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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 06/11/2025. Claims 1-8 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/11/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1, 3,7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim(s) 1, 3,7, and 8 is/are directed to a charging control method of an electric moving body that moves using a battery as a power source. Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites “setting a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity to decrease every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user”.
Claims 3 recites “wherein: a characteristic of a deterioration degree relative to the remaining capacity of the battery is acquired in advance, before the target remaining capacity at an initial charging timing is set; a minimal point, at which the deterioration degree switches from decreasing to increasing in response to an increase of the remaining capacity, is acquired from the acquired deterioration degree characteristic; and the target remaining capacity is set in a manner to not drop below a remaining capacity at the minimal point.”
Claim 7 recites: “set a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed; set the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user.
Claim 8 recites: the charging control apparatus sets a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed; sets the target remaining capacity in a manner to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user; and controls the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity.
The limitations above, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic controller, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites an additional element a charging control method of an electric moving body that moves using a battery as a power source. The charging control method electric moving body that moves using a battery as a power source in the above steps is recited as an intended use of the claimed abstract idea.
Claims 1,7 and 8 additionally recites controlling the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity.
Controlling the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment/field of use, and is not enough to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. MPEP (2106.05(h).
Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 7 recites: “the charging control apparatus includes a memory that stores a program and a central processing unit that reads the program from the memory and executes the program; the central processing unit executing the program causes the charging control apparatus to:”
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform the recited steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a processor. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a processor cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
To overcome the 101 rejection, Examiner recommends amending claim 1 with the limitations of claims 2 or 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (b), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 an similarly claims 7-8 recites “controls the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity.” which is unclear.
Claims 1 an similarly claims 7-8 recites at least three separate target remaining capacities which are: a target remaining capacity provided by a user, a last previously set target remaining capacity, and a target remaining capacity that is an amount less that the last previously set target remaining capacity.
It is unclear which of the three target remaining capacities is claim language “subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity” referencing.
Claims 2-6 is included in this rejection based on its dependence of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ichikawa (US 20180178668).
As to claim 1, Ichikawa discloses a charging control method of an electric moving body that moves using a battery as a power source (Fig. 1 and 4-5), comprising: setting a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed (First target SOC. [0047]and [0050] The controller 19 controls the charger 14 such that the external charging continues until the SOC of the electric power storage device 15 reaches the target SOC. Note that the target SOC is set to a first target SOC (for example, 80%) by default) and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity every timed the battery is charged based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user ([0054] when the host vehicle 11 starts traveling after the completion of the external charging, the controller 19 lowers the target SOC from the first target SOC to a second target SOC (the second target SOC<the first target SOC) and controlling the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity(Fig. 4 The external charging is supposedly performed by using the charging stand 40 until the SOC of the electric power storage device 15 reaches S1 (the target SOC) thereafter, the vehicle travels and SOC decreases (See Fig. 4).
As to claim 7 Ichikawa discloses an electric moving body comprising a charging control apparatus of the electric moving body (controller 19) that moves using a battery as a power source (Fig. 1 and 4-5), wherein: the charging control apparatus includes a memory that stores a program and a central processing unit that reads the program from the memory and executes the program ([0045] The controller 19 includes a CPU and memory, which are not shown, therein and controls equipment (the charger 14); the central processing unit executing the program causes the charging control apparatus to set a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed (the controller 19 stores data indicative of an upper limit value and a lower limit value of the SOC as well as the target SOC in the external charging in the internal memory. First target SOC. [0047]and [0050] The controller 19 controls the charger 14 such that the external charging continues until the SOC of the electric power storage device 15 reaches the target SOC. Note that the target SOC is set to a first target SOC (for example, 80%) by default) and to set the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity every timed the battery is charged based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user ([0054] when the host vehicle 11 starts traveling after the completion of the external charging, the controller 19 lowers the target SOC from the first target SOC to a second target SOC (the second target SOC<the first target SOC) and control the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity (Fig. 4 The external charging is supposedly performed by using the charging stand 40 until the SOC of the electric power storage device 15 reaches S1 (the target SOC) thereafter, the vehicle travels and SOC decreases (See Fig. 4).
As to claim 8 Ichikawa discloses an electric moving body comprising a charging control apparatus of the electric moving body that moves using a battery as a power source (Fig. 1 and 4-5), wherein:
the charging control apparatus sets a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed (the controller 19 stores data indicative of an upper limit value and a lower limit value of the SOC as well as the target SOC in the external charging in the internal memory. First target SOC. [0047]and [0050] The controller 19 controls the charger 14 such that the external charging continues until the SOC of the electric power storage device 15 reaches the target SOC. Note that the target SOC is set to a first target SOC (for example, 80%) by default);
sets the target remaining capacity in a manner to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user ([0054] when the host vehicle 11 starts traveling after the completion of the external charging, the controller 19 lowers the target SOC from the first target SOC to a second target SOC (the second target SOC<the first target SOC); and controls the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity (Fig. 4 The external charging is supposedly performed by using the charging stand 40 until the SOC of the electric power storage device 15 reaches S1 (the target SOC) thereafter, the vehicle travels and SOC decreases (See Fig. 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and rewritten to overcome the 101, 112 second rejections and claim objections above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding dependent claim 2, Although the prior art discloses setting a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity to decrease every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user and controlling the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity, the prior art of record does not disclose or teach the combination of:
“wherein: when setting the target remaining capacity to decrease, the user is notified that the target remaining capacity decreases, and when providing this notification, notification is provided if the remaining capacity at a charging start timing is greater than or equal to a threshold value set based on a discharge amount of a following usage schedule from the usage situation, and notification is not provided and the target remaining amount is not decreased if the remaining capacity at the charging start timing is less than the threshold value.”
Regarding dependent claim 3, Although the prior art discloses setting a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity to decrease every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user and controlling the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity, the prior art of record does not disclose or teach the combination of:
“a characteristic of a deterioration degree relative to the remaining capacity of the battery is acquired in advance, before the target remaining capacity at an initial charging timing is set; a minimal point, at which the deterioration degree switches from decreasing to increasing in response to an increase of the remaining capacity, is acquired from the acquired deterioration degree characteristic; and the target remaining capacity is set in a manner to not drop below a remaining capacity at the minimal point.”
Regarding dependent claim 5, Although the prior art discloses setting a target remaining capacity provided by a user when initial charging of the battery is performed; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity; and setting the target remaining capacity to an amount that is less than a last previously set target remaining capacity to decrease every time the battery is charged, based on a usage situation of the battery of the electric moving body by the user and controlling the electric moving body using the battery subsequent to being charged to the target remaining capacity, the prior art of record does not disclose or teach the combination of:
“in case where the target remaining capacity is set to decrease and even though it is possible to use a notification system that notifies the user that the target remaining capacity is decreased, the user has not activated a function of the notification system, the remaining capacity at the charging start timing is observed continuously a plurality of times; and when a minimum value of the observed remaining capacity at the charging start timing is greater than a first judgement threshold value, at which it is possible to decrease the target remaining capacity by a certain amount at least one time, a recommendation is made to the user to activate the function of the notification system.”
As to claim 4-6, is also objected to as they include the allowable subject matter in claim 2 and 5 respectively.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 TYNESE V MCDANIEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6579. The examiner can normally be reached on M to F, 9am to 530pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Drew Dunn can be reached on 5712722312. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TYNESE V MCDANIEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859