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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
DETAILED ACTION
Preliminary Amendment
Preliminary Amendment filed on 01/03/2023 noted by the examiner, claims 1-16 are cancelled and 17-36 pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
Claims 17-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 17-36 the term “initial status data” is vague and a relative term that renders the claim indefinite. The term “initial status data” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably appraised of the scope of the invention. An artisan doing measuring and testing would not know at what point “initial status data” within the scope of the claim had been accomplished because nothing within the disclosure establishes when a sufficient “initial status data” occurs.
Note: In view of the PTO compact prosecution, the Examiner notes that due to the indefiniteness issues described above all consideration of the merits of the claims in view of prior art is as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 17-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 17, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for processing status data of a battery, wherein the method comprises: obtaining initial status data describing one or more operating variables of the battery, applying a first neural network to the initial status data in order to obtain an encoded representation of the initial status data, applying a second neural network to the encoded representation of the initial status data in order to obtain reconstructed status data appears to be an abstract idea of mathematical manipulation function or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of carrying out an aging estimation based on the reconstructed status data in order to obtain a status indicator which is indicative of an aging status of the battery are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? There is no more additional element. Step 2B: No. claim 17 not eligible. Similar claims analysis for claim 18-27 as the dependent claims merely recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claims 18-27 not eligible as well.
Claim 28, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for processing status data of a battery, wherein the method comprises: obtaining initial status data describing one or more operating variables of the battery, applying a first neural network to the initial status data in order to obtain an encoded representation of the initial status data appears to be an abstract idea of mathematical manipulation function or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of carrying out an aging estimation based on the encoded representation of the initial status data in order to obtain a status indicator which is indicative of an aging status of the battery are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of wherein carrying out the aging estimation comprises applying a second neural network to the encoded representation of the initial status data appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 28 not eligible. Similar claims analysis for claim 29-32 as the dependent claims merely recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claims 29-32 not eligible as well.
Claim 33, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for processing status data of a battery, wherein the method comprises: obtaining initial status data describing one or more operating variables of the battery, applying a first neural network to the initial status data in order to obtain an encoded representation of the initial status data, applying a second neural network to the encoded representation of the initial status data in order to obtain reconstructed status data appears to be an abstract idea of mathematical manipulation function or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of comparing the reconstructed status data to the initial status data in order to identify one or more deviations are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of controlling the operation of the battery based on the reconstructed status data appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 33 not eligible. Similar claims analysis for claim 34-36 as the dependent claims merely recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claims 34-36 not eligible as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 17-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BILETSKA, FR 3010532 A1, DATE PUBLISHED: 2015-03-13, CPC G01R 31/387.
Regarding claim 17:
BILETSKA described a method for processing status data of a battery, wherein the method comprises: obtaining initial status data describing one or more operating variables of the battery (page 2, SoH of the battery), applying a first neural network to the initial status data in order to obtain an encoded representation of the initial status data (page 3, charge of the battery), applying a second neural network to the encoded representation of the initial status data in order to obtain reconstructed status data (page 3, discharge of the battery), and carrying out an aging estimation based on the reconstructed status data in order to obtain a status indicator which is indicative of an aging status of the battery (page 2-3, building charts for all aging states).
Regarding claim 28:
BILETSKA described a method for processing status data of a battery, wherein the method comprises: obtaining initial status data describing one or more operating variables of the battery (page 2, SoH of the battery), applying a first neural network to the initial status data in order to obtain an encoded representation of the initial status data (page 3, charge of the battery), and
carrying out an aging estimation based on the encoded representation of the initial status data in order to obtain a status indicator which is indicative of an aging status of the battery (page 2-3, building charts for all aging states),
wherein carrying out the aging estimation comprises applying a second neural network to the encoded representation of the initial status data (page 2-3, building charts for all aging states).
Regarding claim 33:
BILETSKA described a method for processing status data of a battery, wherein the method comprises: obtaining initial status data describing one or more operating variables of the battery (page 2, SoH of the battery), applying a first neural network to the initial status data in order to obtain an encoded representation of the initial status data (page 3, charge of the battery), applying a second neural network to the encoded representation of the initial status data in order to obtain reconstructed status data (page 3, discharge of the battery), and comparing the reconstructed status data to the initial status data in order to identify one or more deviations (page 3, of calculating the amount of CF / E charge), and controlling the operation of the battery based on the reconstructed status data (page 3, extracted from a battery relative to the maximum capacity Cmax of the battery).
Regarding claim 18, BILETSKA further described comparing the reconstructed status data to the initial status data in order to identify one or more deviations, wherein the aging estimation is carried out as a function of the one or more deviations (page 3, of calculating the amount of CF / E charge).
Regarding claim 19, BILETSKA further described filtering and/or weighting the initial status data and/or the reconstructed status data before carrying out the aging estimation and in a range in which the one or more deviations are detected (page 3, CF / E is estimated by integrating the current 1 (t) in use of the battery).
Regarding claim 20, BILETSKA further described triggering an error mode for the battery as a function of the one or more deviations (page 5, FIGS. 3A and 3B are graphs illustrating the approximation errors induced by the filtering of the data used for estimating the state of charge of a battery).
Regarding claim 21, BILETSKA further described selecting the initial status data or the reconstructed status data for carrying out the aging estimation as a function of the one or more deviations, wherein the aging estimation is then carried out based on the reconstructed status data if these are selected (page 3, CF / E is estimated by integrating the current 1 (t) in use of the battery).
.
Regarding claim 22, BILETSKA further described controlling the operation of the battery based on the reconstructed status data (page 5, FIG. 1, a block diagram of a control system estimating the state of charge of a battery).
Regarding claim 23, BILETSKA further described transmitting the encoded representation of the initial status data from a memory associated with the battery to a central memory for server-side further processing (page 5, computer processing or PRD processor and a database BD), and/or - temporarily storing the encoded representation of the initial status data until further processing.
Regarding claim 24, BILETSKA further described transmitting the encoded representation of the initial status data from a memory associated with the battery to a central memory for server-side further processing (page 5, computer processing or PRD processor and a database BD), and/or - temporarily storing the encoded representation of the initial status data until further processing.
Regarding claim 25, BILETSKA further described wherein the initial status data resolve a time curve of the one or more operating variables of the battery, wherein the method furthermore comprises: monitoring the state of charge of the battery, wherein the initial status data are obtained based on a sampling of measurement data of the battery describing the one or more operating variables, wherein the sampling depends on the monitoring of the state of charge (page 7,
These two measurements make it possible to obtain two reliable values of the SoC and to recalibrate the said time series of SoC values by one of the existing dilatation techniques).
Regarding claim 26, BILETSKA further described wherein the initial status data describe a load spectrum of one or more operating variables of the battery (page 3, of calculating the amount of CF / E charge).
Regarding claim 27, BILETSKA further described one or more time series of the one or more operating variables of the battery, wherein the reconstructed status data comprise at least one further time series of at least one further operating variable of the battery, wherein the initial status data do not comprise at least one further time series (page 7, These two measurements make it possible to obtain two reliable values of the SoC and to recalibrate the said time series of SoC values by one of the existing dilatation techniques).
Regarding claim 29, BILETSKA further described transmitting the encoded representation of the initial status data from a memory associated with the battery to a central memory for server-side further processing (page 5, computer processing or PRD processor and a database BD), and/or - temporarily storing the encoded representation of the initial status data until further processing.
Regarding claim 30, BILETSKA further described wherein the initial status data resolve a time curve of the one or more operating variables of the battery, wherein the method furthermore comprises: monitoring the state of charge of the battery, wherein the initial status data are obtained based on a sampling of measurement data of the battery describing the one or more operating variables, wherein the sampling depends on the monitoring of the state of charge (page 7,
These two measurements make it possible to obtain two reliable values of the SoC and to recalibrate the said time series of SoC values by one of the existing dilatation techniques).
.
Regarding claim 31, BILETSKA further described wherein the initial status data comprise one or more time series of the one or more operating variables of the battery, wherein the reconstructed status data comprise at least one further time series of at least one further operating variable of the battery, wherein the initial status data do not comprise at least one further time series (page 7, These two measurements make it possible to obtain two reliable values of the SoC and to recalibrate the said time series of SoC values by one of the existing dilatation techniques).
Regarding claim 32, BILETSKA further described wherein the one or more operating parameters of the battery comprise: voltage at least one battery cell of the battery and temperature; wherein the at least one further operating variable comprises: current flow at the at least one battery cell (page 7-8, voltage, temperature, current).
Regarding claim 34, BILETSKA further described controlling the operation of the battery comprises triggering an error mode for the battery as a function of the one or more deviations (page 8, approximation error of the current).
Regarding claim 35, BILETSKA further described wherein the initial status data comprise one or more time series of the one or more operating variables of the battery, wherein the reconstructed status data comprise at least one further time series of at least one further operating variable of the battery, wherein the initial status data do not comprise the at least one further time series (page 8, approximation error of the current, the approximation error is defined as the average absolute value of the difference between the initial signal and the filtered and undersampled signal).
Regarding claim 36, BILETSKA further described wherein the initial status data describe a load spectrum of one or more operating variables of the battery (fig. 6).
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
July 29, 2025