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 Arguments
Applicant argues, with regards to independent claim 1, that Ono modified by Kamijima fails to render the amended feature “wherein response to determining that the electrical capacity of the battery is less than a preset capacity, the battery device does not communicate with the electronic device, and the battery is not being charged and discharged, the control chip controls the battery device to enter the shutdown mode to perform deep discharge protection”. This amended feature is supported by applicant specification ¶0018-0019; further, the amended feature changes the scope of the claim thereby requiring further search and consideration. The amended limitation as stated in the applicant arguments and remarks includes the phrase “charged and discharged” does not match with the amended claim set filed 9 January 2026 which reads “charged or discharged”. The phrase “is not being charged and discharged” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of not being charged and discharged simultaneously, whereas the phrase “is not being charged or discharged” has the broadest reasonable interpretation of not being charged or discharged at a given time. The examiner is using the claim language from the claim set filed 9 January 2026 which reads “is not being charged or discharged” for examination.
The amended claim limitation of “is not being charged or discharged” has the broadest reasonable interpretation of not being charged or discharged at a given time. It is an inherent property of batteries that in the absence of being charged or actively discharged through use, the battery will discharge slowly over time. Thereby the battery would always be in a state of being charged or discharged.
Applicant argues that Ono does not teach “in response to determining that the electrical capacity of the battery is less than a preset capacity, the battery device does not communicate with the electronic device, and the battery is not being charged or discharged, the control chip controls the battery device to enter the shutdown mode to perform deep discharge protection”. Applicant points to Ono ¶0061 which states “ The over-discharge-protection mode is a mode in which discharging of the rechargeable battery 001 is prohibited. In the over-discharge-protection mode, the battery pack 100 turns off the gauge IC 003 and thus turns off the charge control FET 004 and the discharge control FET 005” as evidence that the over-discharge protection mode is not comparable. Applicant points to Ono ¶0041 and ¶0043-0045 which describes the over-discharge protection mode wherein the battery pack 100 turns off the gauge IC 003 and thereby turns off the charge control FET 004 and discharge control FET 005, preventing the battery from either charging or discharging while in the over-discharge-protection mode. Applicant argument is supported in Ono ¶0045 which states “The deep-discharge mode is a mode in which the protection IC 002 cuts off current to the fuse 006 to prohibit charging and discharging, and the electronic device 200 is thus not allowed to be started or charged”.
However, the supplementary reference Kamijima et al (US 20180101208 A1) does allow for the battery to be charged and wake up from the shutdown mode/idle mode. This is supported by Kamijima ¶0065 “Stopping is determined to be possible when an operation mode of electronic device 50 is the shut-down mode or the hibernation mode, and a setting for accepting a start-up request via a LAN (a WakeOnLAN setting) has not been made”.
Applicant's arguments filed 9 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. New grounds of rejection are presented herein, as necessitated by amendment
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.
Claims 1 and 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 1 and 6 contain the limitation “wherein the control chip determines, according to the electrical capacity of the battery, whether the battery device communicates with the electronic device, and whether the battery is being charged or discharged, whether to control the battery device to enter the shutdown mode,” which does not distinctly point out or claim the invention. It is unclear which actions the control chip is performing for each limitation following “whether”. For the purposes of examination the examiner is interpreting this as the control chip determining if the battery device is communicating with the electronic device and if the battery is being charged/discharged based on the electrical capacity, and using that information to control if the battery device enters the shutdown mode.
Claims 1 and 6 further contain the limitation “wherein in response to determining that the electrical capacity of the battery is greater than the preset capacity, or the battery device communicates with the electronic device, or the battery is being charged or discharged, the control chip continues to measure the electrical capacity of the battery,” which does not distinctly point out or claim the invention. It is unclear which values the control chip is calculating (determining) and which values the control chip is measuring. For the purposes of examination the examiner is interpreting this as the control chip continues to measure the electrical capacity of the battery when it determines that one or more of the following conditions are met: the electrical capacity of the battery is greater than the preset capacity, the battery device communicates with the electronic device, or the battery is being charged or discharged.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claims 1 and 6 contain the limitation “is not being charged or discharged”. It is an inherent property of batteries that even when idle and not actively discharging, the battery will slowly discharge. Thereby under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation “is not being charged or discharged”, the battery would inherently always be in a state of charge or discharge.
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 3-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono et al (US 20160344206 A1) modified by Kamijima et al (US 20180101208 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ono teaches a battery device, configured to supply electric power to an electronic device, and comprising: a battery; (¶0035 "FIG. 1 illustrates an example hardware configuration of a battery pack 100 and an electronic device 200")
and a control chip, coupled to the battery, (¶0051 "power controller 017 has functions of an integration unit 018, a charge controller 019, a memory unit 020, an input detector 021, and a communication unit 022")
and configured to: measure an electrical capacity of the battery, (¶0054 "The charge controller 019 controls charging and discharging by controlling the charge control FET 004 and the discharge control FET 005", ¶0064 "A method for setting a voltage value for changing a mode related to control of a rechargeable battery will be described by using FIGS. 4 to 7")
and control the battery device to enter a shutdown mode, (¶0059 "The idle mode, the shutdown mode, the over-discharge-protection mode, and the deep-discharge mode will be described as examples of the plurality of modes related to protection of the rechargeable battery 001",¶0062 "deep-discharge mode is a mode in which the protection IC 002 cuts off current to the fuse 006 to prohibit charging and discharging, and the electronic device 200 is thus not allowed to be started or charged")
wherein the control chip determines, according to the electrical capacity of the battery, (¶0066 "rechargeable battery 001 being between 3.9 V and 3.5 V, the shutdown-mode start voltage value Vsd is 3.5 V, and the over-discharge-protection-mode start voltage value Vodp is 2.8 V")
whether the battery device communicates with the electronic device, (¶0038 "The data communication terminals 009 of the battery pack 100 are connected to data communication terminals 013 of the electronic device 200, and data communication is performed")
wherein when in response to determining that the electrical capacity of the battery is less than a preset capacity, (¶0066 "rechargeable battery 001 being between 3.9 V and 3.5 V, the shutdown-mode start voltage value Vsd is 3.5 V, and the over-discharge-protection-mode start voltage value Vodp is 2.8 V")
the battery device does not communicate with the electronic device, and the battery is not being charged or and discharged, the control chip controls the battery device to enter the shutdown mode to perform deep discharge protection, (¶0041 "gauge IC 003 is a semiconductor IC that implements various functions (described later) by using programs. The gauge IC 003 measures or calculates the remaining capacity of the rechargeable battery 001, detects a voltage input from the adaptor power input terminal 010, controls the charge control FET 004 and the discharge control FET 005, and switches between a plurality of modes related to protection of the rechargeable battery 001")
wherein in response to determining that the electrical capacity of the battery is greater than the preset capacity, (¶0058 “FIG. 3 illustrates example modes related to protection of the rechargeable battery 001”, ¶0059 “The idle mode operates while the voltage value detected in the rechargeable battery 001 is higher than the voltage value Vsd (V). When the voltage value detected in the rechargeable battery 001 becomes equal to or lower than the shutdown-mode start voltage value Vsd (V), the mode of the battery pack 100 is switched to the shutdown mode)
or the battery device communicates with the electronic device, or the battery is being charged or discharged, the control chip continues to measure the electrical capacity of the battery, (¶0067 “ FIG. 5 illustrates examples of voltage values for changing modes related to protection of the rechargeable battery 001 and calculation of the period to the deep-discharge mode”, FIG. 5 contains a calculation box on the right hand side which indicates an estimated time frame of operation indicating that the battery capacity is being continually monitored to determine which mode the battery should be in)
and total consumption current of the battery is directly decreased to a current corresponding to the deep discharge protection. (¶0061 “over-d ischarge-protection mode is a mode in which discharging of the rechargeable battery 001 is prohibited. In the over-discharge-protection mode, the battery pack 100 turns off the gauge IC 003 and thus turns off the charge control FET 004 and the discharge control FET 005”)
Ono does not teach a battery device wherein the control unit determines whether the battery is being charged or discharged, whether to control the battery device in shutdown mode, wherein in the shutdown mode, the control chip of the battery device is enabled to enter a low energy consumption state, the control chip receives only an operating voltage required for wakeup, and total consumption current of the battery is directly decreased to a current corresponding to the deep discharge protection.
Kamijima teaches a battery device wherein the control unit determines whether the battery is being charged or discharged, whether to control the battery device in shutdown mode (¶0059 " status information includes an error status indicative of present and past errors, a status indicative of whether shutting down has been performed, and a status indicative of whether battery 10 is presently being charged or discharged")
wherein in the shutdown mode, the control chip of the battery device is enabled to enter a low energy consumption state, (¶0030 “Power supply controlling microcontroller 53 has, as operation modes, a normal mode and a sleep mode at which electric power is less consumed than in the normal mode (low electric power consumption mode)”)
the control chip receives only an operating voltage required for wakeup, (¶0046 “[FIG 3] Upon receiving the alarm in the sleep mode, power supply controlling microcontroller 53 wakes up, and returns to the normal mode (S42)”)
and total consumption current of the battery is directly decreased to a current corresponding to the deep discharge protection. (¶0054 “ battery microcontroller 13, electric power to be consumed in battery 10 can be reduced, and thus a time to be taken by battery cell 11 for reaching a deep discharge state can be delayed”)
Both the battery devices taught by Ono and Kamijima use a microcontroller with multiple battery modes or states to prevent over-discharging the batteries, particularly as applied to small electronic devices. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date, to modify the battery device as taught by Ono, to determine whether the battery is being charged or discharged, whether to control the battery device in shutdown mode as taught by Kamijima for the purpose of minimizing battery degradation and maintaining battery state of health to increase safety of use and extend battery lifespan.
Similarly as applied to a battery protection method for claim 6.
Regarding claim 3, Ono as modified by Kamijima teaches the battery device according to claim 1. Ono as modified by Kamijima further teaches a battery device further comprising: a power switch, coupled to the battery, the electronic device, and the control chip, (Ono ¶0033 "electric device is switched on and starts to receive power supply from the battery pack before entering the shutdown mode", Ono ¶0037 "battery pack 100 includes a rechargeable battery 001, a protection integrated circuit (IC) 002, a gauge IC 003, a charge control field effect transistor (FET) 004, a discharge control FET 005, and a fuse 006")
wherein the battery supplies the electric power to the electronic device through the power switch, (Ono ¶0033 "electric device is switched on and starts to receive power supply from the battery pack before entering the shutdown mode", Ono ¶0037 "battery pack 100 includes a rechargeable battery 001, a protection integrated circuit (IC) 002, a gauge IC 003, a charge control field effect transistor (FET) 004, a discharge control FET 005, and a fuse 006")
and the control chip disconnects the power switch to enter a low energy consumption state. (Ono ¶0059 "voltage value detected in the rechargeable battery 001 becomes equal to or lower than the shutdown-mode start voltage value Vsd (V), the mode of the battery pack 100 is switched to the shutdown mode")
Similarly as applied to a battery protection method for claim 7.
Regarding claim 4, Ono as modified by Kamijima teaches the battery device according to claim 1. Ono as modified by Kamijima further teaches a battery device wherein the control chip determines, according to whether a voltage of the battery is less than a preset voltage, whether the electrical capacity of the battery is less than the preset capacity. (Ono ¶0066 "rechargeable battery 001 being between 3.9 V and 3.5 V, the shutdown-mode start voltage value Vsd is 3.5 V, and the over-discharge-protection-mode start voltage value Vodp is 2.8 V")
Similarly as applied to a battery protection method for claim 8.
Regarding claim 5, Ono as modified by Kamijima teaches the battery device according to claim 1. Ono as modified by Kamijima further teaches a battery device wherein the battery device communicates with the electronic device through a system bus. (Ono ¶0038 "The data communication terminals 009 of the battery pack 100 are connected to data communication terminals 013 of the electronic device 200, and data communication is performed")
Similarly as applied to a battery protection method for claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yen et al (US 20200142005 A1) teaches a battery module which controls a shutdown mode based on state of charge to prevent deep discharge
Nakao et al (US 20220399734 A1) teaches an electric storage device which controls battery over discharge based on state of charge
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA M KOTOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8a-5p.
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, Taelor Kim can be reached at (571) 270-7166. 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.
/LISA KOTOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859