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 the Claims
In the communication filed on 02/17/2026 claims 1-16 are pending. Independent claims 1 and 7 have been amended by adding new limitations not previously presented. Claims 13-16 are new.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to claims 1-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s amendments with respect to the 35 USC § 101 Rejection are not persuasive. A new 35 USC § 101 Rejection is made below.
This action is a second non-Final due to the new considerations made by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “predetermined periodic intervals” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “an actual dQ/dV value calculation operation of calculating an actual dQ/dV value at a predetermined SOH estimation battery voltage at predetermined periodic intervals while charging a battery to predict an SOH” does not clarify how during a charge interval the actual dQ/dV value at the predetermined SOH estimation battery voltage is calculated periodically. Dependent claims 10 and 14, are objected to for similar reasons as claims 1 and 7 for use of the language “predetermined periodic intervals”. For examination purposes below, the limitation “at predetermined periodic intervals” will not be considered, however, appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4 replace “completely charging-completely and discharging” with --completely charging-completely discharging-- to improve readability. For examination purposes below, this limitation will be interpreted as “completely charging-completely discharging”, however, appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3 replace “an” with --the-- so that it reads “the actual dQ/dV value” to avoid a lack of antecedent basis. For examination purpose, this limitation will be interpreted as “the actual dQ/dV value”, however, appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claim 1 is directed towards a method and independent claim 7 is directed towards an apparatus, as identified in Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test outlined in MPEP 2106.
The claims recite receiving and transmitting information, performing calculations, storing information, and making decisions based on that information which are considered exceptions because the limitations fall under the methods of organizing human activity, mental processes, and mathematical concepts groupings of the abstract ideas, as identified in Step 2A Prong One.
The limitations that are considered exceptions are the following:
“an actual dQ/dV value calculation operation of calculating an actual dQ/dV value at a predetermined SOH estimation battery voltage at predetermined periodic intervals while charging a battery to predict an SOH”;
“a battery SOH prediction operation of extracting an SOH value corresponding to the calculated actual dQ/dV value from a prestored dQ/dV:SOH lookup table and predicting a real- time SOH of the battery”;
“an abnormality determination operation of determining whether the battery is abnormal according to a change of the actual dQ/dV value calculated with respect to the battery, wherein when an actual dQ/dV value deviation between a first period and a second period after the first period is greater than a predetermined reference value, the battery is determined to have an abnormality”;
“wherein the SOH estimation battery voltage is set as a single battery voltage value with a largest dQ/dV value deviation among a plurality of cycles measured in a reference battery separate from the battery”; and
“wherein a charging and/or discharging operation of the battery is controlled by a charge/discharge control unit that is configured to charge or discharge the battery”.
These limitations are considered abstract ideas because these could be done mentally by an individual with the aid of pen and paper to perform calculations to predict SOH and to flag that charging or discharging would be required.
These judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application because managing information using a charge/discharge control unit, an SOH estimation battery voltage setting unit, an SOH prediction unit, a storage unit, and an abnormality determination unit are computational functions.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “wherein a charging and/or discharging operation of the battery is controlled by a charge/discharge control unit that is configured to charge or discharge the battery” is a scheduled feature and thus it is part of the abstract idea which could be performed by an individual.
Dependent claims 2-6 and 8-16 are rejected because they only further the abstract idea without additional practical use or significant structure. The dependent claims further add to the abstract idea by providing additional details as to how the data is obtained and calculated.
The following from MPEP 2106.05(g) provides an example of an insignificant extra-solution activity: “An example of post-solution activity is an element that is not integrated into the claim as a whole, e.g., a printer that is used to output a report of fraudulent transactions, which is recited in a claim to a computer programmed to analyze and manipulate information about credit card transactions in order to detect whether the transactions were fraudulent.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With respect to independent claims 1 and 7, the limitation “an actual dQ/dV value calculation operation of calculating an actual dQ/dV value at a predetermined SOH estimation battery voltage at predetermined periodic intervals while charging a battery to predict an SOH” is not supported by the originally filed disclosure.
Specifically, ¶[50-51] of the disclosure do not describe discharging during charging nor how the predetermined intervals are defined (i.e, with respect to the single charging cycle, or multiple charging cycles, and if so, how to know that one would set it to charge at that time every night). Thus, “at predetermined periodic intervals while charging a battery” is not clear whether these are inside one charging cycle accounting for an undisclosed discharge or if they are across multiple charging occasions. MPEP 2163.03(V) Original Claim Not Sufficiently Described provides guidance for when the claim defines the invention in functional language without sufficiently identifying how the function is performed or how the result is achieved.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for a battery SOH prediction operation, does not reasonably provide enablement for “an actual dQ/dV value calculation operation of calculating an actual dQ/dV value at a predetermined SOH estimation battery voltage at predetermined periodic intervals while charging a battery to predict an SOH”. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
MPEP 2164.01(a) Undue Experimentation provides a framework of factors referred to as the Wands factors to assess whether any necessary experimentation is required by the specification is “reasonable” or is “undue”.
Considering the Wands factors, independent claims 1 and 7 broadly encompass predicting a battery’s state of health (SOH) while the battery is still being used. The application aims to enable SOH prediction in real time during charging. In general consideration of the state of the prior art, battery degradation behavior may vary significantly depending upon factors such as battery chemistry, temperature, internal resistance, charging rate, cell architecture, and cycle history. Changes in these parameters affect degradation characteristics and charging performance. SOH estimation methods consider these parameters either directly or indirectly.
Although the specification provides general guidance for predicting SOH, the specification lacks guidance as to how periodic intervals are selected to make the actual dQ/dV calculation operation. An individual of ordinary skill in the art would have had to perform multiple experiments of different interval options to obtain the same results. These different interval options include experimenting within the charging cycle or across multiple charging occasions. Since there are no working examples in the specification, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have to perform undue experimentation to practice the claimed invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 6 does not constitute a further limitation because the limitations of claim 6 are present in claim 1.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-7 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tariki et al. (Japanese Patent JP-2019056595-A; identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) and cited in foreign Office Actions).
With respect to independent claims 1 and 7, Tariki teaches a battery management device and method for estimating a state of health (SOH) of a battery (Fig. 1; ¶[22]; main controller 2/controller 5 for estimating the SOH of a battery 4).
Tariki teaches a charge/discharge control unit configured to supply charge/discharge power to the battery and control charge/discharge (Fig. 1; ¶[34]; charge/discharge command unit 17 and charge/discharge control unit 16 wherein command unit 17 controls control unit 16 to charge/discharge the battery 4).
Tariki teaches an SOH estimation battery voltage setting unit configured to set an SOH estimation battery voltage based on each cycle specific dQ/dV value calculated for a plurality of completely charging-completely discharging cycles for a predetermined reference battery separate from the battery (Fig. 1; differential curve calculation unit 10 and feature point identification unit 15. ¶[25]; an unused battery pack 4 (i.e., a predetermined reference battery separate from the battery) is repeatedly charged and discharged to gradually degrade it to its life limit. The differential dQ/dV is calculated based on the battery voltage V and the battery capacity Q obtained from the charging/discharging cycles done on the unused battery pack 4. Furthermore, a V-dQ/dV curve is calculated from which a specific feature point corresponding to the voltage is determined).
Tariki teaches an SOH prediction unit configured to calculate an actual dQ/dV value at the set SOH estimation battery voltage at predetermined periodic intervals while charging of the battery is in progress, and using the actual dQ/dV value, predict a real-time SOH of the battery (Note: not considering the limitation “at predetermined periodic intervals” as noted above in the Claim Objections. Fig. 1; SOH estimation unit 16. ¶[25-27]; the SOH estimation unit 16 utilizes the measured dQ/dV data (i.e., actual value) during charging to estimate the current SOH of the battery pack 4 (i.e., predict a real-time SOH of the battery)).
Tariki teaches a storage unit configured to store a lookup table (dQ/dV:SOH lookup table) that is a relationship between dQ/dV values at each battery voltage and a corresponding SOH, which is configured based on dQ/dV values calculated during completely discharging and an SOH value corresponding thereto, for the reference battery (Fig. 1; data storage unit 13. ¶[24-25]; dQ/dV: SOH data obtained from the unused battery pack 14 (i.e., the reference battery) is pre-stored in the data storage unit 13 showing a correlation between the specific feature point on the V-dQ/dV curve and the corresponding SOH).
Tariki teaches an abnormality determination unit configured to determine whether the battery has an abnormality according to a change of dQ/dV values using the actual dQ/dV values calculated by the SOH prediction unit (Fig. 1; the degradation index estimation unit. ¶[01, 09]; a degradation index (i.e., abnormality) of the secondary battery is determined according to a change in dQ/dV values using the measured dQ/dV values calculated by the SOH estimation unit 16).
Tariki teaches wherein the abnormality determination unit is configured such that, when an actual dQ/dV value deviation between a first period and a second period after the first period is greater than a predetermined reference value, the abnormality determination unit determines that the battery has the abnormality (Figs. 2-5; a dQ/dV value deviation between a first period and a second period is greater than a predetermined reference value Ps, then abnormality is determined).
Tariki teaches wherein the SOH estimation battery voltage is set as a single battery voltage value with a largest dQ/dV value deviation among a plurality of cycles measured in the reference battery separate from the battery (Figs. 2-5; ¶[33]; Vs is the voltage value of the specific feature point Ps where the change in the differential value dQ/dV is maximum).
With respect to dependent claim 2, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tariki teaches further comprising an abnormality notification operation of generating an abnormality signal alarm when it is determined that there is the abnormality in the battery in the abnormality determination operation (¶[29]; one of ordinary skill understands this the results of the real-time SOH of the battery being displayed in the display unit 18 while an alarm message prompts the driver of an abnormality).
With respect to dependent claim 3, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tariki teaches further comprising a SOH estimation battery voltage setting operation, the SOH estimation battery voltage setting operation comprising a cycle specific dQ/dV value calculation operation of calculating a plurality of completely charging-completely discharging cycle specific dQ/dV values by performing an operation cycle of completely charging-completely and discharging the reference battery a predetermined number of times (¶[25]; an unused battery pack 4 (i.e., the reference battery) is repeatedly charged and discharged to gradually degrade it to its life limit (i.e., a predetermined number of times)).
Tariki teaches a cycle specific dQ/dV value comparison operation of comparing the calculated cycle specific dQ/dV values and a reference battery voltage derivation operation of deriving the battery voltage in which the dQ/dV value deviation is the largest among the plurality of cycles, as a result of the comparison (¶[33]; a comparison is made between the different dQ/dV values to find the characteristic point Ps in which the battery voltage V is greatest with respect to the comparison of the different dQ/dV values).
With respect to dependent claim 4, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 3. Further, Tariki teaches wherein the battery SOH prediction operation comprises an SOH extraction operation of extracting an SOH corresponding to the actual dQ/dV value calculated in the actual dQ/dV value calculation operation from the dQ/dV:SOH lookup table and is an operation of predicting the extracted SOH as the real-time SOH of the battery (¶[35]; reference data pointing to the dQ/dV:SOH values stored in data storage unit 13 is extracted by the SOH estimation unit 16 and used to estimate the SOH based on the maximum change voltage value Vs. Note, Tariki utilizes temperature to point to the correct look up table for comparison purposes).
With respect to dependent claim 5, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 2. Further, Tariki teaches wherein the abnormality determination operation comprises: a dQ/dV value deviation calculation operation of calculating the deviation |dQ/dV(t)- dQ/dV(t-1)| between a dQ/dV value of the second period and a dQ/dV value of the first period calculated in the actual dQ/dV value calculation operation (Figs. 2-5 illustrate an actual dQ/dV value deviation operation wherein |dQ/dV(t)-dQ/dV(t-1)| is determined between points P1 and P2, see ¶[31]).
Tariki teaches a dQ/dV value deviation comparison operation of comparing the calculated dQ/dV value deviation between the second period and the first period with the predetermined reference value (Figs. 2-5; a dQ/dV value deviation between a first period and a second period is greater than a predetermined reference value Ps).
With respect to dependent claim 6, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 5. Further, Tariki teaches wherein when the dQ/dV value deviation between the second period and the first period exceeds the predetermined reference value, it is determined that there is the abnormality in the battery (Figs. 2-5; a dQ/dV value deviation between a first period and a second period is greater than a predetermined reference value, then abnormality is determined).
With respect to dependent claim 12, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Further, Tariki teaches a battery pack comprising the battery management device (Fig. 1, battery pack 4 comprising main controller 2/controller 5).
With respect to dependent claim 13, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Further, Tariki teaches wherein the dQ/dV:SOH lookup table includes reference data that is prepared by performing a full-discharge operation of the reference battery separate from the battery (¶[24-25]; dQ/dV: SOH data obtained from the unused battery pack 14 (i.e., the reference battery) from performing discharging on the unused battery pack 14).
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.
Claims 8-11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tariki et al. (Japanese Patent JP-2019056595-A).
With respect to dependent claim 8, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Further, Tariki teaches a display unit (Fig. 1; display unit 18) configured to display the real-time SOH of the battery predicted by the SOH prediction unit and configured to generate an abnormality signal alarm when the abnormality determination unit determines that the abnormality occurs in the battery (¶[29]; one of ordinary skill understands this the results of the real-time SOH of the battery being displayed in the display unit 18 while an alarm message prompts the driver of an abnormality).
Considering MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts below, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have duplication of parts for redundancy which improves reliability in case one of the display unit and the notification unit stop working and improves speed since one can perform one function while the other performs another.
MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts
In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
With respect to dependent claim 9, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 8. Further, Tariki teaches configured to calculate cycle specific dQ/dV values of the plurality of completely charging-completely discharging cycles while an operation cycle of completely charging-completely discharging cycles of the reference battery by the charge/discharge control unit is performed a predetermined number of times (¶[25]; an unused battery pack 4 (i.e., the reference battery) is repeatedly charged and discharged to gradually degrade it to its life limit (i.e., a predetermined number of times)).
Tariki teaches configured to compare each cycle specific dQ/dV value, and derive the battery voltage in which the dQ/dV value deviation is the largest between the plurality of cycles and wherein the SOH estimation battery voltage setting unit sets the derived battery voltage as the SOH estimation battery voltage (¶[33]; a comparison is made between the different dQ/dV values to find the characteristic point Ps in which the battery voltage V is greatest with respect to the comparison of the different dQ/dV values).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have duplication of parts for redundancy which improves reliability in case one of the SOH measurement battery voltage setting unit and the first dQ/dV value measurement unit (differential calculation unit 10), the SOH estimation unit and the reference battery derivation unit (SOH estimation unit 16), or the feature point identification unit 15 stop working and improves speed since one can perform one function while the other performs another.
With respect to dependent claim 10, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 9. Further, Tariki teaches configured to calculate an actual dQ/dV value at the set SOH estimation battery voltage at predetermined periodic intervals while charging the battery by the charge/discharge control unit (Note: not considering the limitation “at predetermined periodic intervals” as noted above in the Claim Objections. Fig. 1; SOH estimation unit 16. ¶[25-27]; the SOH estimation unit 16 utilizes the measured dQ/dV data (i.e., actual value) during charging to estimate the current SOH of the battery pack 4 (i.e., predict a real-time SOH of the battery)).
Tariki teaches configured to extract an SOH corresponding to the actual dQ/dV value calculated from the dQ/dV:SOH lookup table stored in the storage unit and the extracted SOH as the real-time SOH of the battery (¶[35]; reference data pointing to the dQ/dV:SOH values stored in data storage unit 13 is extracted by the SOH estimation unit 16 and used to estimate the SOH based on the maximum change voltage value Vs. Note, Tariki utilizes temperature to point to the correct look up table for comparison purposes).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have duplication of parts for redundancy which improves reliability in case one of the SOH measurement battery voltage setting unit, the first dQ/dV value measurement unit, the second dQ/dV value measurement unit, the charge/discharge control unit and the SOH prediction unit stop working and improves speed since one can perform one function while the other performs another.
With respect to dependent claim 11, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 10. Further, Tariki teaches configured to calculate the deviation |dQ/dV(t)- dQ/dV(t-1)| between a dQ/dV value of the second period and a dQ/dV value of the first period calculated for the battery (Figs. 2-5 illustrate an actual dQ/dV value deviation operation wherein |dQ/dV(t)-dQ/dV(t-1)| is determined between points P1 and P2, see ¶[31])).
Tariki teaches configured to compare the dQ/dV value deviation between the second period and the first period with the predetermined reference value (Figs. 2-5; a dQ/dV value deviation between a first period and a second period is greater than a predetermined reference value Ps).
Tariki teaches configured to determine that there is the abnormality in the corresponding battery and generate and output an abnormality signal when the dQ/dV value deviation between the second period and the first period exceeds the predetermined reference value upon a comparison result (¶[29] teaches an urgent notification message is sent to display unit 18 to notify a user that the battery is below its life limit (i.e., an abnormality)).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have duplication of parts for redundancy which improves reliability in case one of the SOH measurement battery voltage setting unit, the first dQ/dV value measurement unit, the second dQ/dV value measurement unit, and the dQ/dV deviation calculation unit (differential calculation unit 10) -or- the SOH estimation unit, the reference battery derivation unit, and the comparison unit (SOH estimation unit 16) -or- charge/discharge control unit, abnormality determination unit, and abnormality signal generation unit (charge/discharge command unit 17) stop working and improves speed since one can perform one function while the other performs another.
With respect to dependent claim 14, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Further, Tariki teaches configured to measure cycle specific dQ/dV values of a plurality of full-discharges for the reference battery (¶[24-25]; cycle specific dQ/dV values obtained from the unused battery pack 14 (i.e., the reference battery) from performing discharging on the unused battery pack 14).
Tariki teaches configured to measure the actual dQ/dV value at the set SOH estimation battery voltage at the predetermined periodic intervals while charging the battery by the charge/discharge control unit (Note: not considering the limitation “at predetermined periodic intervals” as noted above in the Claim Objections. Fig. 1; SOH estimation unit 16. ¶[25-27]; the SOH estimation unit 16 utilizes the measured dQ/dV data (i.e., actual value) during charging to estimate the current SOH of the battery pack 4 (i.e., predict a real-time SOH of the battery)).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have duplication of parts for redundancy which improves reliability in case one of the first dQ/dV value measurement unit and the second dQ/dV value measurement unit stop working and improves speed since one can perform one function while the other performs another.
With respect to dependent claim 15, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. However, Tariki fails to explicitly teach the limitations of claim 15.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select the largest dQ/dV value deviation as the largest deviation between a first cycle of the plurality of cycles and a last cycle of the plurality of cycles, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
With respect to dependent claim 16, Tariki teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. However, Tariki fails to explicitly teach the limitations of claim 16. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to wherein the deviation calculation unit configured to calculate the deviation by taking an absolute value of the actual dQ/dV value deviation between the first period and the second period after the first period, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The additional prior art identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) and the prior art cited in the Foreign Office Actions were considered by the examiner, however, for examination purposes were not relied upon for citation purposes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Frank A Silva whose telephone number is (703)756-1698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 09:30 am -06:30 pm ET.
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 571-272-2312. 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.
/FRANK ALEXIS SILVA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights