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 .
The amendment filed on January 16, 2026 has been considered.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 16, 2026 has been entered.
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 1-7, 12, 26, and 27 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.
Claims 1 and 26 are misdescriptive in view of cancelled claim 10. Claim 10 recites that the altered period of the body portion is based on maintaining an impedance of the body portion within a threshold, while claims 1 and 26 recite that the impedance of the body portion is based on the altered body portion (recite the opposite).
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.
Claims 1-6, 12, 26, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi (US 2011/0018500) in view of Seo (US 2021/0103001) and Maluf et al. (US 2020/0014218) and Liu et al. (US 2019/0222041).
Regarding claims 1 and 26, Takahashi discloses a method and system for monitoring an electrochemical device (2) (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
obtaining, via a processing device (1a-2), a measurement of a first characteristic (charge current, Fig. 1) of an electrochemical device (2) during a first period of a waveform at the electrochemical device (Fig. 2);
obtaining, via the processing device (1a-2), a measurement of a second characteristic (voltage) of the electrochemical device (2) during a second period of a waveform at the electrochemical device (Fig. 2), the second period occurring after the first period (the start of period for V2 is after the start of period for I2, Fig. 4A); and
calculating an operational characteristic (impedance) for the electrochemical device (2) based on the measurement of the first characteristic (current) and the measurement of the second characteristic (voltage) (Fig. 2),
and the charge waveform defines a body portion (body of the waveform),
the altered charge waveform charging the electrochemical device (adjusting charging current, S222, Fig. 7).
Takahashi does not disclose altering an attribute of the charge waveform based on the calculated operational characteristic for the electrochemical device
Seo discloses altering an attribute of the charge waveform based on the calculated operational characteristic for the electrochemical device (controlling current based on battery SOH, paragraph 0008, lines 1-2, battery SOH quantifies battery resistance, paragraph 0006, lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Takahashi with altering an attribute of the charge waveform as disclosed by Seo for the purpose of extending the battery life.
Takahashi further does not disclose and altering the attribute of the charge waveform
comprises altering a period of the body portion based on the operational characteristic.
Maluf et al. discloses altering a period of the body portion based on the operational
characteristic (adjusting the period of charge pulses in accordance with characteristics of packet to be adapted, paragraph 0014, lines 5-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Takahashi with adjusting the period of charge pulses as disclosed by Maluf et al. in accordance with characteristics of a packet to be adapted for the purpose of adapting to one or more characteristics of the data packet.
Takahashi further does not disclose altering the body portion (of the charge waveform) to maintain an impedance of the body portion within a threshold.
Liu et al. discloses altering the body portion (of the charge waveform) (adjusting the charging current to maintain the impedance within a certain range so the charging current is within a threshold, i.e., decreasing/increasing impedance, paragraph 0038).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Takahashi with altering the body portion (of the charge waveform) as suggested by Liu et al. for the purpose of maintaining an impedance of the body portion within a range, so the charging current is within a threshold.
Regarding claim 2, Takahashi discloses the first characteristic is a charge current (charging current to 2, Fig. 1) flowing to the electrochemical device (2) and the second characteristic is a voltage across the electrochemical device (voltage of 2, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Takahashi discloses the operational characteristic is an impedance parameter of the electrochemical device (the impedance is calculated based on voltage and current), the impedance parameter used to harmonically tune a charge waveform providing the charge current flowing to the electrochemical device (the current waveform, Fig. 4, is based on current, and the impedance is based on current, accordingly the current waveform is based on or harmonically tuned by the impedance parameter).
Regarding claims 4 and 26, Takahashi does not disclose storing, in a first storage device, the measurement of the first characteristic and, in a second storage device, the measurement of the second characteristic.
Seo discloses storing, in a first storage device, the measurement of the first characteristic (current memory space in memory unit, paragraph 0017, lines 6-8) and, in a second storage device, the measurement of the second characteristic (voltage memory space in memory unit, paragraph 0017, lines 6-8, paragraph 0017, lines 6-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Takahashi with storing current and voltage values as disclosed by Seo for the purpose of determining battery resistance to monitor battery health.
Regarding claim 5, Takahashi does not disclose retrieving, from the first storage device, the measurement of the first characteristic and, from the second storage device, the measurement of the second characteristic after the second period of the charge waveform.
While Seo does not expressly disclose retrieving, from the first storage device, the measurement of the first characteristic and, from the second storage device, the measurement of the second characteristic after the second period of the charge waveform, Seo discloses measured stored current and measured stored current are used to determine battery resistance (paragraph 0050). The measured stored current and measured stored current are stored in memory devices (paragraph 001`7). Thus, it would have been obvious to retrieve, from the first storage device, the measurement of the first characteristic and, from the second storage device, the measurement of the second characteristic one measurement after the other for determining battery resistance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Takahashi with retrieving, from the first storage device, the measurement of the first characteristic and, from the second storage device, the measurement of the second characteristic after the second period of the charge waveform as disclosed by Seo for the purpose of determining battery resistance.
Regarding claim 6, Takahashi discloses controlling a charging circuit to shape the charge waveform (control circuit 1b of charging circuit 1 controls the charging circuit 1 to output charging current, Fig. 1) to comprise a repeating charge signal (charging current is generated during time periods, paragraph 0081), wherein each charge signal occurs within a period of the charge waveform (charging current is outputted during time periods, paragraph 0081). Further, it is known to repeat charging batteries as disclosed by Sea. Seo discloses that batteries can be changed repeatedly (paragraph 0002) for providing power.
Regarding claim 12, Takahashi discloses the impedance parameter comprises at least one of a magnitude impedance value (paragraph 0038, line 4), a phase shift impedance value.
Regarding claim 27, Takahashi discloses the first measurement is a current amplitude (monitored current output from 1d, Fig. 2) responsive to a charge signal (charging current read by 1d, Fig. 2) applied to the electrochemical device (2) and the second measurement is a voltage amplitude (detected voltage output from 1a-1, Fig. 2) responsive to a charge signal (detected voltage output is based on V, Fig.1, which is responsive to charging signal, Fig. 1) applied to the electrochemical device (charging signal is applied to battery 2, Fig. 1), the controller (1a-2) calculating an impedance ratio from the current amplitude measurement and the corresponding voltage amplitude measurement.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi in view of Seo, Maluf et al., and and Liu et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Narisawa et al. (JP 2015161631).
.
Regarding claim 7, Takahashi as modified by Seo, Maluf et al., and and Liu et al. discloses the claimed limitations as discussed above except.
obtaining a second measurement of the first characteristic of the electrochemical device during a third period of the charge waveform applied to the electrochemical device; and
averaging the measurement of the first characteristic and the second measurement of the first characteristic.
Narisawa et al. discloses a plurality of detection periods for current detection (paragraph 4, page 4, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to obtain a second measurement of the first characteristic of the electrochemical device during a third period of the charge waveform applied to the electrochemical device.
Narisawa et al. further discloses averaging the measurement of the first characteristic and the second measurement of the first characteristic (average current detection value, paragraph 4, page 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Takahashi as modified with measurements of the first characteristic during a third period as suggested by Narisawa et al. for the purpose of repeating the measurements of the first characteristic and averaging the measurement of the first characteristic as disclosed by Narisawa et al. for the well-known purpose of determining a “representation” of the measurement of the first characteristic.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13, 14 and 16-25 are allowed.
Reasons For Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The combination as claimed wherein a system for an electrochemical device comprising altering the attribute of the charge waveform comprises altering a frequency of a leading edge harmonic to modulate an impedance associated with the body portion (claim 11) or altering the attribute of the charge waveform comprises altering a frequency of a leading edge harmonic to modulate an impedance associated with the leading edge (claim 13) or the multiplexor controlled to sequence storage of the first measurement in the first memory and the second measurement in the second memory (claim 14) is not disclosed, suggested, or made obvious by the prior art of record.
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.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on January 16, 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the drawing objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The drawing objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s argument and amendment with respect to the claim objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 USC 101 have been withdrawn.
With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 103, Applicants argue “claim 1 is amended herein to incorporate aspects of the subject matter of allowed dependent claim 10.”
Examiner’s position is that claim 1 and claim 26 do not include the subject matter of allowed dependent claim 10 (now cancelled) (see discussions above). Upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Liu et al. (US 2019/0222041), as discussed above.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Nghiem whose telephone number is (571) 272-2277. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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).
/MICHAEL P NGHIEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 January 31, 2026