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
The Amendment filed 5/3/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8, 10-11, 13-14, 16, 19, 21-22, 57, 61, and 65 remain pending in the application, and claims 9, 12, 15, 17-18, 20, 23-56, 58-60, 62-64, and 66-68 have been canceled. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome every 102 and 103 rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 2/2/2026. The new grounds of rejection presented below are necessitated by the amendments. Accordingly, this Office Action is made Final.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 65 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taurand (FR 2860353 A1, published 2005-04-01, cited paragraphs from English Espacenet translation, 11 pages).
Regarding independent claim 1, Taurand teaches a circuitry for balancing cells in a battery pack (Fig. 1), the circuitry comprising:
a cell balancing circuitry configured to transfer energy between cells of the battery pack (Fig. 1 and ¶[8]: balancing control circuit balance plurality of battery cells); and
a control circuitry (Fig. 1 and ¶[8]: BMU) configured to control a parameter of the clock signal (¶[7-8] and Fig. 4: control circuits send PWM signals required for the switching of switches St and Sb) based on a monitored parameter (¶[7-8]: voltage measurement circuit measures voltage on cells) or information associated with the battery pack;
wherein the cell balancing circuitry comprises:
an energy storage element (Fig. 1 and ¶[5], first paragraph of Page 5: capacitor 2); and
a switch network comprising a plurality of switches for selectively coupling the energy storage element to different ones of the cells in the battery pack (Fig. 1: switches St and Sb connecting dipoles E1 and E2);
wherein operation of the plurality of switches of the switch network is synchronized to the clock signal (¶[7-8] and Fig. 4: control circuits send PWM signals required for the switching of switches St and Sb).
Regarding independent claim 65, Taurand teaches a controller (Fig. 1) for outputting a clock signal (¶[7-8] and Fig. 4: control circuits send PWM signals required for the switching of switches St and Sb) for controlling a switching frequency of switches of a switch network configured to selectively couple an energy storage element to cells of a battery in circuitry for balancing the cells in the battery, wherein the controller is controlled based on a monitored parameter of, or information associated with, the battery (¶[5], bottom of Page 2, Page 4, top of Page 5: BMU verifies voltage levels and maintains identical voltage on all storage elements through the control of the switches).
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.
Claims 1-7, 16, 21, 57, and 65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunimitsu (US 20210083331 A1, published 2021-03-18) in view of Taurand.
Claims 1-7, 16, 21, 57, and 65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kunimitsu (US 20210083331 A1, published 2021-03-18).
Regarding independent claim 1, Kunimitsu teaches a circuitry for balancing cells in a battery pack (Fig. 1), the circuitry comprising:
a cell balancing circuitry (Fig. 1: 10, 20, 30, 40) configured to transfer energy (¶0032) between cells of the battery pack (Fig. 1: E1-E20) (¶’s [30, 19] and Fig. 1: pulse width modulation operates on periodic on/off cycles comparable to a clock signal. "First power source circuit 12 steps down the voltage across first power storage module M1 to charge one of the plurality of cells E1 to E5." When compared to Fig. 1, this means that the voltages across M1[i.e. E1-E5] is input to the primary side of transformer 12 by closing switch S1. When the selected switches on the secondary side lead to a cell, that means energy has been transferred between cells); and
a control circuitry (Fig. 1: controlling circuit 50) configured to control a parameter of the clock signal (¶0030) based on a monitored parameter (¶0029: OCV/SOC) or information associated with the battery pack;
wherein the cell balancing circuitry comprises:
an energy storage element (Fig. 1 and ¶[30, 19]: inductors in transformer T1 in power source circuit 12); and
a switch network comprising a plurality of switches for selectively coupling the energy storage element to different ones of the cells in the battery pack (Fig. 1: S10-19);
Kunimitsu does not teach the operation of the plurality of switches of the switch network is synchronized to the clock signal.
Taurand teaches a plurality of switches of a switch network is synchronized to a clock signal (¶[6] on Page 6 and Fig. 2: switches St and Sb are controlled in a nonoverlapping manner with a duty cycle).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to incorporate the PWM operation of the plurality of switches for cell balancing in Taurand into the system of Kunimitsu to enable efficient transfer of energy between cells while preventing shorting using nonoverlapping control signals on the switches (Kunimitsu - Fig. 1; Taurand - Fig. 1 and ¶[6]).
Regarding independent claim 65, Kunimitsu teaches a controller (¶0027 controlling circuit 50) for outputting a clock signal ((¶’s [30, 19] and Fig. 1: pulse width modulation operates on periodic on/off cycles comparable to a clock signal. "First power source circuit 12 steps down the voltage across first power storage module M1 to charge one of the plurality of cells E1 to E5." In Fig. 1, voltages across M1[i.e. E1-E5] are input to the primary side of transformer 12 by closing switch S1. When the selected switches on the secondary side lead to a cell, energy can be transferred between cells) for controlling a switching frequency of switches (¶ [27,34]: active balancing is performed through the balancing switches S10 to S19), wherein the controller is controlled based on a monitored parameter of, or information associated with, the battery (¶[27]: control circuit 50 acquires OCV of cells E1 to E5 and specifies the cell having the lowest OCV).
Kunimitsu does not teach outputting a clock signal for controlling a switching frequency of switches of a switch network configure to selectively couple an energy storage element to cells of a battery in circuitry for balancing the cells in the battery.
Taurand teaches outputting a clock signal for controlling a switching frequency of switches of a switch network configure to selectively couple an energy storage element to cells of a battery in circuitry for balancing the cells in the battery (¶[6] on Page 6 and Fig. 2: switches St and Sb are controlled in a nonoverlapping manner with a duty cycle).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to incorporate the PWM operation of the plurality of switches for cell balancing in Taurand into the system of Kunimitsu to enable efficient transfer of energy between cells while preventing shorting using nonoverlapping control signals on the switches (Kunimitsu - Fig. 1; Taurand - Fig. 1 and ¶[6]).
Regarding claim 2, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, further comprising voltage monitor circuitry for monitoring a voltage of the cells of the battery pack (¶0029).
Regarding claim 3, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 2, wherein the monitored parameter associated with the battery pack comprises one or more of:
a voltage of the battery pack (¶0029);
a voltage difference between a first cell and a second cell of the battery pack; a difference between a voltage a first cell of the battery pack having a highest voltage or state of charge and a voltage of a second cell of the battery pack having a lowest voltage of state of charge; an impedance of a cell of the battery pack; and a statistical measure related to the voltage of the battery pack of the voltage of one or more cells of the battery pack (limitations above are listed in alternative form).
Regarding claim 4, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, further comprising current monitor circuitry for monitoring a load current of the battery pack (¶0030: “charging current flows in accordance [with] the voltage of the cell, and the amount of the charging current can be adjusted by performing the PWM control on first switch S1”).
Regarding claim 5, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 4, wherein the monitored parameter associated with the battery pack comprises one of more of: an instantaneous load current (¶0030); and an average load current over a predetermined period of time (limitation is listed in alternative form).
Regarding claim 6, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, wherein the monitored parameter associated with the battery pack comprises one of more of: an inferred instantaneous load current (¶0030); and an inferred average load current over a predetermined period of time.
Regarding claim 7, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 6, wherein the control circuitry (¶0027 controlling circuit 50) is configured to infer the instantaneous load current (¶0030: “charging current flows in accordance [with] the voltage of the cell”) and/or the average load current based on a measured voltage of one or more cells of the battery pack.
Regarding claim 16, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, wherein the parameter of the clock signal comprises a frequency of the clock signal or a duty cycle of the clock signal (¶0030: a key component of pulse width modulation is duty cycle).
Regarding claim 21, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, wherein the cell balancing circuitry comprises: a switch network (Fig. 1: S10-19, S21-25, S31-35, S41-45); and an inductor (transformers T1-4);
wherein the switch network is controllable such that:
in a first phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry, the inductor is coupled in parallel with a cell of a first module of the battery pack; and
in a second phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry, the inductor is coupled in parallel with a different cell of the first module or with a cell of a second module of the battery pack.
(¶0030: The examiner interprets the first phase as when the transformer receives energy from a charged cell and the second phase as when the target cell to be charged receives energy from the transformer)
Regarding independent claim 57, Kunimitsu teaches an integrated circuit comprising control circuitry for use in the circuitry of claim 1 (See rejection for claim 1).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunimitsu in view of Taurand, and further in view of Pressas (US 20190293723 A1, published 2019-09-26).
Regarding claim 8, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, wherein the control circuitry (¶0027 controlling circuit 50) is configured
to monitor an impedance of a cell of the battery pack (¶0026: internal resistance of each cell is estimated), and
Kunimitsu does not teach the control circuitry configured
to cause the cell balancing circuitry not to apply charging current to the cell during a cycle of the cell balancing circuitry if the impedance of the cell is below a predetermined threshold and/or adjust an impedance of a switch of the cell balancing circuitry based on the impedance of the cell.
Pressas teaches a control circuitry configured
to cause the cell balancing circuitry to adjust an impedance of a switch of the cell balancing circuitry based on the impedance of the cell (¶0035).
Both Kunimitsu and Pressas teach battery charging systems. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the adjusting of a switch based on the impedance of a cell to safely charge or discharge the battery (¶0007).
Claims 10-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunimitsu in view of Taurand, and further in view of Cattin (US 20140315047 A1, published 2014-10-23).
Regarding claim 10, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1, wherein the control circuitry is configured
to infer an impedance of cells of the battery pack based on current that flows through switches of the cell balancing circuitry (¶0026: “The internal resistance can be estimated by dividing a voltage drop, generated when a predetermined current is allowed to pass through the battery for a predetermined time”), and
Kunimitsu does not teach the control circuitry configured to determine an electrical model of the battery pack based at least in part on the inferred impedances.
Cattin teaches control circuitry configured to determining an electrical model of the battery pack based at least in part on the inferred impedances (¶0016,0032).
Both Kunimitsu and Cattin teach battery systems. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the control circuitry determining an electrical model of a battery in the system of Cattin into the system of Kunimitsu to accurately assess the aging of the battery (¶0013).
Regarding claim 11, Kunimitsu in view of Cattin teaches the circuitry according to claim 10, wherein Cattin further teaches the control circuitry is configured to control or modulate a parameter of the clock signal based on the electrical model of the battery pack; and/or adjust an impedance of a switch of the cell balancing circuitry based on the electrical model of the battery pack (¶0040: frequency determined from impedance of battery to be charged).
Regarding claim 13, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1.
Kunimitsu does not teach the circuitry wherein the information associated with the battery pack comprises information from a system, external to the circuitry, belonging to a host device that incorporates the circuitry.
Cattin teaches circuitry wherein the information associated with the battery pack comprises information from a system, external to the circuitry, belonging to a host device that incorporates the circuitry (¶0159: information may be downloaded from a remote server).
Kunimitsu and Cattin both teach battery systems. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the remote server from Cattin into the system of Kunimitsu to easily update information in the system.
Regarding claim 14, Kunimitsu in view of Cattin teaches the circuitry according to claim 13, wherein Kunimitsu teaches the clock signal is generated or received by the control circuitry (¶0030).
Claims 19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunimitsu in view of Taurand, and further in view of Morita (US 20040246635 A1, published 2004-12-09).
Regarding claim 19, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 18, wherein the cell balancing circuitry comprises: a switch network (Fig. 1: S10-19, S21-25, S31-35, S41-45).
Kunimitsu does not teach the cell balancing circuitry comprises a capacitor, and
wherein the switch network is controllable such that:
in a first phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry, the capacitor is coupled in parallel with a cell of a first module of the battery pack; and
in a second phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry, the capacitor is coupled in parallel with a different cell of the first module or with a cell of a second module of the battery pack.
Morita teaches the cell balancing circuitry comprises a capacitor, and
wherein the switch network is controllable such that:
in a first phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry, the capacitor is coupled in parallel with a cell of a first module of the battery pack (Fig. 5 has structure capable of performing the balancing process as described in ¶0015 and Fig. 1 where a first cell is coupled to a capacitor); and
in a second phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry, the capacitor is coupled in parallel with a different cell of the first module or with a cell of a second module of the battery pack (¶0015: in the second phase the capacitor is couple to a second cell adjacent to the first cell).
Both Kunimitsu and Morita teach circuitry for cell balancing. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the capacitors in the circuitry of Morita into the circuitry of Kunimitsu for simpler circuit design and saving on manufacturing costs.
Regarding claim 22, Kunimitsu teaches the circuitry according to claim 1.
Kunimitsu does not teach wherein the cell balancing circuitry comprises: a switch network; and a set of capacitors coupled in parallel between the switch network and a common node;
wherein the switch network is controllable such that:
during a first phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry the set of capacitors is coupled to a first portion of a first plurality of cells of the battery pack; and
during a second phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry the set of capacitors is coupled to a second portion of the first plurality of cells and to a first portion of a second plurality of cells of the battery pack, wherein the first and second portions of the first plurality of cells comprise at least one different cell of the first plurality of cells.
Morita teaches cell balancing circuitry (Fig. 5: voltage detection circuit 60) comprising: a switch network (61-66); and a set of capacitors (67-69) coupled in parallel between the switch network and a common node (connecting node N4);
wherein the switch network is controllable (Fig. 5: control section 39) such that:
during a first phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry the set of capacitors (67-69) is coupled to a first portion of a first plurality of cells of the battery pack (B1-B2); (Fig. 5 has structure capable of performing the balancing process as described in ¶0015 and Fig. 1) and
during a second phase of operation of the cell balancing circuitry the set of capacitors (67-69) is coupled to a second portion of the first plurality of cells and to a first portion of a second plurality of cells of the battery pack (B2-B3), wherein the first and second portions of the first plurality of cells comprise at least one different cell of the first plurality of cells.
(The examiner interprets first and second portions of the first plurality of cells as B1 and B2 respectively, and the first portion of the second plurality of cells as B3)
Both Kunimitsu and Morita teach circuitry for cell balancing. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the capacitors in the circuitry of Morita into the circuitry of Kunimitsu for simpler circuit design and saving on manufacturing costs.
Claim 61 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunimitsu in view of Taurand, and further in view of Lin (US 20140097787 A1, published 2014-04-10).
Regarding independent claim 61, Kunimitsu teaches a host device comprising the circuitry of claim 1 (See rejection for claim 1).
Kunimitsu does not teach wherein the host device comprises an electric vehicle, an electric bicycle, an electric scooter, a cordless power tool, a computing device, a laptop, netbook, notebook or tablet computer, a portable battery powered device, a mobile telephone or an accessory device for such a host device.
Lin discloses a host device (¶0006: electric vehicle) comprising of balancing circuitry (battery management system).
Both Lin and Kunimitsu disclose circuits for balancing batteries. It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the circuitry of Kunimitsu in an EV as suggested by Lin for the purpose of balancing cells in an EV.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim (KR 20160039787 A) teaches a circuitry for balancing cells in a battery pack (Fig. 2), the circuitry comprising:
a cell balancing circuitry configured to transfer energy between cells of the battery pack (Fig. 2: balancing control circuit balance plurality of battery cells).
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 Ryu-Sung P. Weinmann whose telephone number is (703)756-5964. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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, Julian Huffman, can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
/Ryu-Sung P. Weinmann/Examiner, Art Unit 2859 June 23, 2026
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights