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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/31/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claim 1 is amended.
Claims 2-3 and 8 are canceled.
Claims 1 and 4-7 are pending.
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 4-7 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 the limitation:
“the second lower voltage difference”
There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-7 are rejected based on their inherent deficiencies.
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 4-7 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.
Under Step 2A prong 1, the claims as a whole are identified as being directed to a judicial exception as claim 1 recite(s) “wherein 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”, “wherein 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, wherein 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”, “wherein the sensing voltage difference between the second battery cell and the upper battery cell adjacent to the second battery cell while the switch is on is defined as a second upper voltage difference, wherein the sensing voltage difference between the second battery cell and the lower battery cell adjacent to the second battery cell while the switch is on is defined as the second lower voltage difference”, and “wherein the control unit determines that the sensing line of the second battery cell is open when the first lower voltage difference is greater than the second lower voltage difference or when the first upper voltage difference is smaller than the second upper voltage difference” 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;”, “perform cell balancing and control the plurality of switches; and a plurality of sensing lines which connect the plurality of battery cells and the control unit”, and “wherein the control unit is configured to send signals to an even numbered group of plurality of switches to turn on to measure voltages of the even-numbered group and then send signals to the plurality of switches to turn off and send signals to turn on the plurality of switches of an odd-numbered group of the plurality of switches to measure voltages of odd-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the odd-numbered group” 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 which is configured to detect voltages of the plurality of battery cells”, “wherein the control unit sends a control signal to turn off the switch unit and measures a sensing voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells”, “wherein 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”, “wherein the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference”, and “wherein the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference” 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;”, “perform cell balancing and control the plurality of switches; and a plurality of sensing lines which connect the plurality of battery cells and the control unit”, and “wherein the control unit is configured to send signals to an even numbered group of plurality of switches to turn on to measure voltages of the even-numbered group and then send signals to the plurality of switches to turn off and send signals to turn on the plurality of switches of an odd-numbered group of the plurality of switches to measure voltages of odd-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the odd-numbered group” 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, 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). The elements of “a control unit which is configured to detect voltages of the plurality of battery cells”, “wherein the control unit sends a control signal to turn off the switch unit and measures a sensing voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells”, “wherein 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”, “wherein the control unit stores the first upper voltage difference and the first lower voltage difference”, and “wherein the control unit stores the second upper voltage difference and the second lower voltage difference” 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 4-7 do 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 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (EP 3598154 A1) in view of Friegel (US 20200191845 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) which 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 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”), wherein 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”), wherein 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), wherein 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”), wherein 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), wherein the control unit is configured to send signals to an even numbered group of plurality of switches to turn on to measure voltages of the even-numbered group and then send signals to the plurality of switches to turn 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 send signals to turn on the plurality of switches of an odd-numbered group of the plurality of switches to measure voltages of odd-numbered battery cells and then turn off the switches of the odd-numbered group (Par. 53), wherein the sensing voltage difference between the second battery cell and the upper battery cell adjacent to the second battery cell while the switch is on 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”), wherein the sensing voltage difference between the second battery cell and the lower battery cell adjacent to the second battery cell while the switch is on is defined as the second lower voltage difference (Par. 53 Fig. 3, Par. 67, 77), and wherein the control unit determines that the sensing line of the second battery cell is open when the first lower voltage difference is greater than the second lower voltage difference or when the first upper voltage difference is smaller than the second 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 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.
Friegel teaches 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 at before the invention was filled to 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 4, Ye discloses wherein, when the switches are turned on, a voltage of the adjacent upper battery cell of the disconnected sensing line is increased (Par. 160).
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 (Par. 160).
In claim 6, Ye discloses wherein, in a state in which the switches are on, the sensing voltage of the battery cell of the disconnected sensing line corresponds to the sensing voltage of an adjacent lower battery cell (Par. 97).
In claim 7, Ye discloses wherein, in the switch unit, the switches of an even-numbered group and the switches of an odd-numbered group are alternately turned on (Fig. 2, S220 S230).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s 112 arguments in section A, the examiner notes that one of the issues still remains, thus the rejection is maintained. Regarding applicants 101 arguments in section B, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Regarding example 45, the examiner does not consider it to be relevant to the current claims as the controlling operations are not related the abstract idea, rather they relate to the data gathering steps. Regarding applicants 103 arguments in section C, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited above, the prior art of record discloses the amended claim language. In particular, the examiner notes that when comparing applicant’s Fig. 1 and prior art Fig. 3, the two sides of the switches that the applicant refers to as “poles” directly connect to the resistors in series, the prior art still meets the BRI of the current claim language.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 10788539 B2, Battery Monitoring Device And Battery System Using Same; US 20110156649 A1, BATTERY BALANCING METHOD.
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
/SHELBY A TURNER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857