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
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed 12/05/2025, are accepted and
appreciated by the examiner.
Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 14-15 are pending. Examiner agrees with Applicant that the amended claim limitations do not introduce new matter, with support found in the specification (dated 11/07/2022) in at least [0048] - [0053], with Claims 6, 7, 13 canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/05/2025 have been fully considered
Examiner withdraws rejection of Claims 1-5 and 7-15, as previously presented, under 35 U.S.C § 112, second paragraph as made in previous office action (Final Rejection, dated 06/05/2025), based on amended claim language for independent Claim 1. However, Examiner notes, consideration of the problem faced by the inventor, based on reading of specification in view of amended claim limitations, new grounds for rejection under U.S.C. §112 (b) are necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. A detailed explanation and reasoning is presented below.
Applicant’s arguments regarding rejection of Claims 1-5 and 7-15 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been carefully reviewed and considered, but they are not persuasive. Amended claim limitations require further consideration and search.
Regarding claim rejections in previous office action under 35 U.S.C. §103 over prior art, Examiner maintains rejection of independent Claim 1 (as presented in claim set dated 06/25/2025) over the obvious combination of FAN and LEE was proper. However, Examiner has carefully reviewed Applicant’s arguments regarding rationale for obviousness based on reference combinations previously cited to address Claim 1 as currently amended. In response to applicant's argument that art cited in previous office action does not hint, suggest or teach amended claim language, Examiner agrees. However, Claim 1, as currently amended, with some matter from dependent Claim 7 (as presented in claim set dated 06/26/2025, currently cancelled) has been incorporated, new limitations have been added, and dependency connections have been modified. In consideration of the problem faced by the inventor, based on reading of specification in view of amended claim limitations, new grounds for rejection under 35 U.S.C §103 are necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. Thus, Examiner finds the arguments are not persuasive. A detailed response to arguments and new grounds for rejection are presented below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
1-5, 8-12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), 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.
Specifically, independent Claim 1 (currently amended) recites the limitation (emphasis added) “implement a first mode to turn off charge-related elements after forced connection of charge-related elements”
“inspection controller is configured to: implement a first mode to turn off charge-related elements after forced connection of the charge-related elements; determine whether a first voltage of the charge-related elements is zero after the charge-related elements are turned off; and implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero, and wherein the inspection controller is further configured to, in the second mode, turn on charge-related elements, determine a second voltage of the charge-related element, and determine that the charge-related elements normally operate based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero.
The term “charge-related elements” as recited does appear previously in Claim 1, and the term, as currently amended in plural form, does not appear in the specification. Examiner points to FIG. 3, wherein element 230 is depicted as “charging-related element”, and (emphasis added) [0040]: “processing unit 214 controls a charging-related element 230 in the vehicle V so that the charging function is inspected. The charging-related element 230 is a charging-related component disposed in a charging circuit in the vehicle V, which may include a high-voltage battery 232, an on-board charger 234, a high-voltage junction box 236, a charging port 238, and certain relays and connectors”. While specification [0040] recites a list of subcomponents which may be included in the “charging-related element 230”, the narrative when combined with FIG. 3 indicated that the “charging-related element” is a component part of the “vehicle charging management system 200”. The change to a plurality of “charge-related elements” renders the scope and meaning of Claim 1 indefinite. Examiner notes the singular term “a charge-related element” was presented in Claim 7 in previous claim set (date 06/26/2025), providing antecedent basis for subsequent use of the term, so that for examination in previous office action, the term “a charge-related element” was interpreted, as guided by specification, as a single “charging-related element” component. In Claim 1 as currently amended, the term “charge-related elements” in plural form, and without antecedent basis, introduces ambiguity in the meaning of the claim limitation, and renders independent Claim 1 as indefinite since it is not clear “charge-related elements” is referring to. For examination purposes in evaluation of prior art, the term will be interpreted as any/all of the multiple components as found in specification [0040] above.
The term “turn off charge-related elements” is likewise unclear, based on indefinite reference to “charge-related elements”. Using [0040] and FIG.3 as above for guidance, there is no language preceding the term to indicated what charge-related elements are, and, more specifically, which are in a state such that the step of “turn off” could be implemented. Examiner notes Claim 7 in previously presented claim set (date 06/26/25) recited (emphasis added) “turn off a charge related element after forced activation of the charge-related element”, allowing the term to be interpreted using guidance in specification [0049], reciting “charging controller 210 or the processing unit 214 forcibly activates the charging-related element 230 for the quick charging, and then releases the forced activation. All relays are turned OFF.” In previous office action, the claim limitation was reasonably interpreted to mean that the “charge-related element” was disconnected (via switching relays inside component to “off”) after the “charge related element” was “activated”, interpreted to mean turned on. Claim 1 as currently amended recites “after forced connection of the charge-related elements” The term “forced connection” does not appear in specification. One of ordinary skill would not presume “connection” to be synonymous or analogous to an “on” state, leaving the step of “turn off” ambiguous, particularly in light of revisions to include a plurality of “charge-related elements” rather than a single “charging-related element 230” as supported by specification. Moreover, it is not clear when “charge-related elements” are disconnected such that a step of “forced connection” could be executed.
Claim 1 additionally recites “determine whether a first voltage of the charge-related elements is zero after the charge-related elements are turned off; and implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is zero”. Based on rationale as discussed above, this language renders Claim 1 indefinite, since it is not which of the charge-related elements have been turned on, and what voltage, from among the plurality of charge-related elements is being measured to determine a zero value. Examiner points to guidance provided by specification in at least [0049], as above, and [0050] “FIG. 5, when the forced activation is canceled, the high-voltage battery 232 is not connected to the charging port 238 (indicated by C1), so in the first mode, 0 volt (V) should be measured during the measurement of the high voltage.” And [0051]: “charging-related element 230 is forcedly activated so that respective element is connected or is in association even when not in a charging situation.” Using the singular “charge-related element”, it was interpreted in previous office action that voltage being determined as zero (or not zero) referred to potential difference at the charging port, where, as shown in FIG 5, a circuit was incomplete, illustrated by broken lines, C1. Using the specification to guide interpretation, the claim limitation language as currently amended is indefinite.
In consideration of rejection based on indefiniteness, Examiner notes guidance from MPEP 2173.04, “A broad claim is not indefinite merely because it encompasses a wide scope of subject matter provided the scope is clearly defined. But a claim is indefinite when the boundaries of the protected subject matter are not clearly delineated and the scope is unclear” and “If the claim is too broad because it does not set forth that which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention as evidenced by statements outside of the application as filed, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, would be appropriate.” Thus, Examiner maintains proper use of indefiniteness rejection of independent Claim 1 based on rationale as discussed above.
Examiner notes that for evaluation of the claimed invention for differentiation over existing prior art, the terms “charge-related elements” and “turn off charge-related elements” will be interpreted using broadest reasonable interpretation to mean, any component involved in or related to a charging function, and a disconnected state between any two charge-related components in a charging-related apparatus/system, respectively, as would be generally known and understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 2-5, and 7-15, with dependency on Claim 1 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph as being indefinite.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Examiner notes application of guidance found in MPEP 2141 in determination of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. Specifically, factual inquiry steps described in 2141 (II): “An invention that would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill at the relevant time is not patentable. See 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a). As reiterated by the Supreme Court in KSR, the framework for the objective analysis for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 is stated in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966). Obviousness is a question of law based on underlying factual inquiries.” Further, the following steps for factual inquiries were used in evaluation of prior art used for obviousness rejection:
(A) Determining the scope and content of the prior art;
(B) Ascertaining the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art; and
(C) Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Claim(s) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over FAN (CN 105548763 B) in view of LEE (KR 20180099286), and further in view of SHIN (US 20200180438 A1).
With respect to Claim 1 (Currently amended), FAN teaches:
A charging function inspection apparatus comprising:
(Examiner notes citations from REVISED translation, provided with this office action.; FAN is in same technical field, [0002])
an inspection connector
(FAN teaches inspection system connected to power supply and control device, see [0006]; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language “connector” to be analogous to reference teaching “connection” which would be known by one of ordinary skill to require a connector for electrical function.)
connectable to a vehicle to supply a communication signal and a power signal to the vehicle,
(FAN teaches connection to a vehicle, including communication connection [0006]: “send test instructions to the integrated test box, also used to receive test data of the integrated test box”, analogous to claim limitation “communication signal”.)
the inspection connector for inspecting a slow charging function of the vehicle and for inspecting a quick charging function of the vehicle;
(FAN teaches connector for slow charging function of vehicle and fast/quick charging function, [0001]: “integrated test box”, [0008]: “control device is provided with a battery interface for outputting a fast charge flow or a slow charge flow, and [0009]: “data collector is connected to the computer through the CAN bus, and is also connected to the battery interface, and configured to send the collected first
test data and the second test data to the computer, wherein, The test data is test data obtained by testing the fast charge performance or the slow charge performance of the rechargeable battery, and the second test data is test data obtained by testing the fast charge performance or the slow charge performance of the control device”)
and 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,
(FAN teaches evaluation of battery, [0016]: “test schemes on the PC software are selected to test one or more of the control device, the rechargeable battery and the drive motor, and the fault type is determined according to the test data…Rapid detection of faults”
wherein the inspection controller is further configured to: place the vehicle in an inspection mode
(FAN teaches the function inspection controller to facilitate inspection of battery, Abstract: “computer, which is connected to the integrated test box…is used to send test instructions to the integrated test box…used to receive test data from the integrated test box and display test results corresponding to the test data of the integrated test box”; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language “place the vehicle in inspection mode” as analogous to reference of “sending a test instruction”.)
and continuously implement a slow charging inspection mode and a quick charging inspection mode and the based on the vehicle being in the inspection mode,
(FAN teaches controller implementation of slow and fast charging and collection of data during each mode, controlled by relays, [0008]: “control device is provided with a battery interface for outputting a fast charge flow or a slow charge flow” and [0009]: integrated test box further includes: a data collector, the data collector is connected to the computer…also connected to the battery interface…configured to send the collected first test data and the second test data to the computer”; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language of “continuously implement” to be analogous to description of testing process as taught by reference, with iterated steps.)
However, FAN, is silent to the language of:
connector comprising a first portion; and a second portion
wherein during the quick charging inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to:
implement a first mode to turn off charge-related elements after forced connection of the charge-related elements:
determine whether a first voltage of the charge-related elements is zero after the charge-related elements are turned off;
and implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is
zero,
and wherein the inspection controller is further configured to, in the second mode, turn on charge-related elements,
determine a second voltage of the charge-related element,
and determine that the charge-related elements normally operate based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero.
Nevertheless, LEE teaches:
connector comprising a first portion; and a second portion
(Examiner citations from translated copy, provided in previous office action; LEE is in same technical field, Pg2: “relates to a bidirectional charging and discharging method and apparatus for an electric vehicle”; While FAN does teach use of a connector, FAN does not explicitly teach a two part structure. LEE teaches specifically a two part connector with each part providing a distinct function; Pg2-3: “used in a combo (Combined Charging System, Combo) method…for an electric vehicle (EV) using a single connector for normal charging and rapid charging, is international standardized through ISO/ IEC 15118”; Pg4: “a communication protocol…for an electric vehicle (EV) using a single connector for normal charging and rapid charging”; Examiner notes connectors taught by LEE would be known to one of ordinary skill in the art.)
wherein during the quick charging inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to:
(LEE teaches a fast charging inspection measurement, Pg.3: “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.”)
implement a first mode to turn off charge-related elements after forced connection of the charge-related elements:
(LEE teaches method of termination after forced charging, see Pg.5-6: “vehicle, A step (40) of forcibly driving the charger, a step (42) for comparing the output current of the charger with the charging current of the battery when the charger is forcibly driven, and a step (42) 44) terminating the charging operation (46). Before…comparing the voltage of the battery with the output voltage of the charger…method may further comprise the step of entering the charging sequence 32 and the step of connecting the main relay 34…after entering the charging sequence (32), the pre-charge relay unit in the battery device is connected…if it is determined that there is no problem in the battery
device, the main relay unit can be connected and the precharge relay unit can be disconnected” Examiner notes interpretation of limitation to mean a disconnection of at least one of “charge-related elements” is done after inspection device is connected to at least one of “charge-related elements” of term “charge-related elements” as discussed above, using specification [0050] for guidance in interpretation of scope and meaning of limitation language as an indication of a open circuit, as shown in specification FIG. 5, element C1 (broken lines), analogous to reference step of “terminating the charging operation” and “disconnected”.)
determine a first voltage of the charge-related elements;
(LEE teaches step of voltage measurement for fault determination, Pg.3: “If the difference between the high-voltage battery voltage and the slow- charger output voltage is greater than a predetermined threshold value”)
and implement a second mode based on determining [a] first voltage
(LEE teaches comparative voltage analysis to determine next steps, Abstract: “starting the charging operation or forcedly driving the charger according to a voltage comparison result”; two measurement processes, analogous to “modes”, FIG. 1 and Pg.3: “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 is smaller than a predetermined threshold value (16)…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. If the difference between the high-voltage battery voltage and the constant-speed”,
and wherein the inspection controller is further configured to, in the second mode, turn on charge-related elements,
(LEE teaches monitoring voltage after forced charging, FIG.1 and Pg.3 (as directly above), and FIG. 4.)
determine a second voltage of the charge-related element, and determine that the charge-related elements normally operate based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero.
(LEE teaches voltage measurement during second charging mode, Pg.3: “when the main relay connected to the charging sequence is connected, the high-voltage battery connection and the fast charging charger voltage are measured… If the difference between the high-voltage battery voltage and the constant-speed charger
output voltage is determined to be within the predetermined threshold value, the high-voltage battery is normally connected”; Examiner notes reference to “threshold value” is a value >0, depicted in FIG.3 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 FAN to include, using a connector comprising a first portion and a second portion; and wherein during the quick charging inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to implement a first mode to turn off charge-related elements after forced connection of the charge-related elements: determine a first voltage of the charge-related elements; and implement a second mode based on determining [a] first voltage and wherein the inspection controller is further configured to, in the second mode, turn on charge-related elements; and determine a second voltage of the charge-related element, and determine that the charge-related elements normally operate based on determining that the second voltage is non-zero. such as that of LEE.
One of ordinary skill would be motivated to modify FAN to include the steps and elements as described above, as taught by LEE because it would be understood that the details disclosed by LEE would enhance and improve the method and system as taught by FAN with a reasonable expectation of success to result in a more robust, accurate and reliable method and system for determination of a charging function inspection apparatus. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to combine the two disclosures to result in a more efficient way to incorporate an existing and commonly used component, such as a combination connector taught by LEE and known in the art in the technical field of electrical vehicle batteries, into the method and system disclosed by FAN. One of ordinary skill would see the obvious advantage of using existing charging technology, with a two-portion connector designed to deliver both fast charge and slow charge, to implement an inspection apparatus to evaluate quick and slow charging function of a vehicle battery by monitoring voltages using the combined steps of FAN and LEE.
However, FAN, as modified by LEE, as taught above, is silent to the language of:
determine whether a first voltage of the charge-related elements is zero after the charge-related elements are turned off;
and implement a second mode based on determining that the first voltage is
zero,
Nevertheless, SHIN teaches:
determine whether a first voltage of the charge-related elements is zero after the charge-related elements are turned off;
(SHIN is in same technical field, [0002] relates to a fault diagnosing method and apparatus of a power electric system for a vehicle” and [0042]: “FIG. 8, a fault diagnosis apparatus of a power electric system for a vehicle…may include…may be electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) of a charging station that provides power for charging the vehicle battery”; SHIN teaches detailed method for analysis related to battery charging, [0015]: “fault diagnosis apparatus of a power electric system for a vehicle including: a power transmission unit configured to include a battery…relay…current sensor…voltage sensor…controller…”; SHIN teaches diagnosis based on a zero voltage measurement with open relays, [0019]: “controller may be configured to determine that the corresponding relay is normal if the voltage of the neutral stage of the motor measured while the relay is open is zero.”)
[and implement a second mode] based on determining that the first voltage is
zero,
(SHIN teaches method based on determination of a zero voltage, [0056]: “if the voltage of the neutral stage of the motor measured by the voltage sensor 300 is zero while the relay 150 is open, the controller 400 may determine that the relay 150 is normal as illustrated in FIG. 4.”; SHIN teaches next step of voltage measurement, FIG.3, step S20, S30; Examiner notes interpretation of “implement a second mode” to be analogous to performing a subsequent measurement based on a determination, analogous to that disclosed in reference.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify FAN as modified by LEE and as taught above to include the steps of determining whether a first voltage of the charge-related elements is zero after the charge-related elements are turned off, [and implement a second mode] based on determining that the first voltage is zero, as taught by SHIN because it would be understood as an advantageous and efficient way to ensure safety prior to applying voltage for charging inspection. One of ordinary skill would understand that including this step as taught by SHIN with the method/system of FAN as modified by LEE would, with a reasonable expectation of success, result in a more robust, and safer inspection apparatus and method, without adding additional expense. One of ordinary skill may view the step as an important way to verify a system has safely de-energized such that electrical hazards could be avoided.
With respect to Claim 2 (Currently amended), FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
FAN further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller is further configured to communicate with a vehicle charging management system including a charging controller operatively controlling charging-related elements of the vehicle and communicable with the inspection controller.
(FAN teaches communication controller, [0001]: “computer…connected to the integrated test box…used to send test instructions to the integrated test box, and is also used to receive test data from the integrated test box”; and [0008]: “control device is provided with a battery interface for outputting a fast charge flow or a slow charge flow,”; and [0041]: “communication connection…may be an indirect coupling or communication connection through some interface”; FAN teaches communication with battery charging system [0006]: “test system includes: a high voltage direct current power source; an alternating current power source; an integrated test box, and the integrated test box… CAN bus and the transmission cable are respectively connected to the control device and the rechargeable battery of the electric vehicle…the integrated test box is used for testing the control device, the rechargeable battery”)
With respect to Claim 3, FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
wherein the inspection connector is connected to a charging port of the vehicle for charging the battery.
FAN further teaches:
wherein the inspection connector is connected to a charging port of the vehicle for charging the battery.
(FAN teaches inspection device connected to charging port, [0008]: “the control device is provided with a battery interface for outputting a fast charge flow or a slow charge flow, and the integrated test box further includes: a third relay, the first end of the third relay is connected to the battery interface, and the second end of the third relay connected to the rechargeable battery”)
With respect to Claim 4, FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
further including: an input unit for inputting an inspection-related request to the inspection controller;
(FAN teaches sending instruction for test, see [0001]: “computer, which is connected to the integrated test box through the CAN bus, and is used to send test instructions to the integrated test box”)
and an output unit for displaying an inspection state implemented according to the request.
(FAN teaches display of result on computer, [0001]: “computer, which is connected to the integrated test box through the CAN bus, and is used to send test instructions to the integrated test box, and is also used to receive test data from the integrated test box and display test results corresponding to the test data of the integrated test box”; and see [0006]: “computer used to send test instructions to the integrated test box, also used to receive test data of the integrated test box, and display test data corresponding to the integrated test box”)
With respect to Claim 5, FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 2,
(References above applied to Claim 2.)
FAN further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller is further configured to: transmit an inspection request to the charging controller;
(FAN teaches sending a test instruction, as above, [0001]; and teaches sending instruction to charging device, [0006]: “integrated test box is used for testing the control device…computer used to send test instructions to the integrated test box… test instructions are used to test control devices,”)
control the charging controller to execute one of the quick charging inspection mode and the slow charging inspection mode of the battery;
(FAN teaches quick and slow charging functions for testing, [0008]: “control device is provided with a battery interface for outputting a fast charge flow or a slow charge flow”)
and 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.
(FAN teaches use of a relay circuits to accomplish sequential testing steps, [0007]: “drive controller is configured to control the first relay and/or the second relay according to the indication of the test command when testing the rechargeable battery or the control device.”)
With respect to Claim 8 (Currently amended), FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
FAN further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller is configured to measure the first and second voltages through the inspection connector.
(FAN teaches voltage measurement using inspection connector, [0016]: “power cable is provided on the transmission cable, thereby providing a plurality of power connectors adapted to different types of control devices and rechargeable batteries, thereby improving the system”, and [0028]: “integrated test box may further include: a data collector, the data collector is connected to the computer through the CAN bus, and is also connected to the battery interface…voltage of the battery pack, the voltage of the single battery, the charging current and other parameters, the test data obtained above is transmitted from the battery management module of the rechargeable battery to the host computer”)
With respect to Claim 9 (Currently amended), FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
FAN further teaches:
wherein during the slow charging inspection mode, the inspection controller is configured to: control the charging controller to execute slow charging;
(FAN teaches slow charging inspection using controller, as above, [0008])
However, FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, is silent to the language of:
and determine whether a slow charging function operates normally in accordance with initiation of the slow charging.
Nevertheless, LEE further teaches:
and determine whether a slow charging function operates normally in accordance with initiation of the slow charging.
(LEE teaches evaluation of testing result to determine fault, see Pg.4: “charge control unit 64 can compare the voltage of the battery device 70 with the output voltage of the charger 62 for the purpose of fault diagnosis”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include and determine whether a slow charging function operates normally in accordance with initiation of the slow charging, such as that further disclosed by LEE.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include determination of whether a slow charging function operates normally in accordance with initiation of the slow charging, as further taught 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 FAN to determine whether a quick charging function operates normally in order to reliably evaluate the charging functionality of an electric vehicle battery.
With respect to Claim 10, FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 9,
(References above applied to Claim 9.)
FAN further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller is configured to: measure a charging current of the battery through the inspection connector;
(FAN teaches inspection connector connected to power supply and control device, as discussed above (Claim 1); FAN teaches collection of current data, [0028]: “control device is provided with a battery interface for outputting a fast charge stream or a slow charge stream…integrated test box may further include: a data collector…to test various parameters of the rechargeable battery during fast charging or slow charging…voltage of the battery pack, the voltage of the single battery, the charging current and other parameters, the test data obtained above is transmitted from the battery management module of the rechargeable battery to the host computer”)
However, FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, is silent to the language of:
and determine whether the slow charging function operates normally based on the charging current.
(LEE teaches evaluation of current measurements during charging, Pg.5: “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 and the charge can be terminated after it is determined that the output voltage sensor inside the slow charger has failed.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN 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.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include determination of whether the slow charging function operates normally based on the charging current, as further taught 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 FAN 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 respect to Claim 11 (Currently amended), FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 8,
(References above applied to Claim 8.)
However, FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, is silent to the language of:
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.
Nevertheless, 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 teaches measurements of voltages for both a sequence of slow charging and fast charging, Pg.3, “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 modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN 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 disclosed by LEE.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include 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, as 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 respect to Claim 12, FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 10,
(References above applied to Claim 10.)
However, FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, is silent to the language of:
wherein the inspection controller includes a current measurement unit configured to measure the charging current through the first portion in the inspection connector.
Nevertheless, LEE further teaches:
wherein the inspection controller includes a current measurement unit configured to measure the charging current through the first portion in the inspection connector.
(LEE teaches a two part connection for accomplishing both fast and slow charging operations on a vehicle as part of an integrated testing system, as above Pg.2: “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”; LEE teaches current measurement for slow and fast charging testing, 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 Pg.5: “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 FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include wherein the inspection controller 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 disclosed by LEE.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include wherein the inspection controller 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, 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 FAN and SHIN, as modified and taught above, for an efficient way to make such measurements.
With respect to Claim 14 (Currently amended), FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
FAN further teaches:
wherein the charging-related element includes parts forming a charging circuit for charging the battery of the vehicle.
(FAN teaches, as discussed above, test apparatus integrated into circuit containing battery and charger, [0013]: “integrated test box…a third switch circuit, the first end of the third switch circuit is connected to the low voltage power interface of the control device, and the second end of the third switch circuit is respectively connected with the data collector and the electronic load…third end of the three-switch circuit is connected to the driving controller, and the third switch circuit is configured to connect the electronic load”, and [0016]: “the high-voltage DC power source and the AC power source are connected to the integrated test box…control device and the rechargeable battery of the electric vehicle are respectively connected to the integrated test box…control device is connected with the drive.”)
With respect to Claim 15 (Currently amended), FAN in view of LEE, and further in view of SHIN teaches:
The charging function inspection apparatus of claim 1,
(References above applied to Claim 1.)
However, FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, is silent to the language of:
wherein the 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.
Nevertheless, LEE further teaches:
wherein the 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 above, LEE teaches a two part connection for accomplishing both fast and slow charging operations on a vehicle as part of an integrated testing system, Pg.2: “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”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include wherein the inspection controller 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 disclosed by LEE.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to further modify FAN, as modified by LEE and SHIN as taught above, to include wherein the inspection controller 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, as 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 FAN 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.
CAI (CN 110018338 A) – teaches test system, method and computer for vehicle-mounted charging machine; specifically teaches functional testing of a vehicle mounted charger system.
HA (US 20230258727 A1 filing date 05/26/2021) – teaches method and a system for predicting the behavior of a secondary battery on the basis of a parameter measurement, and a secondary battery behavior, including apparatus for measurement battery parameters during rapid and slow charging to determine performance and or deterioration of a battery with applications to electric vehicle industry.
NAM (US 20150160304 A1) – teaches quick and slow charging testing method for determination of a battery function.
NAM (US 20230278459 A1 filing date 2021-08-18) – teaches battery management system and battery charge control.
NITZBERG (US 20130190968 A1) – teaches electric vehicle supply equipment and, more particularly, to testing apparatus for such electric vehicle supply equipment; teaches a zero measurement of voltage to determine a ready to charge state for an eV battery.
SABURO (JP 2020109368 A) – teaches technique for charge/discharge inspection of a storage battery, specifically, as part of a manufacturing of lithium ion batteries, with measurements to inspect charging and discharging function to determine whether a product is “good product”. (translation provided)
SRINIVASAN (US 20220034974 A1) - teaches open circuit voltage determination for establishing health / function of a battery and generally state of health measurements and evaluation
TSAI (US 20090189563 A1) –teaches a test device for a generalized charge performance of an “electronic device” includes testing technique for normally open connections to determine ground fault state.
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 2863
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863