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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the
references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although
the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the
specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It
is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the
references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as
the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The entire
reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims &
only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give
the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure.
Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was
referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is
broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are
provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the
examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the
intent & spirit of compact prosecution.
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.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dougherty et al. US 20030236656 A1 (2002) [herein “Dougherty”], in view of Zheng et al. “A simplification of the time-domain equivalent circuit model for lithium-ion batteries based on low-frequency electrochemical impedance spectra” (2021) [herein “Zheng”], and in view of Horowitz et al. “E40M RC Circuits and Impedance” (2017) [herein “Horowitz”].
Regarding Claim 1, Dougherty teaches
A battery simulator comprising:
a circuit simulator that simulates an operation of an RC parallel circuit which is an equivalent circuit of a battery to be monitored; and
“The present invention relates to a battery characterization system and method. More particularly, the present invention relates to a simulation circuit for characterizing and simulating the operation of batteries”. (003).
“The system and method may provide the ability to monitor the charge state of the battery in battery-operated and hybrid vehicles.” (0067).Dougherty shows circuits equivalent of batteries to be monitored and characterized.
Dougherty does not explicitly teach but Zheng teaches,
an RC parallel circuit optimization device that optimizes the RC parallel circuit based on a monitoring frequency of the battery,
“Firstly, we propose a method for the ECMs, which combines the model parameters identification in the frequency-domain and the model accuracy verification in the time-domain. Based on the full-frequency EIS (1kHz-0.01 Hz), we establish the FECM and use the EIS to identify the model parameters.”. (Conclusions).
Zheng shows a way to optimize circuits parameters based on the frequency of a battery.
Dougherty and Zheng do not teach but Horowitz teaches,
wherein the RC parallel circuit optimization device is configured to:
delete a capacitance value of the RC parallel circuit when the monitoring frequency is determined to be a low frequency, and
“At low frequencies (F ≈ 0) and a capacitor behaves like an open circuit. Thus, if we are doing a “DC” analysis of a circuit (voltages and currents), capacitors are modeled as open circuits.”. (Slide 17).
Horowitz shows that, at low frequencies, certain circuit components can be ignored in circuit theory.
delete resistance and capacitance values of the RC parallel circuit when the monitoring frequency is determined to be a high frequency.
“At very high frequencies (F ≈ infinity) and a capacitor behaves like a short circuit.”. (Slide 17).
Horowitz shows that, at high frequencies, certain circuit components can be ignored in circuit theory.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective
filing date of the applicants claimed invention to combine Dougherty, Zheng, and Horowitz. Dougherty discloses a simulator that is a circuit equivalent of a battery for use in monitoring. Zheng discloses a circuit optimizer based on the frequency of a circuit equivalent battery. As Zheng states “ECMs are the most widely used battery model for on-line applications [9], because the method is simple, and the precision is high. Common ECMs include the first-order RC model, PNGV model, Thevenin model, n-order RC model. By identifying model parameters through limited dynamic conditions... To solve the problem of dependence on time-domain working conditions and improve the accuracy and stability of the full-cycle modeling of lithium batteries, it is critical to establish the ECM based on EIS.”. Combining these teachings of Dougherty’s battery simulator with Zheng’s circuit optimizer based on frequency would allow a PHOSITA with the ability to apply a frequency-based optimizations to the circuit equivalent battery simulator for optimization.
A PHOSITA would have been further motivated to add Horowitz’s circuit theory that allows ignoring components based on frequency to speed up analysis and simplify simulation. Horowitz states “There’s a new and very different approach for analyzing RC circuits, based on the “frequency domain.” This approach will turn out to be very powerful for solving many problems.”. Combining with Dougherty’s teaching “…simple models with fewer model parameters may fit better. In addition, the computational burden of BMS is lowered, so simpler ECM can be widely used in vehicle applications." would lead to improved performance in a combination of Dougherty-Zheng-Horowitz by allowing the removal of components to simplify and speed up the simulation of the battery.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dougherty et al. US 20030236656 A1 (2002) [herein “Dougherty”], in view of Zheng et al. “A simplification of the time-domain equivalent circuit model for lithium-ion batteries based on low-frequency electrochemical impedance spectra” (2021) [herein “Zheng”], in view of Horowitz et al. “E40M RC Circuits and Impedance” (2017) [herein “Horowitz”], and in view of Cleaver et al. “Lesson 15. Frequency Response, Filters, and Resonance” (2021) [herein “Cleaver”].
Regarding Claim 2, Dougherty , Zheng, and Horowitz do not explicitly teach but Cleaver teaches
The battery simulator according to claim 1, wherein the RC parallel circuit optimization device determines whether the monitoring frequency is a low frequency or a high frequency based on 1/RC, where R is a resistance value and C is a capacitance value of the RC parallel circuit.
“Below is a circuit for an RC low-pass filter. It tends to pass low frequency signals and block high frequency signals.”. (Low Pass Filter Section, Page 1).
“ωc = 1/RC This is the so-called cutoff frequency…”. (Low Pass Filter, Page 2).
“A high-pass filter tends to block low frequency signals and pass high frequency signals.”. (High Pass Filter Section, Page 4).
“The cutoff frequency of the high-pass filter is calculated exactly the same as for the low-pass filter: ωc = 1/RC “. (High Pass Filter Section, Page 4).
Cleaver shows determining if a frequency gets filtered in to a low or high frequency based on a threshold.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to combine Cleaver, and the Dougherty-Zheng-Horowitz combination to use the circuit theory of Cleaver with the implementation of frequency-based battery simulation of Dougherty-Zheng-Horowitz to have a more robust determination of high, intermediate, and low frequencies for discernment of what components to not use in the simulation (Cleaver, Pages 1, 2, and 4).
Regarding Claim 3, Cleaver teaches
The battery simulator according to claim 2, wherein the RC 25 parallel circuit optimization device does not optimize the RC parallel circuit when it is determined that the monitoring frequency is neither a low frequency nor a high frequency.
“Band pass filters are intended to block low and high frequencies, while allowing signals in a midrange of frequencies to pass through without attenuation.”. (Band Pass Filter, Page 6).
Cleaver shows determining if a frequency does not meet the high or low threshold allowing it to pass through and not be blocked.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to combine Cleaver, and the Dougherty-Zheng-Horowitz combination to use the circuit theory of Cleaver with the implementation of frequency-based battery simulation of Dougherty-Zheng-Horowitz to have a more robust determination of high, intermediate, and low frequencies for discernment of what components to not use in the simulation (Cleaver, page 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Reference Dougherty teaches a battery simulator with an equivalent circuit of the battery.
Reference Zheng teaches a circuit optimizer based on the battery frequency.
Reference Horowitz teaches deleting / ignoring components based on the frequency of the circuit.
Reference Cleaver teaches applying filters based on thresholds to determine high, intermediate, and low frequencies of circuits.
For claim 4, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, teaches the limitation “RC parallel circuit includes k (k is an integer of 2 or more)” and “1/RC from each of k RC parallel circuits and a ratio of two 1/RC”.
For claim 5, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, teaches the limitation “monitoring frequency is larger than a value obtained by multiplying a maximum value of the calculated k 1/RC by a second threshold value” and “of the k RC parallel circuits”.
For claim 6, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, teaches the limitation “monitoring frequency is smaller than a value obtained by 25 multiplying a minimum value of the calculated k 1/RC by a third threshold value” and “deletes the capacitance value of the k RC parallel circuits”.
For claim 7, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, teaches the limitation “calculated k 1/RC are arranged in a descending order of values, and the monitoring frequency is between 1/(Rn-1*Cn-1) and 1/(Rn * Cn) (2 n-k), the RC parallel circuit optimization device deletes C1 to Cn-2, Cn+1 to Ck and Rn+1 to Rk”.
For claim 8, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, teaches the limitation “RC parallel circuit optimization device sets the k RC parallel circuits as one RC parallel circuit, and wherein the one RC parallel circuit includes a resistor having a sum value of the resistance values of the k RC circuits and a capacitance having a sum value of the capacitance values of the k RC circuits”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure. KR 102171199 B1 by WON et al, JP 2010267570 A by MAKINOUCHI et al, WO 0115023 A1 by Bai et al, and US 20160012168 A1 by Chen et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NARCISO EDUARDO MONTES whose telephone number is (571)272-5773. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at (571) 272-3676. 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.
/N.E.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2189
/REHANA PERVEEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2189