Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/967,372

DETERIORATION DIAGNOSIS APPARATUS OF BATTERY AND DETERIORATION DIAGNOSIS METHOD OF BATTERY

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Oct 17, 2022
Examiner
DAVIS, CYNTHIA L
Art Unit
2857
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

73%
Career Allow Rate
139 granted / 190 resolved
Without
With
+13.6%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
36 pending
226
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
§103
40.8%
+0.8% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§112
Response to Amendment This communication is in response to the amendment filed on 7/21/2025. Claims 1-12 are pending. 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. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) 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 at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Independent Claim 1 has been amended to recite “set a discharging lower limit voltage as the predetermined discharging end voltage in response to variations in cell voltages being wider for a first portion of the plurality of cells included in a first cell voltage distribution and a second portion of the plurality of cells included in a second cell voltage distribution of the assembled battery”. However, this claim feature is not supported by the Specification as filed. The cell voltage distributions are discussed in paragraphs [0080]-[0084] of the Specification as filed, with respect to Figs. 5-6. This portion of the Specification merely illustrates the effect of different values of a discharging end voltage Vend in a second assembled battery as compared to a first assembled battery. It is noted in the Specification, regarding Fig. 5, that the variations in cell voltage distributions may be wider in an assembled battery having a discharging end voltage Vend equal to the discharging lower limit voltage, versus Fig. 6, in which the discharging end voltage Vend is higher than the discharging lower limit voltage, so as to avoid over discharging. The Specification does not contain support for setting the discharging lower limit voltage in response to variations in cell voltages being wider for a first portion of the plurality of cells included in a first cell voltage distribution and a second portion of the plurality of cells included in a second cell voltage distribution of the assembled battery as is recited in Claim 1, because there is no discussion anywhere in the Specification of any variations in cell voltages for a first portion of cells and a second portion of cells in the same assembled battery. Independent Claims 9 and 10 recite the same features as Claim 1, and are rejected for the same reasons; Claims 2-8 and 11-12 are rejected due to their dependence on Claim 1. Prior Art of Record The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. Brunet et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0169230) teaches stopping a combustion engine when a voltage level is reached in a battery cell in order to drive an electric machine using the power from the battery cell in paragraph [0035]. Suzuki et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0085010) teaches detecting a voltage stable state of battery cells in order to detect an abnormality of a battery accurately in paragraph [0024]. Matsushima et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0145949) teaches measuring a temperature and discharging current of a battery in the Abstract. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Upon further consideration of the amendments that were proposed in the interview dated 7/18/2025, the amended Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for containing new matter. This new matter was not found in the prior art; however, the Claims cannot be considered to be allowable because the amendments are not supported by the Specification as filed. It is noted that the supported amendments to independent Claims 1, 9 and 10 (i.e., determining stability, and the stopping of the engine) are found in the prior art (see the Brunet and Suzuki references in the Prior Art of Record section, above). It is further noted that features of new Claim 11 are taught by the Abstract of Matsushima et al (see the Prior Art of Record section, above), and the features of new Claim 12 are taught by the BECM of Chikkannanavar (cited in the Non-Final Office Action dated 4/21/2025,, see paragraphs [0017], [0032], [0039]). THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA L DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am to 4pm. 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, Lisa M Caputo can be reached at (571)272-2388. 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. CYNTHIA L. DAVIS Examiner Art Unit 2863 /C.L.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 2863 /LISA M CAPUTO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2863
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 16, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 16, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 21, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Mar 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12574681
SYSTEM FOR REAL-TIME RECOGNITION AND IDENTIFICATION OF SOUND SOURCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560434
ACCELERATION MONITORING DEVICE, ACCELERATION MONITORING METHOD, AND PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12535386
TIRE WEAR CONDITION PREDICTION SYSTEM, TIRE WEAR CONDITION PREDICTION PROGRAM AND TIRE WEAR CONDITION PREDICTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12510362
METHOD FOR DETECTING MALFUNCTIONS IN INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12504440
LOW STRESS OVERTRAVEL STOP
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+13.6%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 190 resolved cases by this examiner