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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 14-15 are pending. Claims 1, 2, and 14 are amended (dated 04/29/2025). Claims 6, 7, and 13 were previously cancelled. (Claims dated 12/05/2025)
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, dated 04/29/2026, are accepted.
Applicant’s arguments dated 04/29/2026 have been fully considered.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (b)
With regard to rejection of under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (b) in previous office action (Non-final Rejection, dated 01/29/2026), with specific attention to use of the terms involved “charge-related elements” found to render Claim 1 to be indefinite, with Claims 2-5, and 7-15 also rejected by direct or indirect dependency to Claim 1, Examiner finds amendments have remedied the issue. Rejection of Claims 1-5 and 7-15 is withdrawn, where Examiner notes Claims 7 and 13 are presently cancelled.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
With regard to rejection of Claims 1-5 and 7-15 under 35 USC § 103, Examiner has considered Applicant’s arguments. With attention specifically to independent Claim 1, as currently amended, Examiner notes Applicant’s assertion that best prior art as identified in previous office by FAN (CN 105548763), LEE (KR 20180099286), and SHIN (20200180438), fail to teach or suggest inventive features of the presently claimed invention, namely “based on determining that the first voltage is not zero, the second mode is not implemented”. Applicant specifically argues FAN fails to disclose implementation of first mode or second mode, a deficiency not accounted by for with reference by LEE. This argument is emphasized further (Remarks Pg8-9/11), based on differences between LEE Fig. 3 and instant application Fig. 4. Examiner notes the cited limitation has not been considered previously, such that the amendment requires further search and evaluation to determine whether or not claimed invention differentiates over prior art. Examiner respectfully notes, the limitation recited in Applicant’s argument (Pg6/11, ¶8-9), including specifically “first voltage is not zero” is directed to amended language Claim 1 limitations not previously considered, necessitating further search, evaluation and new grounds of rejection. Based on this further consideration, amended limitation is found in prior art and discussed in detail below with new grounds of rejection under U.S.C. 35 §103 over obvious combination of prior art.
Applicant further argues reference by LEE, as presented by the examiner in previous office action, contains a mistranslation. (Remarks Pg7/11, ¶2) After further review, Examiner agrees with Applicant’s argument, the translation of LEE used in previous office action is mistranslated, i.e., LEE discloses invention related to slow charging. Therefore, Lee fails to provide teaching related to the fast-charging inspection requirements. However, based further search and evaluation as necessitated by amendments and arguments relating to other references (as discussed below), Examiner finds prior art by JUNG (US 20200189416 A1) does teach two mode charging, as explained in detail below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over JUNG (US 20200189416 A1) in view of LEE (KR 20180099286 A)* and LIM (US 20200276908 A1), and further in view of ICHIKAWA (US 20190356139 A1).
*REVISED translation provided
With respect to Claim 1, JUNG teaches:
A charging function inspection apparatus comprising: an inspection connector connectable to a vehicle to supply a communication signal and a power signal to the vehicle, (JUNG is in same technical field, [0002]: “relate to a communication device that controls data transmission and reception, a charging cable (i.e. an inspection connector) that communicates with the communication device (i.e., “communication signal”) and transmits charging power (i.e., “a power signal”) to a vehicle, and a method of controlling the charging cable and the communication device for performing communication with each other.”; and FIG. 5 with [0148]: “first controller 233 may diagnose a failure (i.e., “inspection”) of various operations related to the charging of the vehicle 1 and store diagnostic information”)
the inspection connector comprising a slow charging function of the vehicle and a quick charging function of the vehicle; (JUNG, [0024]: “charging cable may further include: a connector provided with the plurality of pins”; [0073] “charger may include a high-speed charger 117 (i.e., “quick charging function”) for quick charging the battery and a slow-speed charger 118 (i.e., “slow charging function”) for charging the battery to a slower rate than a rapid charging rate.”, further [0075]: “high-speed charger 117 for quick charging and the slow-speed charger 118 for the slow charging…at the same location on the exterior parts 110 of the vehicle 1. That is, the vehicle 1 may include only one charger integrally provided in the exterior parts 110 of the vehicle 1. In this case, the one charger may be equipped with a high-speed charging inlet and a slow-speed charging inlet.”; and as above, FIG. 5 with [0148].)
an inspection controller configured to determine whether a charging function of a battery of the vehicle is normal based on a connection of the inspection connector, (JUNG, [0016]: “controls communication with a charging object connected through the plurality of pins, controls charging of the charging object and monitors the charging”; and [0025]: “communication device includes…controller configured to…identify a communication enabled state with the charging cable” (i.e., “based on a connection of the inspection connector”); also see Fig. 6 with [0092]: “control box 230 of the charging cable 2 may determine whether the connector 210 of the charging cable 2 is connected to the charging inlet 118c of the vehicle 1 based on the signal of the proximity detection pin PD”; [0096] The control box 230 of the charging cable may perform a communication mode for monitoring a state of charge (SOC) of the battery of the vehicle 1 based on the signal of the control pilot pin CP…control box 230 of the charging cable 2 may receive the charging information of the battery of the vehicle 1 during charging” (i.e., “determine whether a charging function of a batter of the vehicle is normal”))
inspection controller is further configured to: place the vehicle in an inspection mode, (JUNG, [0098]: “when the charging cable 2 is connected between the vehicle 1 and the charger such as a charging station, the vehicle 1 may also possible to perform the communication mode for mutual monitoring between the vehicle 1 and the charger.”(i.e., “place the vehicle in an inspection mode))
continuously implement a slow charging mode and a quick charging mode (JUNG, as above, [0024] and [0073] (i.e., “slow charging mode and a quick charging mode”); and [0031]: “controller may transmit data for updating at a predetermined time interval…receive a response signal from the charging cable at the predetermined time interval” and [0037]: “data for updating to the charging cable may include transmitting the data for updating at a predetermined time interval; determining whether a response signal is received from the charging cable at the predetermined time interval; and maintaining transmission of the data for updating (i.e., “continuously implement”)”; Examiner interprets “continuously implement” as analogous to reference teaching of “maintaining transmission of data for updating” and “predetermined time interval” to mean an on-going real time process, as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.)
JUNG does not explicitly teach:
inspection connector comprising a first portion for inspecting a slow charging function of the vehicle and a second portion for inspecting a quick charging function of the vehicle;
implement a slow charging inspection mode and a quick charging inspection mode using the first portion and the second portion;
wherein during the quick charging inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to: implement a first mode to turn off a charging-related element after forced activation of the charging-related element;
determine whether a first voltage of the charging-related element is zero after the charging-related element is turned off;
implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero;
the inspection controller is further configured to, in the second mode, turn on the charging-related element, determine a second voltage of the charging-related element, and determine that the charging-related element normally operates based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero,
based on determining that the first voltage is not zero, the second mode is not implemented.
LEE teaches:
inspection connector comprising a portion for inspecting a slow charging function of the vehicle and portion for inspecting a quick charging function of the vehicle; (LEE is in same technical field, [0001]: “relates to a bidirectional charging and discharging method and apparatus for an electric vehicle”; [0041]: “communication protocol used in a combo (Combined Charging System, Combo) method, which is a charging standard for an electric vehicle (EV), in which a normal charging (i.e. “slow charging”) and a rapid charging (i.e. “quick charging”) can be performed by a single connector”; Examiner interprets “first portion” and “second portion” to mean generally any connector capable of carrying out two charging functions, analogous to reference using a single connector with guidance using Howard v: Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. a64 (1893), see discussion below.)
implement a slow charging inspection mode and a quick charging inspection mode; (LEE, as above, [0041]: “communication protocol used in a combo (Combined Charging System, Combo) method, which is a charging standard for an electric vehicle (EV), in which a normal charging (i.e. slow charging) and a rapid charging (i.e. quick charging) can be performed by a single connector”; also [0044]: “charger failure diagnosis method includes a step (12) of entering a charging sequence…when the main relay connected to the charging sequence is connected, the high-voltage battery connection state is checked (i.e., “inspection mode”) by measuring the high-voltage battery voltage and the slow charging voltage” (i.e., “implement…inspection mode”))
wherein during the inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to: implement a first mode to turn off a charging-related element after forced activation of the charging-related element; (LEE, FIG. 3 with [0063]: “vehicle charger failure diagnosis method includes comparing (36) a battery voltage to an output voltage of a charger before starting a charging operation of the battery mounted in the vehicle…when the charger is forcibly driven (i.e., “forced activation”), and determining a failure region according to a result of the comparison…terminating the charging operation (i.e., “turn off a charging related element”)” ; Applying BRI and plain meaning, Examiner interprets “charging-related element” to mean generally any component related to performing a charging function, as guided by specification in at least FIG.3 and [0039], where a general list of components including at least a high voltage battery, relays and connectors is recited. Examiner’s interpretation using BRI and plain meaning is guided by specification in at least [0050] and FIG.5, element C1 (broken lines), to mean generally “terminate” is equivalent to open circuit analogous to reference step of “terminating the charging operation”.)
the inspection controller is further configured to, in the second mode, turn on the charging-related element, (LEE, FIG. 3 and [0061]: “when the difference between the high voltage battery voltage and the charger output voltage exceeds a predetermined threshold value (i.e., “inspection”)…enters the forced drive mode (i.e., “second mode”)” of the charger. At this time, the charger performs output current control”; and as above, FIGs 1, 3, with [0063]: “vehicle charger failure diagnosis method includes comparing (36) a battery voltage to an output voltage of a charger before starting a charging operation (i.e., “turn on charging related element”) of the battery mounted in the vehicle”; Examiner notes terms “second mode” is interpreted using guidance from specification in at least [0023] as being “used to describe various components…used only for distinguishing one component from other components” and analogous to distinguishable, conditional steps as taught by reference.)
determine a second voltage of the charging-related element, and determine that the charging-related element normally operates based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero, (LEE, FIG.1 with [0044]: “charger failure diagnosis method includes a step (12) of entering a charging sequence, a step (14) of connecting a main relay, a step of comparing whether a difference between a battery voltage and a charger output voltage (i.e., “determining a second voltage”) is smaller than a predetermined threshold value…when the main relay connected to the charging sequence is connected, the high-voltage battery connection state is checked by measuring the high-voltage battery voltage and the slow charging voltage”; further, [0045]: “difference between the high-voltage battery voltage and the constant-speed charger output voltage is within the predetermined threshold (i.e., “non zero”), the high-voltage battery is normally connected and the slow charger performs charging (i.e., “normally operates”); Examiner notes reference to “threshold value” is a value >0 (i.e., “non-zero”), depicted in FIG.4 second graph.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG, to include and inspection connector comprising a first portion for inspecting a slow charging function of the vehicle and a second portion for inspecting a quick charging function of the vehicle, continuously implement a slow charging inspection mode and a quick charging inspection mode using the first portion and the second portion, wherein during the quick charging inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to implement a first mode to turn off a charging-related element after forced activation of the charging-related element, and in the second mode, turn on the charging-related element and to determine a second voltage of the charging-related element, and determine that the charging-related element normally operates based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero, as taught by LEE because these steps would add integrity and value to the invention of JUNG with the use of trusted and proven components, such as the combination connection disclosed by LEE, and charging processes which are well understood. Additionally, the invention of LEE, disclosing The combination of LEE with JUNG would be understood as an obvious improvement in efficiency, reliability and accuracy for a charging inspection device/process.
Lee discloses a single connector that performs the function of the first portion and second portion as claimed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the single connector of Lee in the invention of Jung, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v: Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. a64 (1893). This would give the advantage of improving charging monitoring using a simplified architecture.
JUNG, as modified by LEE and taught above, does not explicitly teach:
determine whether a first voltage of the charging-related element is zero after the charging-related element is turned off;
implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero;
based on determining that the first voltage is not zero, the second mode is not implemented.
LIM teaches:
determine whether a first voltage of the charging-related element is zero after the charging-related element is turned off; (LIM is in same technical field, [0001] “relates to an electric vehicle charging controller”, and FIGs 2,4 with [0055]: “electric vehicle charging controller 100…includes a communication unit 120, a charging control device 200”; Abstract: “a second sensor for measuring a third voltage value between the electric vehicle charging equipment and the relay in the high voltage line (i.e., “charging-related element”)”; Examiner interprets designation of “first” as analogous to reference, as a generalized numbering scheme for identification and as such is analogous to reference voltage measurement of a “charging related element” as part of a diagnostic method. Such interpretation is supported by guidance from specification in at least [00221]; further, [0071]: “control unit controls the relay 300 to be turned off, and then compares the difference between the voltage values of the front end and the rear end of the relay 300 obtained through the first sensor 210 and the second sensor 220” and [0085]: “when the control unit controls the relay 300 to be turned off, if the relay 300 is normally turned off, the difference between the second voltage value and the third voltage value may be measured…the relay 300 may be diagnosed as being normally turned off regardless of whether the first battery 14 is in a normal state (60 V) or a defective state (0 V).”; As required, Examiner interprets “charging-related element is zero” applying BRI and plain meaning with guidance from specification in at least [0050], reciting “”, to be analogous to “defective state (0 V)” as in reference teaching.;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify JUNG, as modified by LEE and taught above, to include determining whether a first voltage of the charging-related element is zero after the charging-related element is turned off, as taught by LIM because this would provide an additional level of reliability in determining the normal function of a charging process to provide a more complete diagnostic method for a battery charging system. One of ordinary skill would understand implications of the voltage equal to zero once the charging circuit was disconnected as an indication of circuit status.
JUNG, as modified by LEE and LIM as taught above, does not teach:
implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero;
based on determining that the first voltage is not zero, the second mode is not implemented.
ICHIKAWA teaches:
implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero; (ICHIKAWA is in same technical area, [0001]: “relates to an electric circuit and a diagnosis method” and [0017]: “circuit may further include a first bidirectional switch configured to cut a charging or discharging current of the first storage cell unit” (i.e., related to battery charging), also [0014]: “circuit may further include a control unit (140) configured to switch between a first connection mode…and a second connection mode”; FIG. 5 with [0121]: “ECU 140 sets a diagnosis condition of Diagnosis Item 0 (SA01) and first performs diagnosis of Diagnosis Item 0 immediately after an initiation operation is detected…ECU 140 determines whether the PDU power supply side (i.e., “charging related element”) terminal voltage is within a desired voltage range… expected value of the PDU power supply side terminal voltage in State 0 is 0 V (volts). The ECU 140 determines that there is no abnormality in the result of the diagnosis”; and see [0119-23] “State2: [0123]: “causes the control state from State 1 to transition State 2, sets the diagnosis condition of Diagnosis Item 2 (SA21), and performs diagnosis of Diagnosis Item 2. The ECU 140 maintains the conductive state of the switch 1213P in the battery 121, sets the contactor 116 to the conductive state (ON)”; Examiner notes meaning of “implement second mode” to mean (as recited above: “in the second mode, turn on the charging-related element”) to “turn on” the charging circuit, analogous to method steps of reference “contactor…to the conductive state (ON)”, when there is no abnormality as indicated by the “0 V” value.)
based on determining that the first voltage is not zero the second mode is not implemented. (Refer to FIGs 5,6, flow chart step SA63, with description [00119-127] “State1”-“State 6”, and [0128] After any process ends among SA04, SA14, SA24, SA34, SA44, and SA54, the ECU 140 determines that there is abnormality in the diagnosis result of the diagnosis item of any process and performs a predetermined fail-safe process… After the ECU 140 ends the process, the ECU 140 ends the series of processes showed in the drawings (i.e. “second mode is not implemented”)”; Examiner notes “fail safe process is labeled as “SA63 in FIG. 6, and mislabeled in [0128] as “SA62”. Examiner interprets “second mode is not implemented” based on previous limitations, applying BRI and plain meaning, to general mean the charging circuit is not connected, or remains disconnected, equivalent to reference teaching of “fail safe mode”; Examiner further notes interpretation of numbering of modes as above, based on specification to generally indicated distinct steps or processes.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify JUNG, as modified by LEE and LIM and as taught above, to include the steps of implementing a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero and based on determining that the first voltage is not zero, the second mode is not implemented, as taught by ICHIKAWA because it would be seen as an advantageous improvement to the invention disclosed by JUNG and modified by LEE and LIM. One of ordinary skill would find it obvious to combine the teaching of checking for a measurement of zero volts prior to initiating charging, with the charging system and method of JUNG, as modified by LI and LIM without additional components, as a way to ensure contactors are not welded shut, and avoid potential safety issues and/or equipment damage. One of ordinary skill would also see the combination as obvious to provide a level of isolation monitoring that would prevent a charging system from engaging a charging process if a short to ground or leakage is detected.
With regard to Claim 2, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
JUNG further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller is further configured to communicate with a vehicle charging management system including a charging controller operatively controlling charge-related elements the charging-related element of the vehicle and communicable with the inspection controller. (JUNG, as above, [0002] “relate to a communication device that controls data transmission and reception, a charging cable that communicates with the communication device (i.e., “communication signal”) and transmits charging power to a vehicle, and a method of controlling the charging cable (i.e., “charging related element”) and the communication device for performing communication with each other (i.e., “communicate with a vehicle charging management system”)”; and FIG. 5 with [0148]: “first controller 233 may diagnose a failure (i.e., “inspection”) of various operations related to the charging of the vehicle 1 and store diagnostic information”; Examiner notes interpretation, as above, “charging function inspection apparatus” using BRI and plain meaning as analogous to reference component “controller 233” in combination with other components as depicted in FIG. 5.)
With regard to Claim 3, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
JUNG further teaches:
the inspection connector is connected to a charging port of the vehicle for charging the battery. (JUNG, [0002] “relate to a communication device that controls data transmission and reception, a charging cable that communicates with the communication device (i.e., “communication signal”) and transmits charging power (i.e., “a power signal”) to a vehicle”, further, [0007]: “when the plug of the charging cable is connected from an outlet of the commercial power and a connector of the charging cable is connected to a charging port of the vehicle, the vehicle is supplied with the commercial power through the charging cable.”)
With regard to Claim 4, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
JUNG further teaches:
an input unit for inputting an inspection-related request to the inspection controller; and an output unit for displaying an inspection state implemented according to the request. (JUNG, [0018]; “charging cable may further include: a signal outputter configured to output either a signal corresponding to the data input from the data transmitter or the PWM signal input from the CP outputter”; and [0019] “signal outputter may include a first input terminal to which the CP outputter is connected, a second input to which the data transmitter is connected, and an output terminal coupled to the control pilot pin”; and [0034]: “communication device may further include: a display configured to display at least one of communication information and update information with an interface”)
With regard to Claim 5, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 2.
JUNG further teaches: inspection controller is further configured to: transmit an inspection request to the charging controller; (JUNG, as above, [0002]; and [0272] The charging cable 2 may output the PWM signal having the duty ratio of 20% as a communicable response signal for a communication request of the communication device 3 to the communication device 3”)
control the charging controller to execute one of the quick charging inspection mode and the slow charging inspection mode of the battery; (JUNG, [0014]: “provide a communication device and a method of controlling the communication device for transmitting either a first voltage for recognizing a connection state or a second voltage for recognizing an update mode to the charging cable, and a charging cable and a method of controlling the charging cable for determining whether to perform the update mode based on a voltage value received from the communication device”; and [0073]: “charger may include a high-speed charger 117 for quick charging the battery and a slow-speed charger 118 for charging the battery to a slower rate than a rapid charging rate”)
in response to determining that one of the inspection mode implemented first is normal, control the charging controller to execute a remaining inspection mode of the quick charging inspection mode and the slow charging inspection mode. (JUNG, as above, [0073]: “charger may include a high-speed charger 117 for quick charging the battery and a slow-speed charger 118 for charging the battery to a slower rate than a rapid charging rate”, and [0016]: “controls communication with a charging object connected through the plurality of pins, controls charging of the charging object and monitors the charging”; and [0025]: “communication device includes…controller configured to…identify a communication enabled state with the charging cable” (i.e., “based on a connection of the inspection connector”); also, Fig. 6 with [0092]: “control box 230 of the charging cable 2 may determine whether the connector 210 of the charging cable 2 is connected to the charging inlet 118c of the vehicle 1 based on the signal of the proximity detection pin PD”. [0096]: “control box 230 of the charging cable may perform a communication mode for monitoring a state of charge (SOC) … may receive the charging information of the battery of the vehicle 1 during charging. (i.e., “execute a remaining inspection mode”); )
With regard to Claim 8, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
JUNG further teaches:
the inspection controller is configured to measure the first and second voltages through the inspection connector. ( JUNG, [0035]: “when a voltage received through a control pilot pin of a plurality of fins is a first voltage” [0036]: “changing the voltage applied to the two pins to a second voltage”)
With regard to Claim 9, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
JUNG further teaches:
the inspection controller is configured to: control the charging controller to execute slow charging; (JUNG, “charger may include a high-speed charger 117 for quick charging the battery and a slow-speed charger for charging the battery to a slower rate than a rapid charging rate (i.e., “control charging controller to execute slow charging”))
LEE further teaches:
determine whether a slow charging function operates normally in accordance with initiation of the slow charging. (LEE, [0061]: “the high voltage cable and fuse outside the charger output are normal and the charge can be terminated after it is determined that the output voltage sensor inside the slow charger is faulty (i.e., “whether a slow charging function operates normally”)”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further JUNG, as modified by LEE, LIM, and ICHIKAWA as taught above, to include a step to determine whether a slow charging function operates normally in accordance with initiation of the slow charging, such as that further disclosed by LEE because doing so would be understood as a way to make the method of battery inspection as taught by LEE more reliable and accurate. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of this obvious combination as a way to improve safety, since one testing protocol using high voltage would need to be discontinued prior to performing a second testing protocol. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include the technique taught by LEE in the method of JUNG, as modified and taught above, to determine whether a quick charging function operates normally in order to reliably evaluate the charging functionality of an electric vehicle battery.
With regard to Claim 10, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 9.
LEE further teaches:
the inspection controller is configured to: measure a charging current of the battery through the inspection connector; (LEE, [0041]: “communication protocol used in a combo (Combined Charging System, Combo) method, which can charge a charging standard for an electric vehicle (EV) using a single connector for normal charging and rapid charging, is international standardized through ISO/ IEC 15118”; and Abstract: “comparing a charging current of the battery with an output current of the charger if the charger is forcedly driven; and determining a fault part according to a current comparison result”; or [0057]: “Based on the result of the current comparison, the charge controller 64 may determine the fault location and terminate the charge operation.”)
determine whether the slow charging function operates normally based on the charging current. (LEE, : [0061]: “If the output current control command value and the actual battery charge current are the same after entering the charger forced drive mode, the high voltage cable and the fuse outside the charger output are normal””)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further JUNG, as modified by LEE, LIM, and ICHIKAWA as taught above, to include determination of whether the slow charging function operates normally based on the charging current, such as that further disclosed by LEE because it would be understood that measurement of charging current would be an obvious way to reliably evaluate a slow charging function mode of an electric vehicle battery. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of combining this step as taught by LEE with the method of JUNG as modified above as a way to accurately establish whether a charging function operated as expected. One of ordinary skill would understand the value of examining current as a way to determine unexpected operation faults that would indicate issues in the slow charging function of the battery.
With regard to Claim 11, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 8.
LEE further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller includes a voltage measurement unit configured to measure the first and second voltages through the second portion in the inspection connector. (LEE, [0044]: “charger failure diagnosis method includes a step (12) of entering a charging sequence, a step (14) of connecting a main relay…when the main relay connected to the charging sequence is connected, the high-voltage battery connection and the fast charging charger voltage are measured to check the high-voltage battery connection state….battery is normally connected…slow charger performs charging (18)…If the difference between the high-voltage battery voltage and the slow- charger output voltage”; Examiner notes reference teaches measurement of two voltages from two distinct charging processes, analogous to claim limitation of “first and second” voltage measurements.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further JUNG, as modified by LEE, LIM, and ICHIKAWA as taught above, to include wherein the inspection controller includes a voltage measurement unit configured to measure the voltage of the battery through the second portion in the inspection connector, such as that further taught by LEE because it would be understood that a reliable acquisition of voltage during the high power fast charging process investigation would be essential for forming an accurate determination of battery charging function. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to take advantage of an existing connection for such a measurement, as taught by LEE, so that additional and necessary information/data could be obtained without expense of an additional connector or additional time for making connection or disconnection to facilitate the measurement.
With regard to Claim 12, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 10.
LEE further teaches:
the inspection controller includes a current measurement unit configured to measure the charging current through the first portion in the inspection connector. (LEE, [0041]: “communication protocol used in a combo (Combined Charging System, Combo) method, which can charge a charging standard for an electric vehicle (EV) using a single connector for normal charging and rapid charging, is international standardized through ISO/ IEC 15118”; and Abstract: “comparing a charging current of the battery with an output current of the charger if the charger is forcedly driven; and determining a fault part according to a current comparison result”; or [0057]: “Based on the result of the current comparison, the charge controller 64 may determine the fault location and terminate the charge operation.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify JUNG, as modified by LEE, LIM, and ICHIKAWA as taught above, to include an inspection controller that includes a current measurement unit configured to measure the charging current through the first portion a slow charging portion for the slow charging function inspection formed in the inspection connector, such as that further taught by LEE because it would a convenient improvement, since the connector provides the option of making both fast and slow charging processes possible with a single connector. One of ordinary skill would find and obvious combination for using the method of using two variations of charging to better understand battery charging function with the method system of JUNG, to allow for a more accurate and reliable determination of battery charging function. One of ordinary skill would understand the necessity of knowing current to form a reliable and valid determination of battery charging function, and would be motivated to use the connector configuration as taught by LEE in combination with the method taught by JUNG and modified as above, for an efficient way to make such measurements.
With regard to Claim 14, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
JUNG further teaches:
wherein the charge-related elements charging-related element includes parts forming a charging circuit for charging the battery of the vehicle.(JUNG, as above, FIGs. 6-9)
With regard to Claim 15, JUNG, in view of LEE and LIM and further in view of ICHIKAWA teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
LEE teaches as above,
inspection connector is integrated with a quick charging inspection connector portion for quick charging function inspection of the battery and a slow charging inspection connector portion for slow charging function inspection of the battery. (LEE, as above, [0041]: “communication protocol used in a combo (Combined Charging System, Combo) method, which is a charging standard for an electric vehicle (EV), in which a normal charging and a rapid charging can be performed by a single connector (i.e., “first portion”, “second portion”), is internationally standardized through ISO / IEC 15118…physical layer and the data link layer of ISO / IEC 15118 are defined in ISO / IEC 15118-3 and use IEEE 1901 Profile Green PHY and IEEE 802.3 MAC.”; Examiner notes connectors taught by LEE would be known to one of ordinary skill in the art.; Examiner notes citations from translated copy revised 07/09/2026, provided in previous office action. Examiner further notes JUNG teaches a plurality of pins on inspection connector, which may be considered as “portions” but LEE teaches concept explicitly.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify JUNG, as modified by LEE, LIM, and ICHIKAWA as taught above, to include inspection connector is integrated with a quick charging inspection connector portion for quick charging function inspection of the battery and a slow charging inspection connector portion for slow charging function inspection of the battery, as further taught by LEE, because it would be understood that doing so would be advantageous and convenient, since the connector provides the option of making both fast and slow charging processes possible with a single connector, and the method of using two variations of charging to better understand battery charging function would allow for a more accurate and reliable determination of battery charging function. One of ordinary skill would understand the necessity of knowing current to form a reliable and valid determination of battery charging function, and would be motivated to use the connector configuration as taught by LEE in combination with the method taught by JUNG, as modified and taught above, for an efficient way to make such measurements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is included in previous office actions.
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 TONI D SAUNCY whose telephone number is (703)756-4589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. 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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 571-270-0349. 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.
/TONI D SAUNCY/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights