DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 5 are pending.
Claims 1 and 5 are amended.
Claims 2-4 and 6-8 are canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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 and 5 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites three different instances of “a sensing voltage difference”, Its unclear if these are the same or different sensing voltage differences as for example the claim states “a sensing voltage difference between another battery cell of the plurality of battery cells and the upper battery cell” then recites “the sensing voltage difference between the another battery cell and a lower battery cell” but per the previous language, a sensing voltage difference is of another battery cell and the upper battery cell not the lower battery cell.
Further claim 1 recites “the adjacent lower battery cell” on the 4th from last line, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It’s is also unclear if this is in reference to “a lower battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell” or “a lower battery cell adjacent to the another battery cell” or an entirely different adjacent lower battery cell .
Claim 5 is rejected based on its dependency on claim 1.
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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under step 1, claim 1 belongs to a statutory category of a machine.
Under Step 2A prong 1, the claims as a whole are identified as being directed to a judicial exception as claim 1 recite(s) “the control unit measures the voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells by obtaining a difference between the sensing voltage of a given battery cell of the plurality of battery cells and the sensing voltage of a lower battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell,”, “a sensing voltage difference between another battery cell of the plurality of battery cells and the upper battery cell adjacent to the another battery cell is defined as a first upper voltage difference, in the state where the plurality of switches is all open or nonconductive, the sensing voltage difference between the another battery cell and a lower battery cell adjacent to the another battery cell is defined as a first lower voltage difference,”, “a sensing voltage difference between the given battery cell and an upper battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell after a corresponding switch for the given battery cell has been turned on for the predetermined period of time is defined as a second upper voltage difference,”, “a sensing voltage difference between the given battery cell and the lower battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell after the corresponding switch for the given battery cell has been turned on for the predetermined period of time is defined as a second lower voltage difference,” and “the control unit determines that a sensing line of the given battery cell is open when in a state in which the corresponding switch for the given battery cell is on, the sensing voltage of the given battery cell corresponds to the sensing voltage of the adjacent lower battery cell, and when the second lower voltage difference is decreased relative to the first lower voltage difference or when the second upper voltage difference is increased relative to the first upper voltage difference” which are directed to mathematical concepts and/or mental processes because which are directed to mathematical concepts and/or mental processes as can be seen in applicants specification Par. 52-53.
Under Step 2A prong 2, evaluating whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application of that exception, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because “A battery management system, comprising: a plurality of diodes which are connected in parallel to a plurality of battery cells, the plurality of battery cells being connected in series; a switch unit which includes a plurality of switches respectively connected to the plurality of battery cells, wherein each of the plurality of switches has a first resistor connected on one side thereof and a second resistor connected on an opposite side thereof, wherein a number of resistors matches a number of poles for each of the plurality of switches;”, ‘control unit is configured to… perform cell balancing and control the plurality of switches;’, “a plurality of sensing lines which connect the plurality of battery cells and the control unit, wherein: the control unit sends a control signal to turn off the switch unit to form a state where the plurality of switches is all open or nonconductive and measures a sensing voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells,”, “the sensing voltage of the battery cell including a disconnected sensing line is measured by a voltage distribution of the diode connected to the corresponding battery cell and the diode connected to an upper battery cell, in the state where the plurality of switches is open or nonconductive,”, and “the control unit divides the plurality of switches into an even numbered group and an odd-numbered group, and is configured to alternately: turn on only the even-numbered group to perform cell balancing for a predetermined period of time and then measure sensing voltages of even-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the even-numbered group; and turn on only the odd-numbered group to perform cell balancing for the predetermined period of time” are considered to be generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The elements of “a control unit having an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) including an analog front end (AFE)”, “the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference,”, and “the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference,” are considered to be generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The elements of “which control unit is configured to detect voltages of the plurality of battery cells,” and “then measure sensing voltages of odd-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the odd-numbered group,” are considered to be data gathering steps required to use the correlation do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity.
Under Step 2B, evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept both individually and in combination, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “A battery management system, comprising: a plurality of diodes which are connected in parallel to a plurality of battery cells, the plurality of battery cells being connected in series; a switch unit which includes a plurality of switches respectively connected to the plurality of battery cells, wherein each of the plurality of switches has a first resistor connected on one side thereof and a second resistor connected on an opposite side thereof, wherein a number of resistors matches a number of poles for each of the plurality of switches;”, ‘control unit is configured to… perform cell balancing and control the plurality of switches;’, “a plurality of sensing lines which connect the plurality of battery cells and the control unit, wherein: the control unit sends a control signal to turn off the switch unit to form a state where the plurality of switches is all open or nonconductive and measures a sensing voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells,”, “the sensing voltage of the battery cell including a disconnected sensing line is measured by a voltage distribution of the diode connected to the corresponding battery cell and the diode connected to an upper battery cell, in the state where the plurality of switches is open or nonconductive,”, and “the control unit divides the plurality of switches into an even numbered group and an odd-numbered group, and is configured to alternately: turn on only the even-numbered group to perform cell balancing for a predetermined period of time and then measure sensing voltages of even-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the even-numbered group; and turn on only the odd-numbered group to perform cell balancing for the predetermined period of time” are considered to be merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself per MPEP 2106.05(h) and are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d) (see prior art of record, for example structure performing the functions described is discloses in EP 3598154 A1 as shown in the rejection and similarly found in US 8614871 B2, US 20200025833 A1, US 20170271888 A1, US 20090309545 A1). The elements of “a control unit having an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) including an analog front end (AFE)”, “the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference,”, and “the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference,” are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d) because the courts have decided that storing and retrieving information in memory as well-understood, routine, conventional activity as a computer function when claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II)). The elements of “which control unit is configured to detect voltages of the plurality of battery cells,” and “then measure sensing voltages of odd-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the odd-numbered group,” are considered to be adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception per MPEP 2106.05(g) (See Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 611-12, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) [well-known random analysis techniques to establish the inputs of an equation were token extra-solution activity]) and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d)( see prior art of record, for example EP 3598154 A1, US 20090309545 A1, and US 20140062388 A1).
Claims 5 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the elements are considered to be generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself per MPEP 2106.05(h) and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d) (see prior art of record, for example EP 3598154 A1, US 20090309545 A1, and US 20140062388 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (EP 3598154 A1) in view of Friegel (US 20200191845 A1) and in further view of Nagase (US 20200403420 A1).
In claim 1, Ye discloses a battery management system (Fig. 3), comprising: a plurality of diodes (Fig. 3, D1..Di) which are connected in parallel (See Fig. 3) to a plurality of battery cells (Fig. 3, I1…Ii), the plurality of battery cells being connected in series (See Fig. 3); a switch unit which includes a plurality of switches respectively connected to the plurality of battery cells (Fig. 3 K1-Ki, Par. 54 “a switch unit”), wherein each of the plurality of switches has a first resistor connected on one side thereof and a second resistor connected on an opposite side thereof (See Fig. 3, R2i and Rli-1), wherein a number of resistors matches a number of poles for each of the plurality of switches (See Fig. 3); a control unit (Fig. 3, 31) having an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) (Par. 219 “ASIC”) which control unit is configured to detect voltages of the plurality of battery cells, perform cell balancing and control the plurality of switches (see abstract); and a plurality of sensing lines which connect the plurality of battery cells and the control unit (Fig. 3, L1…Li+1), wherein: the control unit sends a control signal to turn off the switch unit to form a state where the plurality of switches is all open or nonconductive (see abstract “controlling a plurality of equalization modules to be turned off” and Par. 7 “in the case that all of the plurality of equalization modules are turned off”) and measures a sensing voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells (Par. 7, 12, 54 “turned off” “sampling detection circuit has energy storage modules and resistance modules for voltage division”, “a switch unit”), the control unit measures the voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells by obtaining a difference between the sensing voltage of a given battery cell of the plurality of battery cells and the sensing voltage of a lower battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell (See Fig. 3, Par. 69,118 examiner considers the later battery cell to be said “a lower battery cell” relative to the first battery cell i.e. “a given battery cell”), the sensing voltage of the battery cell including a disconnected sensing line is measured by a voltage distribution of the diode connected to the corresponding battery cell and the diode connected to an upper battery cell (Fig. 3, Par. 67, 77), in the state where the plurality of switches is open or nonconductive, a sensing voltage difference between another battery cell of the plurality of battery cells (Fig. 3 C2) and the upper battery cell adjacent to the another battery cell (Fig. 3 C1) is defined as a first upper voltage difference (Par. 53 “first sampled data” Fig. 3, Par. 67, 77 examiner considers the measurements taken to be said “first upper voltage difference”), in the state where the plurality of switches is all open or nonconductive, the sensing voltage difference between the another battery cell and a lower battery cell adjacent to the another battery cell is defined as a first lower voltage difference (Par. 53 Fig. 3, Par. 67, 77), the control unit divides the plurality of switches into an even numbered group and an odd-numbered group (Par. 53 “even” “odd”), and is configured to alternately: turn on only the even-numbered group to perform cell balancing and then measure sensing voltages of even-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the even-numbered group off (Par. 53 “odd numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned on and even numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned off”, “odd numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned off and even numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned on”); and turn on only the odd-numbered group to perform cell balancing for and then measure sensing voltages of odd-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the odd-numbered group (Par. 53 “odd numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned on and even numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned off”, “odd numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned off and even numbered equalization modules among the sampled equalization modules are turned on”), a sensing voltage difference between the given battery cell and an upper battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell after a corresponding switch for the given battery cell has been turned on for the predetermined period of time is defined as a second upper voltage difference (Par. 53 “second sampled data” Fig. 3, Par. 67, 77 examiner considers the measurements taken when the switches are on of said battery cells to be said “second upper voltage difference”), a sensing voltage difference between the given battery cell and the lower battery cell adjacent to the given battery cell after the corresponding switch for the given battery cell has been turned on is defined as a second lower voltage difference (Par. 53 Fig. 3, Par. 67, 77), the control unit determines that a sensing line of the given battery cell is open when in a state in which the corresponding switch for the given battery cell is on, the sensing voltage of the given battery cell corresponds to the sensing voltage of the adjacent lower battery cell, and when the second lower voltage difference is decreased relative to the first lower voltage difference or when the second upper voltage difference is increased relative to the first upper voltage difference (Par. 53 “when it is detected that relationship between the second sampled data and the first sampled data of a sampled equalization module 55 and/or relationship between the third sampled data and the first sampled data of the sampled equalization module change, it can be determined that the sampling detection circuit has a malfunction and the malfunction may be located in an equalization loop comprising the sampled equalization module”).
Ye does not explicitly disclose an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) including an analog front end (AFE) (emphasis added), perform cell balancing for a predetermined period of time (emphasis added), wherein the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference wherein the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference.
Nagase teaches an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) including an analog front end (AFE) (Par. 24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to have the application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) of Ye have an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) including an analog front end (AFE) based on the teachings of Nagase in order to convert an analog voltage into a digital value (Nagase Par. 24) to use the digital processor of Ye with analog voltage values.
Further, Friegel teaches perform cell balancing for a predetermined period of time (Par. 25-28, imbalance, “first time point”, “second time point”), wherein the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference (Par. 16 “to save a lower cell voltage of each storage cell at the end of the discharging process and, during the charging of the energy storage device, to save an upper cell voltage of each storage cell at the end of the charging process. The calculation unit is moreover designed to compare the lower cell voltages of the storage cells and the upper cell voltages of the corresponding storage cells”), wherein the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference (Par. 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to perform cell balancing for a predetermined period of time, wherein the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference wherein the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference based on Ye and the teachings of Friegel in order to improve the measurement of the capacitance of the energy storage device thus allowing for only to replace those cells which actually show a loss of capacitance of the relevant magnitude (Friegel Par. 7).
In claim 5, Ye discloses wherein, when the switches are turned on, a voltage of the battery cell of the disconnected sensing line is decreased and a voltage of the adjacent upper battery cell of the disconnected sensing line is increased (Par. 160).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 06/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s 101 arguments in section C, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The opening and closing of “odd” and “even” or alternating switches of adjacent battery cells and associated physical elements are considered to be generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry and are not a “particular battery management control sequence”.
Regarding applicants’ 103 arguments in section D, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The cited elements of Ye and Friegle are within the BRI of the claims as specified above. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “collapse” “open wire protocol”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). While applicant asserts the prior art elements are different from the claims, claims are examiner under their BRI and applicant provides no explanation as to why the elements do not fall within the BRI of the claims. In response to applicant's argument that the rational for the combination of Friegle to Ye lacks a reason to modify, The office action does cite a reason to modify, i.e. “to improve the measurement of the capacitance of the energy storage device thus allowing for only to replace those cells which actually show a loss of capacitance of the relevant magnitude”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20110121837 A1, BATTERY PACK AND METHOD OF SENSING VOLTAGE OF BATTERY PACK.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRANDON J BECKER whose telephone number is (571)431-0689. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30.
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, Shelby Turner can be reached at (571) 272-6334. 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.
/B.J.B/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/KYLE R QUIGLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
