase of the lithium ion battery module where the charging signal is applied [¶0080].
As to claim 10, Sun in combination with d Maluf discloses adjusting charging signal based on battery impedance [noted that Sun discloses plurality of charging signals based on temperature; and Maluf discloses adjusting charging signals based on battery impedance].
However, Sun and Maluf do not disclose explicitly, wherein application of the first charging signal is stopped and application of the second charging signal is commenced when an activation impedance of an electrode of the lithium ion battery module is 50% or less of the total impedance of the electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to choose appropriate battery impedance range or percentage in order to effectively charge and discharge of the battery, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Tan (US 2020/0036197).
As to claim 15, Sun discloses all of the claim limitations except, a plurality of charge pulses, and wherein application of the preheating signal is stopped and application of the charging signal is commenced , charging signal is commenced when a Warburg impedance of an electrode of the lithium ion battery module is 20% or less of the total impedance of the electrode.
Tan discloses in figures 1-16b, a plurality of charge pulses, and wherein application of the preheating signal is stopped and application of the charging signal is commenced charging signal is commenced when a Warburg impedance of an electrode of the lithium ion battery module based on impedance of the electrode [see ¶0018. ¶0043 and claim 11; noted that the charging is adjusted based on Warburg impedance].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use Warburg impedance in Sun’s apparatus to control charging current as taught by Tan in order to effectively charge battery and prolong battery life.
Neither Sun nor Tan discloses, battery module is 20% or less of the total impedance of the electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to choose appropriate battery impedance range or percentage in order to effectively charge and discharge of the battery, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Hempel et al. ( US 2016/0149430), hereinafter Hempel.
As to claim 16, Sun discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the lithium ion battery module has an open circuit voltage and an upper cutoff voltage, and wherein the plurality of charge pulses are at a voltage between the open circuit voltage and the upper cutoff voltage.
Hempel discloses in figures 1-11,wherein the lithium ion battery module has an open circuit voltage and an upper cutoff voltage, and wherein the plurality of charge pulses are at a voltage between the open circuit voltage and the upper cutoff voltage [see ¶0033; charging voltage being VLmax which is battery cutoff voltage].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use charging pulse voltage between the open and cutoff voltage of the battery in Sun’s apparatus as taught Hempel in order to extended durability of the battery.
As to claim 17, Hempel discloses in figures 1-11, wherein the charging signal comprises a plurality of charge pulses at peak voltages greater than a cutoff voltage of the lithium ion battery module [see ¶0033].
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Kajiyama et al. (US 2021/0249963), hereinafter Kajiyama.
Regarding Claim 19, Sun disclose all of the claim invention as claim 1 above, (see rejection above, 35 USC § 103 paragraph 2), except a method of charging a plurality of energy sources within an energy storage system, wherein the energy storage system comprises a plurality of converter modules connected together in cascaded fashion, each converter module of the plurality of converter modules comprising an energy source and switch circuitry, wherein each converter module of the plurality of converter modules is independently controllable by a control system to output a module voltage, and wherein the energy storage system is configured to generate AC power with a superposition of module output voltages generated by the plurality of converter modules.
Kajiyama discloses in figure 16, wherein the energy storage system comprises a plurality of converter modules [see figure 16, ¶0173] connected together in cascaded fashion, each converter module of the plurality of converter modules comprising an energy source and switch circuitry, wherein each converter module of the plurality of converter modules [converter units 101] is independently controllable by a control system to output a module voltage, and wherein the energy storage system is configured to generate AC power with a superposition of module output voltages generated by the plurality of converter modules [see ¶00173; plurality of cascaded converters are disclosed].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use cascaded converters in Sun’s apparatus as taught by Kajiyama in order to effectively charge battery and extend battery life.
As to claim 20, Sun in combination Kajiyama disclose, wherein the modules transition from application of the preheating signal to application of the charging signal at different times based on when each module reaches a temperature threshold.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached on Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859