DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/27/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
In the communication filed on 03/27/2026 claims 1-4, 7-10, 13-16, and 19 are pending. Independent claims 1, 9, and 14 have been amended by incorporating the limitations of cancelled dependent claims 5-6, 11-12, and 17-18, respectively. Furthermore, independent claims 1, 9, and 14 now include a new limitation “without” not previously presented thus changing the scope of the invention.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 03/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant in pages 12-15 of the Remarks dated 03/27/2026 argues that Miyake, Matsunaga, and Park fail to teach the newly added limitation in bold “may switch the operating mode to a low-power mode without recalculating the cell balancing time”. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the SOC calculations performed in steps 104 and 109 of Fig. 3 of Miyake could serve as a determining factor for whether a remaining balancing time is to be calculated. It is well known that SOC may be used to determine the need for cell balancing and the duration of such balancing. In this case, in an iteration of Fig. 3 where the system first performs steps S103-S106 prior to performing steps S108-S112, a cell balancing time may be calculated in the SOC calculation step S104 and it may not be calculated in step 107 as a means to speed up system performance. Thus, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have utilized the calculated SOC as a determining factor for whether to calculate a remaining balancing time because doing so would avoid unnecessary balancing time calculations, thereby reducing unnecessary processing while maintaining effective cell balancing.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Matsunaga does not teach or suggest that a high-voltage battery charges both the low-voltage battery and the sub-battery”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims.
In response to applicant’s arguments that “Park performs a new determination and control process after the power off transition, whereas the present application clearly differs in that the cell balancing operation is performed for the remaining time without recalculating the balancing time”, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In this case, Park is not relied upon to teach the normal operating mode or the low operating mode but rather Park is cited to teach a battery module with a plurality of battery cells in which a cell balancing operation is performed and an auxiliary battery configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus as cited in page 9 of the Office Action dated 01/13/2026.
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 and the specification objection to the title are withdrawn due to the amendments.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 15 replace “operates” with --is configured to operate-- and in line 19 replace “switches” with --is configured to switch--. For examination purposes below these limitations will be interpreted as “the controller is configured to operate” and “the controller is configured to switch”, however, appropriate correction is required. Claim 14 is objected to for similar reasons as claim 1 above.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 13-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyake (USPN 10752127), in view of Matsunaga et al. (USPGPN 20190288523), and further in view of Park et al. (Korean Patent KR-20200004160-A).
With respect to independent claims 1 and 9, Miyake teaches a battery management apparatus and method (Figs. 2A and 3; battery controller BC and method).
Miyake teaches comprising a sensor configured to sense an operating state of a target device (Fig. 2B; acquiring unit 11a (i.e., sensor) acquires conditions (i.e., operating state) of the vehicle (i.e., target device), see col. 4 lines 40-47).
Miyake teaches a power manager configured to manage power supply from at least one auxiliary battery based on the operating state of the target device (Fig. 2B; connection control unit 11b (i.e., power manager) manages power flow from auxiliary battery LiB 14 based on the condition of the vehicle, see col. 4 lines 40-67).
Miyake teaches a controller configured to perform a cell balancing operation for a plurality of battery cells according to an operating mode determined based on the operating state of the target device (Fig. 2B; balancing control unit 11d (i.e., controller) configured to perform cell balancing operation for a plurality of battery cells according to operation signal (i.e., operating mode) determined based on the condition of the vehicle, see col. 4 lines 20-25 and lines 40-67).
Miyake teaches wherein, when the target device is in a power-on state, the controller is configured to operate in a normal mode, calculate a cell balancing time for the plurality of battery cells, and perform the cell balancing operation based on the calculated cell balancing time (Fig. 3; in steps S103-S106 the vehicle IG is on thus the system operates in a normal mode of operation, SOC calculation is performed, and cell balancing is performed. It is well understood by an individual of ordinary skill that a cell balancing time may be derived from the determined SOC value).
Miyake teaches wherein, when the target device is switched to a power-off state before the cell balancing operation is terminated, the controller switches the operating mode to a low-power mode without recalculating the cell balancing time and performs the cell balancing operation for a remaining time of the calculated cell balancing time (Fig. 3; following steps S103-S106 the vehicle condition is acquired at step S101 and if the vehicle IG is off the method moves to steps S108-S112 in which cell balancing is performed in a low mode of operation. One of ordinary skill understands the remaining SOC balancing has a remaining time associated with it. Col. 3 lines 59-67 and col. 4 lines 1-6; the switch 12 is operated based on the operating mode/state).
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the SOC calculations performed in steps 104 and 109 of Fig. 3 of Miyake could serve as a determining factor for whether a remaining balancing time is to be calculated. It is well known that SOC may be used to determine the need for cell balancing and the duration of such balancing. In this case, in an iteration of Fig. 3 where the system first performs steps S103-S106 prior to performing steps S108-S112, a cell balancing time may be calculated in the SOC calculation step S104 and it may not be calculated in step 107 as a means to speed up system performance. Thus, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have utilized the calculated SOC as a determining factor for whether to calculate a remaining balancing time because doing so would avoid unnecessary balancing time calculations, thereby reducing unnecessary processing while maintaining effective cell balancing.
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach the at least one auxiliary battery including a first auxiliary battery and a second auxiliary battery; a cell balancing operation for a plurality of battery cells located inside a battery module; wherein the plurality of battery cells are configured to charge the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery based on control by the power manager, wherein the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery are located outside the battery module, and wherein the first auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the target device and the second auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus.
Matsunaga teaches the at least one auxiliary battery including a first auxiliary battery and a second auxiliary battery (Figs. 1 and 4; the low-voltage battery 130/530 and the sub-battery 160/560).
Matsunaga teaches wherein the plurality of battery cells are configured to charge the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery based on control by the power manager (Figs. 1-2 and 4; ¶[12]; the plurality of cells within the high-voltage battery 110/510 are configured to charge the low-voltage battery 130/530 and the sub-battery 160/650 based on control by the equalization and transmission processing part 180).
Matsunaga teaches wherein the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery are located outside the battery module (Figs. 1 and 4; the low-voltage battery 130/530 and the sub-battery 160/560 are located outside the high-voltage battery 110/510).
Matsunaga teaches wherein the first auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the target device (Figs. 1 and 4; ¶ [22]; the low-voltage battery 130 is configured to supply power to the regular load 140).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Miyake’s electric power supply system with Matsunaga’s main-battery and two-auxiliary battery system. The advantage of this being having multiple batteries allows for customizable power solutions, improved power management, and reduced battery strain (see ¶[07-11] of Matsunaga).
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach a cell balancing operation for a plurality of battery cells located inside a battery module; and the second auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus.
Park teaches a cell balancing operation for a plurality of battery cells located inside a battery module (Fig. 1; ¶[35, 37]; a cell balancing operation for a plurality of battery cells 10 located in a battery module).
Park teaches the auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus (Fig. 1; the low-voltage battery 40 is configured to supply power to the controller 30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Park’s cell balancing apparatus and low-voltage battery to power the controller/BMS to Miyake’s electric power supply system in order to apply cell balancing to a plurality of battery cells located within a battery module and to supply power to the BMS from the secondary auxiliary battery. The advantage to this modification being that battery cell balancing is performed in a manner that improves battery efficiency and increases the driving distance of the vehicle by ensuring the necessary circuits are connected during balancing operations (see ¶[24] of Park).
With respect to claim 2, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the power manager operates by using power originating from the battery module comprising the plurality of battery cells, when the target device is in a power-on state (Fig. 3; in step S113 if the ignition is on the connection to the LiB auxiliary battery 14 is maintained with the vehicle (i.e., switch 12 remains closed). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art understands the components of battery controller BC are powered by the high-voltage battery 2 (i.e., battery module)).
With respect to claim 3, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 2. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the at least one auxiliary battery is charged by using the power originating from the battery module, when the power manager is supplied with power from the battery module (Fig. 3; step S113).
With respect to dependent claims 4 and 10, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 9, respectively. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the power manager is supplied with power from the at least one auxiliary battery, when the target device is in a power-off state (Fig. 3; steps S103 and S103 result if the vehicle is in an off state. One of ordinary skill understands when the auxiliary LiB battery 14 is disconnected (i.e., switch 12 is opened) then the components of battery controller BC are powered by LiB 14).
With respect to dependent claims 7 and 13, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 6 and 12, respectively. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the controller is configured to switch the operating mode to the normal mode every preset time and monitor a voltage of the plurality of battery cells in the normal mode to re-calculate the cell balancing time (Fig. 3; the method is iterative in nature and will switch back to a “normal mode” after a preset time in which SOC is calculated. One of ordinary skill understands SOC calculation is voltage dependent and a remaining time is associated with the SOC for balancing purposes).
With respect to claim 8, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the preset time is determined based on at least one of specifications of the target device, characteristics of the plurality of battery cells, and a capacity of the at least one auxiliary battery (Col 1. lines 42-55).
With respect to claim 14, Miyake teaches a battery management system (Fig. 2A; electric power supply system 1).
Miyake teaches a battery comprising a plurality of battery cells and configured to supply power to a target device (Fig. 2A; high-voltage battery 2 supplies power to a vehicle (i.e., target device). One of ordinary skill understands high-voltage battery 2 comprises a plurality of battery cells).
Miyake teaches a battery management apparatus configured to perform a cell balancing operation for the plurality of battery cells according to an operating mode determined based on an operating state of the target device (Fig. 2A; battery controller BC is configured to perform a cell balancing operation according to an operating signal (i.e., operating mode) determined based on a condition (i.e., operating state) of the vehicle).
Miyake teaches generate at least one control command based on the operating state of the target device (Fig. 3; multiple control commands are generated based on the condition of the vehicle).
Miyake teaches a switch (Fig. 2A; switching unit 12).
Miyake teaches wherein, when the target device is in a power-on state, the battery management apparatus operates in a normal mode, calculates a cell balancing time for the plurality of battery cells, and performs the cell balancing operation based on the calculated time (Fig. 3; in steps S103-S106 the vehicle IG is on thus the system operates in a normal mode of operation, SOC calculation is performed, and cell balancing is performed. It is well understood by an individual of ordinary skill that a cell balancing time may be derived from the determined SOC value).
Miyake teaches wherein, when the target device is switched to a power-off state before the cell balancing operation is terminated, the battery management apparatus switches the operating mode to a low-power mode and performs the cell balancing operation for a remaining time of the calculated cell balancing time (Fig. 3; following steps S103-S106 the vehicle condition is acquired at step S101 and if the vehicle IG is off the method moves to steps S108-S112 in which cell balancing is performed in a low mode of operation. One of ordinary skill understands the remaining SOC balancing has a remaining time associated with it. Col. 3 lines 59-67 and col. 4 lines 1-6; the switch 12 is operated based on the operating mode/state).
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the SOC calculations performed in steps 104 and 109 of Fig. 3 of Miyake could serve as a determining factor for whether a remaining balancing time is to be calculated. It is well known that SOC may be used to determine the need for cell balancing and the duration of such balancing. In this case, in an iteration of Fig. 3 where the system first performs steps S103-S106 prior to performing steps S108-S112, a cell balancing time may be calculated in the SOC calculation step S104 and it may not be calculated in step 107 as a means to speed up system performance. Thus, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have utilized the calculated SOC as a determining factor for whether to calculate a remaining balancing time because doing so would avoid unnecessary balancing time calculations, thereby reducing unnecessary processing while maintaining effective cell balancing.
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach a battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells; a switch configured to connect or disconnect a first auxiliary battery of the target device to or from the battery management apparatus in response to the control command; a second auxiliary battery configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus; wherein the plurality of battery cells are configured to charge the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery based on control by the battery management apparatus, wherein the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery are located outside the battery module, and wherein the first auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the target device.
Matsunaga teaches a switch configured to connect or disconnect a first auxiliary battery of the target device to or from the apparatus in response to the control command (Fig. 4; relay 570 connects or disconnects low-voltage battery 530 of the vehicle from the sub-battery 560 side in response to command from a control device, see ¶ [05]).
Matsunaga teaches wherein the plurality of battery cells are configured to charge the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery based on control by the battery management apparatus (Figs. 1-2 and 4; ¶[12]; the plurality of cells within the high-voltage battery 110/510 are configured to charge the low-voltage battery 130/530 and the sub-battery 160/650 based on control by the equalization and transmission processing part 180).
Matsunaga teaches wherein the first auxiliary battery and the second auxiliary battery are located outside the battery module (Figs. 1 and 4; the low-voltage battery 130/530 and the sub-battery 160/560 are located outside the high-voltage battery 110/510).
Matsunaga teaches wherein the first auxiliary battery is configured to supply power to the target device (Figs. 1 and 4; ¶ [22]; the low-voltage battery 130 is configured to supply power to the regular load 140).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Miyake’s electric power supply system with Matsunaga’s main-battery and two-auxiliary battery system. The advantage of this being having multiple batteries allows for customizable power solutions, improved power management, and reduced battery strain (see ¶[07-11] of Matsunaga).
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach a battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells; and a second auxiliary battery configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus.
Park teaches a battery module comprising a plurality of battery cells (Fig. 1; ¶[35]; a plurality of battery cells 10 located in a battery module).
Park teaches an auxiliary battery configured to supply power to the battery management apparatus (Fig. 1; the low-voltage battery 40 is configured to supply power to the controller 30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Park’s cell balancing apparatus and low-voltage battery to power the controller/BMS to Miyake’s electric power supply system in order to apply cell balancing to a plurality of battery cells located within a battery module and to supply power to the BMS from the secondary auxiliary battery. The advantage to this modification being that battery cell balancing is performed in a manner that improves battery efficiency and increases the driving distance of the vehicle by ensuring the necessary circuits are connected during balancing operations (see ¶[24] of Park).
With respect to claim 15, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 14. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the at least one control command includes a first control command, and wherein the battery management apparatus is configured to generate the first control command for opening the switch, when the target device is in a power-off state (Fig. 3; the battery controller BC through control unit 11 generates command signals illustrated in Fig. 3. In step S108 when the vehicle is off the causing the switching unit to open (i.e., for disconnecting LiB). One of ordinary skill understands this to be a command signal (i.e., first command signal)).
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach to disconnect the first auxiliary battery from the battery management apparatus.
Matsunaga teaches to disconnect the first auxiliary battery from the apparatus (Fig. 4; relay 570 disconnects low-voltage battery 530 of the vehicle from the sub-battery 560 side in response to command from a control device, see ¶ [05]. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill understand the switching action to disconnect LiB 14 of Miyake using the 3-battery system of Matsunaga would actually result in the first auxiliary battery being disconnected. In this case the first auxiliary battery being the low-voltage battery 530 and the second auxiliary battery being the sub-battery 560).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Miyake’s electric power supply system with Matsunaga’s main-battery and two-auxiliary battery system. The advantage of this being having multiple batteries allows for customizable power solutions, improved power management, and reduced battery strain (see ¶[07-11] of Matsunaga).
With respect to claim 16, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 15. Further, Miyake teaches wherein the at least one control command further includes a second control command, and wherein the battery management apparatus is configured to generate the second control command for closing the switch when the target device is in the power-off state, and the second auxiliary battery is charged using power originating from the battery module when the switch is closed (Fig. 3; in steps S106 and S111 the auxiliary LiB battery 14 is connected thus being charged by the high-voltage battery 2. One of ordinary skill understands switching unit 12 is closed).
With respect to claim 19, Miyake teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Miyake teaches comprising a switch including a first port connected to the first auxiliary battery (Fig. 2A; switching unit 12).
Miyake teaches the switch being configured to supply power to the apparatus when the switch is closed (Col. 3 lines 59-67 and col. 4 lines 1-6; the switch 12 is operated based on the operating mode/state thus one of ordinary skill understands the power flows in the circuit upon operation of the switch to deliver power to apparatuses/loads).
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach a second port connected to the second auxiliary battery and the battery management apparatus.
Matsunaga teaches a second port connected to the second auxiliary battery (Figs. 1 and 4; the second port of the sub-battery 160/560 is connected to the relay/switch 170/570).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Miyake’s electric power supply system with Matsunaga’s main-battery and two-auxiliary battery system. The advantage of this being having multiple batteries allows for customizable power solutions, improved power management, and reduced battery strain (see ¶[07-11] of Matsunaga).
However, Miyake fails to explicitly teach a second port connected to the battery management apparatus.
Park teaches a second port connected to the battery management apparatus (Fig. 1; a second port of the low-voltage battery 40 is connected to the controller 30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Park’s cell balancing apparatus and low-voltage battery to power the controller/BMS to Miyake’s electric power supply system in combination with Matsunaga’s two auxiliary battery system. The advantage to this modification being that battery cell balancing is performed in a manner that improves battery efficiency and increases the driving distance of the vehicle by ensuring the necessary circuits are connected during balancing operations (see ¶[24] of Park).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The additional prior art identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) were considered by the examiner, however, for examination purposes were not relied upon for citation purposes.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights