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 .
Status of the Claims
In the communication filed on 11/06/2025 claims 1-20 are pending. Independent claims 1 and 16 have been amended by adding new limitations not previously presented, by including a limitation previously presented in claim 5, and to correct informalities that were objected to. Claim 18 has been amended to correct informalities that were objected to.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, filed 11/06/2025, with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejection of the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of a newly found prior art reference in combination with the previously applied references. The amendments made by the applicant have changed the scope of the claims.
With respect to the applicant’s arguments in pages 12-14 of the Remarks dated 11/06/2025, the applicant contends that Choi and/or Lee fail to teach “the first switch and the second switch to be turned on/off affecting which charging path includes the impedance to achieve charging equally”. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, with respect to the impedance between the battery pack and the charging and discharging circuit not being taught by Choi, the examiner illustrates annotated Fig. 5 below to enhance the teachings of the impedance between the batteries and the charging and discharging circuit cited in page 7 of the Office Action dated 08/29/2025.
PNG
media_image1.png
694
963
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Second, in response to applicant's argument that Choi’s first protection circuit 571 and second protection circuit 572 are for protection and not for balancing purposes, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Third, with respect to Choi not teaching turning on and off the switches to achieve balancing, the examiner relies on Lee on page 8 of the Office Action dated 08/29/2025 for teaching controlling the first switch and the second switch to be turned on or turned off, so that batteries in the battery pack are charged equally. The applicant further argues that Lee teaches balancing at fixed points and not controlling fixed paths as claimed in the newly presented limitations of the amended claims. The examiner agrees with the applicant’s arguments in view of the newly added limitations. However, the new limitations presented are rejected below in view of a newly found prior art reference in combination with the previously applied references.
The remaining arguments are moot as the applicant’s arguments for the remaining claims were based on dependency of the independent claims.
The drawing objections are withdrawn in part due to the amendments. Figs. 2-3 and 5a-5b remain objected to for the reasons stated below.
The specification objections remain. A marked-up copy must be submitted along with the clean copy as outlined in 37 CFR 1.121.
The claim objections are withdrawn due to the amendments.
This Office Action is made Final due to the amendments.
Drawings
NOTE: the drawings filed on 11/6/25 have been partially approved for entry. Specifically, Figs. 1, 6a-6b, and 10a-10b are approved for entry while Figs. 2-3 and 5a-5b are still objected for the following reasons:
The drawings are objected to because of minor informalities illustrated in the annotated Figs. 2-3 and 5a-5b below.
PNG
media_image2.png
510
570
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
587
819
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
556
579
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
556
597
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
NOTE: The substitute specification filed 11/06/2025 has not been approved for entry because a marked-up copy and a clean copy of the amendments must be submitted in accordance with 37 CFR 1.121.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in certain instances SC charger 1 or SC charger 2 are referred to as just “SC charger” for example see ¶ [100-101]. This may lead to misinterpretation of which SC charger is being discussed. Applicant is advised to review the specification to correct this and other instances of reference numbers missing to improve reading comprehension. Appropriate correction is required. A marked-up copy and a clean copy of the amendments must be submitted in accordance with 37 CFR 1.121.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-12, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (USPGPN 20220077695), in view of Lee et al. (USPGPN 20210167612), and further in view of Li et al. (Chinese Patent CN-112467811-A; identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) and cited in the International Search Report (ISR)).
First, the examiner notes the applicant discloses a first charger is a buck charger and a second charger is a switched capacitor (i.e., SC charger) in the disclosure in ¶ [14-15] of the disclosure. For examination purposes a first charger will be interpreted as a buck charger (i.e., step-down charger) and a second charger will be interpreted as a switched capacitor charger.
With respect to independent claims 1 and 16, Choi teaches an electronic device (In Fig. 5 an electronic device 502).
Choi teaches wherein the electronic device comprises a charging and discharging circuit and a battery pack, wherein the battery pack comprises a first battery and a second battery, wherein the charging and discharging circuit is configured to charge and discharge the battery pack (In Fig. 5 the electronic device 502 comprises a battery charging and discharging system and batteries 531 and 532. The batteries 531 and 532 may be arranged as a battery pack, see the last sentence of ¶ [56]).
Choi teaches the charging and discharging circuit comprises a processing module (In Fig. 5 a processor 599).
Choi teaches the charging and discharging circuit comprises a first charging circuit (In Fig. 5 a charging circuit 550).
Choi teaches the charging and discharging circuit comprises a first switch and a second switch (In Fig. 5 a first protection circuit 571 and a second protection circuit 572).
Choi teaches an impedance, wherein the impedance comprises a path cabling impedance or a path device impedance between the battery pack and the charging and discharging circuit (In Fig. 5 the resistance component between the batteries 531/532 and the charging/discharging system, see ¶ [05]).
Choi teaches wherein the first switch and the second switch are separately connected to the processing module, a first port of the first charging circuit, and the battery pack (In Fig. 5 the first protection circuit 571 and the second protection circuity 572 are separately connected to the processor 599, to a first port of the charging circuit, and to batteries 531/532).
Choi teaches wherein the first charging circuit is configured to output a voltage by using the first port, wherein the voltage passes through the first switch, the second switch, and the impedance for charging the battery pack (In Fig. 5 the charging circuit 550 outputs I_CHGR to by using the output port, wherein the charging current passes through the first protection circuit 571, the second protection circuit 572, and the resistance component for charging the batteries 531/532. One of ordinary skill understands a charging current has a charging voltage associated with it).
Choi teaches wherein the first switch and the second switch are separately connected to a charging line of at least one battery in the battery pack (In Fig. 5 the first protection circuit 571 and the second protection circuit 572 are separately connected to a charging line of at least batteries 531/532).
Choi teaches wherein the processing module is configured to obtain a voltage of the charging line of the at least one battery in the battery pack and control, based on the voltage of the charging line (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 is configured to obtain a voltage of the charging line of the batteries 531/532 using a first monitoring circuit 561 and a second monitoring circuit 562 and this is shared with processor for control and determination. The monitoring circuits obtain a voltage for each of the batteries 531/532 (i.e., the corresponding charging lines have the same measured voltage), see ¶ [66]).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach control the first switch and the second switch to be turned on or turned off, so that batteries in the battery pack are charged equally; controlling the first switch and the second switch comprising: based on the voltage of the charging line or the current of the charging line, controlling the first switch to be turned on and the second switch to be turned off such that a second charging path to the second battery includes the impedance while a first charging path to the first battery bypasses the impedance, or controlling the first switch to be turned off and the second switch to be turned on such that a first charging path to the first battery includes the impedance while a second charging path to the second battery bypasses the impedance, so that the first battery and the second battery are charged equally.
Lee teaches control the first switch and the second switch to be turned on or turned off, so that batteries in the battery pack are charged equally (In Fig. 3 the power/voltage divider circuit 264 comprises a plurality of switches which may be turned on and off for equally charging the batteries 252/254 as illustrated in Figs. 9-12).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for switching first and second protection circuits to balance the batteries. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Lee’s switching functionality for balancing the batteries. The advantage to this modification being that the batteries may be balanced while maximizing usable pack capacity, increase safety by preventing overcharge/discharge, and extend the lifespan of the batteries.
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach controlling the first switch and the second switch comprising: based on the voltage of the charging line or the current of the charging line, controlling the first switch to be turned on and the second switch to be turned off such that a second charging path to the second battery includes the impedance while a first charging path to the first battery bypasses the impedance, or controlling the first switch to be turned off and the second switch to be turned on such that a first charging path to the first battery includes the impedance while a second charging path to the second battery bypasses the impedance, so that the first battery and the second battery are charged equally.
Li teaches controlling the first switch and the second switch comprising: based on the voltage of the charging line or the current of the charging line, controlling the first switch to be turned on and the second switch to be turned off such that a second charging path to the second battery includes the impedance while a first charging path to the first battery bypasses the impedance, or controlling the first switch to be turned off and the second switch to be turned on such that a first charging path to the first battery includes the impedance while a second charging path to the second battery bypasses the impedance, so that the first battery and the second battery are charged equally (Figs. 5-6; ¶[32-37]; the impedance comprises the internal resistance of batteries 1 and 2 and the impedance of the MOS 1 and 2 (i.e., the impedance of a path device). The control circuit acquires the voltages of the batteries 1 and 2, and controls, according to the voltages, the MOS 1 and the MOS 2 to be turned on or off, so that the charging of the batteries 1 and 2 is equalized via the respective impedance path created by the switch (e.g., MOS 1 or MOS 2) being turned on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Li’s impedance path switching network topology. The advantage to this modification being that the a dual-battery voltage balancing method and a dual-battery voltage balancing circuit, which can automatically adjust circuit parameters according to the voltage difference in a dual-battery parallel connection scenario to achieve dual-battery voltage balancing (see ¶[03] of Li).
With respect to dependent claims 2 and 19, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 16, respectively. Further, Choi teaches wherein the charging and discharging circuit further comprises a second charging circuit, and the second charging circuit is connected to both the processing module and the battery pack (In Fig. 5 when switch 580 is enabled so that the power supply device 501 charges the batteries 531/532 through cell balancing circuit 540 is a second charging circuit, and the second charging circuit is connected to the processor 599 and the batteries 531/532).
Choi teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to switch between the first charging circuit and the second charging circuit when detecting the voltage of the charging line of the at least one battery in the battery pack meeting a preset condition (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 is configured to switch between the charging circuit 550 or the second charging circuit at switch 580 when the detected voltage of the charging line of the batteries 531/532 meet a preset condition, see ¶ [69, 71]. The preset condition is understood by one of ordinary skill to be reaching a battery charging threshold which in response a power adjustment mode is selected accordingly).
Choi teaches wherein, when the charging and discharging circuit is switched to the second charging circuit, the second charging circuit provides a fast charging service for the battery pack (In ¶ [69, 71] charging with the second charging circuit (i.e., first power adjustment mode or an external adjustment mode) the batteries 531/532 are charged at a higher rate for example 50 mA).
With respect to dependent claims 3 and 20, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 2 and 19, respectively. Further, Choi teaches wherein the second charging circuit comprises a third switch and a fourth switch, and the third switch and the fourth switch are separately connected to at least one charging line in the battery pack (In Fig. 5 the cell balancing circuit 540 comprises a plurality of switches which are separately connected to the charging line of the batteries 531/532).
Choi teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to in a process in which the second charging circuit charges the battery pack, control the third switch or the fourth switch to be turned on or turned off, so that the batteries in the battery pack are charged equally (In Fig. 5 the plurality of switches in the cell balancing circuit 540 are controlled by the processor 599 to turn on or off so that the batteries 531/532 are charged equally, see ¶ [63]).
With respect to dependent claims 4 and 18, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 16, respectively. Further, Choi teaches further comprising a collection circuit, wherein the collection circuit is disposed in the charging and discharging circuit (In Fig. 5 the first monitoring circuit 561 and the second monitoring circuit 562 are disposed in the charging and discharging system).
Choi teaches the collection circuit is connected to both the battery pack and the processing module (In Fig. 5 the first monitoring circuit 561 and the second monitoring circuit 562 are connected to both the batteries 531/532 and the processor 599).
Choi teaches wherein the collection circuit is configured to collect the voltage of a charging line of the at least one battery in the battery pack, and report the voltage to the processing module (In Fig. 5 the monitoring circuits 561/562 collect a voltage of the charging line of the batteries 531/532 and report this voltage to the processor 599).
Choi teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to receive the voltage reported by the collection circuit (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 is further configured to receive the voltage reported by the monitoring circuits 561/562).
With respect to dependent claim 5, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 3. Further, Choi teaches charging lines of the batteries in the battery pack comprise a first charging line and a second charging line (In Fig. 5 the charging lines of the batteries 531/532 in the battery pack comprise a first charging line and a second charging line).
Choi teaches the first charging line passes through the first switch for charging the battery pack, and the second charging line passes through the second switch for charging the battery pack (In Fig. 5 the first charging line passes through the first protection circuit 571 for charging battery 531, and the second charging line passes through the second protection circuit 572 for charging battery 532).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the processing module is further configured to: in a process in which the first charging line charges the battery pack, control the first switch to be turned on and the second switch to be turned off, or control the first switch to be turned off and the second switch to be turned on, so that a first voltage difference between a first charging voltage of the first battery and a second charging voltage of the second battery is less than or equal to a first threshold.
Lee teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to: in a process in which the first charging line charges the battery pack, control the first switch to be turned on and the second switch to be turned off, or control the first switch to be turned off and the second switch to be turned on, so that a first voltage difference between a first charging voltage of the first battery and a second charging voltage of the second battery is less than or equal to a first threshold (In Fig. 3 the power/voltage divider circuit 264 comprises a plurality of switches which may be turned on and off for equally charging the batteries 252/254 as illustrated in Figs. 9-12 so that the voltage difference between the batteries 252/254 is less than or equal to a first threshold).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for switching first and second protection circuits to balance the batteries. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Lee’s switching topology for balancing the batteries, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claim 6, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 5. Further, Choi teaches wherein that the processing module is further configured to switch between the first charging circuit and the second charging circuit when detecting the voltage of the charging line of the at least one battery in the battery pack meeting the preset condition (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 is configured to switch between the charging circuit 550 or the second charging circuit at switch 580 when the detected voltage of the charging line of the batteries 531/532 meet a preset condition, see ¶ [69, 71]. The preset condition is understood by one of ordinary skill to be reaching a battery charging threshold which in response a power adjustment mode is selected accordingly).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach when detecting the voltage in the battery pack meeting a first preset condition, controlling the first charging circuit to be switched to the second charging circuit, wherein the first preset condition is that the first charging voltage of the first battery reaches a second threshold, and the second charging voltage of the second battery reaches the second threshold.
Lee teaches when detecting the voltage in the battery pack meeting a first preset condition, controlling the first charging circuit to be switched to the second charging circuit (In ¶ [82] the charging circuit 262 may charge the batteries 252/254 using the high-voltage charging circuit 320 based on the charging scheme (e.g., normal charging, direct charging, or rapid charging) based on the attributes of the batteries 252/254. One of ordinary skill understands a first preset condition is met to determine switching over to the high-voltage charging circuit).
Lee wherein the first preset condition is that the first charging voltage of the first battery reaches a second threshold, and the second charging voltage of the second battery reaches the second threshold (In Fig. 10 a comparison is made between the voltage difference of the batteries 252/254 and a second reference).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for switching first and second protection circuits to balance the batteries. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Lee’s switching topology for balancing the batteries, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claim 7, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 6. Further, Choi teaches wherein that the processing module controlling the first charging circuit to be switched to the second charging circuit comprises controlling, by the processing module, a switch to be operated (In Fig. 5 the switching circuit 580 under control of the processor 599 causes the system to switch from the charging circuit 550 to the second charging circuit path).
Choi A discloses the claimed invention except for the third and fourth switches being turned on to switch over the first charging circuit to the second charging circuit. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a single-pole double-throw switch dedicated to changing between the first charging circuit and the second charging circuit, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (CA7 1977).
MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts
In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
With respect to dependent claim 8, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 5. Further, Choi teaches wherein in a process in which the second charging circuit charges the battery pack, the second charging circuit charges the battery pack by using a third charging line and a fourth charging line (In Fig. 5 the batteries 531/532 are charged using a third charging line path (a) and a fourth charging line path (g plus b)).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the processing module is further configured to control the third switch to be turned on and the fourth switch to be turned off, or control the third switch to be turned off and the fourth switch to be turned on, so that the first voltage difference between the first charging voltage of the first battery and the second charging voltage of the second battery is less than or equal to a third threshold.
Lee teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to control the third switch to be turned on and the fourth switch to be turned off, or control the third switch to be turned off and the fourth switch to be turned on, so that the first voltage difference between the first charging voltage of the first battery and the second charging voltage of the second battery is less than or equal to a third threshold (In Fig. 10 the plurality of switches in the voltage/power divider circuit 264 are turned on and off in a balancing operation and the voltage difference of the batteries 252/254 has reached a third reference).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for switching first and second protection circuits to balance the batteries. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Lee’s switching topology for balancing the batteries, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claim 9, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 6. Further, Choi teaches wherein that the processing module is further configured to switch between the first charging circuit and the second charging circuit when detecting the voltage of the charging line of the at least one battery in the battery pack meeting the preset condition (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 is configured to switch between the charging circuit 550 or the second charging circuit at switch 580 when the detected voltage of the charging line of the batteries 531/532 meet a preset condition, see ¶ [69, 71]. The preset condition is understood by one of ordinary skill to be reaching a battery charging threshold which in response a power adjustment mode is selected accordingly).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach when detecting the voltage or the current in the battery pack meeting a second preset condition, controlling the second charging circuit to be switched to the first charging circuit, wherein the second preset condition is that the first charging voltage of the first battery reaches a fourth threshold, and the second charging voltage of the second battery reaches the fourth threshold.
Lee teaches when detecting the voltage or the current in the battery pack meeting a second preset condition, controlling the second charging circuit to be switched to the first charging circuit (In ¶ [82] the charging circuit 262 may charge the batteries 252/254 using the high-voltage charging circuit 320 based on the charging scheme (e.g., normal charging, direct charging, or rapid charging) based on the attributes of the batteries 252/254. One of ordinary skill understands a first preset condition is met to determine switching over to the low-voltage charging circuit).
Lee teaches wherein the second preset condition is that the first charging voltage of the first battery reaches a fourth threshold, and the second charging voltage of the second battery reaches the fourth threshold (In Fig. 10 a comparison is made between the voltage difference of the batteries 252/254 has reached a fourth reference).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for switching first and second protection circuits to balance the batteries. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Lee’s switching topology for balancing the batteries, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claim 10, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 9. Further, Choi teaches wherein that the processing module controlling the second charging circuit to be switched to the first charging circuit comprises controlling, by the processing module, the switch to be operated (In Fig. 5 the switching circuit 580 under control of the processor 599 causes the system to switch from second charging path to the charging circuit 550).
Choi A discloses the claimed invention except for the operation of the first and second switches to change from the second charging circuit to the first charging circuit. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a single-pole double-throw switch dedicated to changing between the first charging circuit and the second charging circuit, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (CA7 1977).
MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts
In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
With respect to dependent claim 11, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 10. Further, Choi teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to when detecting that a charging current of at least one of the first charging line or the second charging line reaches a cutoff current of a battery, disconnect a current charging line from the first charging circuit, and stop charging the battery that reaches the cutoff current (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 is further configured to control the first protection circuit 571 and the second protection circuit 572 to suspend charging of the batteries 531/532 by disconnecting the charging line from the charging circuit and stop charging the battery with a current that reaches a full charge, see ¶ [67-68]).
With respect to dependent claim 12, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 11. Further, Choi teaches wherein the processing module disconnecting a current charging circuit from the first charging circuit, and stops charging for the battery that reaches the cutoff current comprises controlling, by the processing module, to change a first status of the first switch from being turned on to being turned off, and change a second status of the second switch from being turned off to being turned on (In Fig. 5 the processor 599 stops charging of the battery 531/532 that reaches a full charge by turning off the switch in the first protection circuit 572 or the second protection circuit 572 however if the other battery has not reached a full charge condition it’s respective protection circuit switch is kept on, see ¶ [67-68]).
Claims 13-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi, Lee, and Li and further in view of Kim et al. (USPGPN 20200036198; identified by the applicant in the IDS and cited in the European Search Opinion (ESO)).
With respect to dependent claims 13 and 17, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 5 and 16, respectively. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the charging and discharging circuit further comprises a power circuit, and wherein the power circuit is connected to the processing module of the charging and discharging circuit by using the first charging circuit, and is configured to consume power of the battery pack, so that the battery pack is discharged.
Kim teaches wherein the charging and discharging circuit further comprises a power circuit (In Fig. 4 a power management integrated circuit 440).
Kim teaches wherein the power circuit is connected to the processing module of the charging and discharging circuit by using the first charging circuit (In Fig. 4 the power management integrated circuit 440 is connected to the processor 470 by using the charging circuit).
Kim teaches wherein the power circuit is configured to consume power of the battery pack, so that the battery pack is discharged (In ¶ [83, 88] the first battery 410 or the second battery 420 supplies power to the load via power input VSYS which are connected through PMIC 440).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for the power circuit. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic device by adding Kim’s power circuit to supply power to a load from discharging the battery pack, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claim 14, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 13. Further, Choi teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to: in a discharging process of the battery pack, control the first switch to be turned on and the second switch to be turned off, or control the first switch to be turned off and the second switch to be turned on (In ¶ [67-68] the first protection circuit 571 and the second protection circuit 572 turn on and off the respective switches during a discharging process of the batteries 531/532 to avoid over-discharging).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach so that a second voltage difference between a first discharging voltage of the first battery and a second discharging voltage of the second battery is less than or equal to a fifth threshold.
Lee teaches so that a second voltage difference between a first voltage of the first battery and a second voltage of the second battery is less than or equal to a fifth threshold (In Fig. 10 a comparison is made between the voltage difference of the batteries 252/254 has reached a fifth reference. One of ordinary skill understands this may be applied to a discharge process).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for switching first and second protection circuits to balance the batteries. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic apparatus by adding Lee’s switching topology for balancing the batteries, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claim 15, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 14. Further, Choi teaches wherein the processing module is further configured to when detecting that the first discharging voltage of the first battery reaches a first power-off voltage or the second discharging voltage of the second battery reaches a second power-off voltage, disconnect the supply of power from the battery pack (In ¶ [67-68] to avoid an over-discharge situation the first protection circuit 571 and the second protection circuit 572 disconnect the respective batteries 531/532).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach the power circuit.
Kim teaches the power circuit (In Fig. 4 a power management integrated circuit 440).
Choi discloses the claimed invention except for the power circuit. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Choi’s electronic device by adding Kim’s power circuit to supply power to a load from discharging the battery pack, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang et al. (USPGPN 20220209551) teaches an electronic device, a charging method, and a charging system for charging two batteries connected in series. The charging integrated circuit controls, based on a target voltage corresponding to each preset period, a charging mode for charging the two batteries. As a charging process is prolonged, the voltages of the two batteries gradually increase, and the target voltage obtained varies with each period. A turning point of switching from constant current charging to constant voltage charging is determined based on the target voltage, and the target voltage is related to the minimum voltage value of the two batteries in each preset period. The charging mode is adjusted based on the target voltage corresponding to each preset period instead of a fixed target voltage. This reduces a probability of battery overcharging and improves battery charging reliability.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Frank A Silva whose telephone number is (703)756-1698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 09:30 am -06:30 pm 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/FRANK ALEXIS SILVA/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859