DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment filed on March 16, 2026 has been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1, 2, 4-12, and 16-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 12, “each of the plurality of set correction sections includes a same
SOC interval including an inflection point of the plurality of inflection points” is not described in the original disclosure. Fig. 7 shows correction sections IP1, IP2, IP3 having the SOC intervals of same size. However, Fig. 7 does not show the correction sections include a same SOC interval.
Claim 20, “the SOC interval is approximately 10%” is not described d by the original disclosure. Rather, Fig 7 shows IP1 at 10% SOC.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 20, “the SOC interval is approximately 10%” is unclear in view of Fig. 7. Fig. 7 shows IP1 at 10% SOC.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Pursuant to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (MPEP 2106), the following analysis is made:
Under step 1 of the Guidance, the claims fall within a statutory category.
Under step 2A, prong 1, claims 1, 12, and 13 recite an abstract idea of “estimate battery information including an open circuit voltage (OCV) and a state of charge (SOC) for a battery cell based on at least one of a voltage and a current of the battery cell” (mathematical concept), “generate a SOC profile representing a correspondence between the OCV and the SOC” (evaluation, mental process), “determine an inflection point in the received SOC profile (evaluation, mental process), “set a correction section in the SOC profile to include the inflection point when at least one inflection point exists in the SOC profile” (evaluation, mental process, claims 1, 12), and “correct the SOC profile by linearizing the set correction section” (mental process, claims 1, 12), “set a correction section in the SOC profile based on the OCV or the SOC corresponding to the inflection point when at least one inflection point exists in the SOC profile (evaluation, mental process, claim 13), :correct the SOC profile multiple times while changing a size of the correction section” (mental process, claim 13), “calculate a SOC error for each of the plurality of corrected SOC profiles based on a reference profile” (mathematical concept, claim 13), “select a target SOC profile having a minimum calculated SOC error among the plurality of corrected SOC profiles” (evaluation, mental process, claim 13), “set the selected target SOC profile as a criterion profile for the battery cell” (evaluation, mental process, claim 13), “wherein a plurality of inflection points exist in the SOC profile, … set[ting] the correction section for each of the plurality of inflection points and linearize the plurality of set correction sections independently” (mental process, mathematical process), “wherein each of the plurality of set correction sections includes a same SOC interval including an inflection point of the plurality of inflection points” (abstract data, claims 1, 12), “wherein the inflection point of the plurality of inflection points is located at a midpoint of the SOC interval” (abstract data, claims 1, 12).
The nominal recitation of a generic processor (processors, controller) does not take the claim limitation out of the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) (III).
Under step 2A, prong 2, the claim limitations are not integrated into a practical application (MPEP 2106.04(d)(I)). Receiving OCV, SOC data are directed to insignificant extra solution activities of data gathering (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). “[T]he corrected SOC profile is used to control charging and/or discharging of the battery cell” merely recites an intended use of the abstract idea. The corrected SOC profile has not yet been used/applied to control charging/discharging of the battery cell, thus, the corrected SOC profile has not yet been used/applied in a meaningful way (MPEP 2106.05(e)).
Under step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(A)). Receiving OCV, SOC data are directed to well-known, routine, and conventional features known in the industry (see Ruan et al. US 2020/0371162, step 104, Fig. 4, Park et al. US 2021/0048481, S100, Fig. 1).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea.
The remaining dependent claims do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea.
Claims 2, 4-10, 14, 15, 17, and 20 are directed to an abstract idea/data.
Claim 11 is directed to well-known, routine, and conventional features known in the industry (see Ruan et al. US 2020/0371162, Abstract, Title; Zhou et a. CN 112130084, Abstract).
Claims 16-18 are directed to conventional extra-solution activities of data gathering.
Claim 19 is directed to a generic processor.
Accordingly, claims 1, 12, and 13 and their respective dependent claims 2, 4-11, and 14-20 are patent ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Prior Art Note
Claims 1, 2, and 4-20 do not have prior art rejections.
The combination as claimed wherein a battery management apparatus comprising correcting the SOC profile multiple times while changing a size of the correction section (claims 5, 13) or each of the plurality of set correction sections includes a same SOC interval including an inflection point of the plurality of inflection points (claims 1. 12) is not disclosed, suggested, or made obvious by the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed on March 16, 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
With respect to the rejections under 35 USC 101, Applicants argue “the independent claims have been amended to recite "wherein the corrected SOC profile is used to control charging and/or discharging of the battery cell." Therefore, the claims have been amended to include a practical application.”
Examiner’s position is that controlling charging and/or discharging of the battery cell is interpreted as an intended use of the corrected SOC profile. Thus, the corrected SOC profile has not been used/applied in a meaningful way such that the claims are indicative of integration into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(e)).
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 USC 103 have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (CN 111208439) discloses a SOC profile where each of the plurality of set correction sections includes an SOC interval including an inflection point of inflection points (Fig. 5’s).
Zhang et al. (CN 110931901) discloses variable scaling the input voltage Vin according to the remaining electric quantity SOC change condition by nonlinear transformation model to obtain the output voltage Vout, so that the output voltage Vout and the battery group of the remaining electric quantity SOC are in linear relationship (page 3, paragraph 4).
However, the references above do not disclose each of the plurality of set correction sections includes a same SOC interval including an inflection point.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Nghiem whose telephone number is (571)272-2277. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MICHAEL P NGHIEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 May 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights