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 . The rejections from the Office Action of 9/2/2025 are hereby withdrawn. New grounds for rejection are presented below.
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/18/2026 has been entered.
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 1, 7, 9, 10, 12-21, 24, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the abstract idea of a mathematical algorithm for evaluating the parameters of a vehicle battery.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the results of the algorithm are not used to improve the performance of the underlying battery and/or vehicle in any manner.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the notification of the algorithm results to a user or the transmission of the detected data amounts to the recitation of mere extra-solution activity. The recited device amounts to the recitation of a general-purpose computer for performing the algorithm and does not serve to amount to significantly more than the recitation of the abstract idea itself (Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014)). The recitations that the method is executed by a battery management unit (BMU) within an electric vehicle (EV) in which the battery pack is disposed and the device and the battery pack being disposed within an electric vehicle (EV) amount to mere field of use limitations in that neither the performance of the underlying battery or vehicle is improved through the performance of the algorithm.
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, 9, 12, 15-19, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al. (US 20150369873 A1)[hereinafter “Nakao”] and Torai et al. (US 20170212170 A1)[hereinafter “Torai”].
Regarding Claims 1 and 25, Nakao discloses a method for diagnosing a battery pack [Paragraph [0031] – “The assembled battery control unit 150 detects the state of the assembled battery 110 based on the received information.”], executed by a battery management unit (BMU) within an electric vehicle (EV) in which the battery pack is disposed [Paragraph [0027] – “In the following embodiments, the description will be made about a case where the invention is applied to a battery system included in a power source of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). The configurations of the embodiments in the following description can be applied to a battery control circuit of a battery apparatus included in the power source of a car such as a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) or an electric vehicle (EV), and an industrial vehicle such as a hybrid railway vehicle.”], having a configuration in which a plurality of cells are connected in series [Fig. 1, cells 111], using a system for obtaining detected data including the current and temperature of the battery pack and the voltage of each cell [Paragraph [0031] – “The assembled battery control unit 150 receives a voltage and a temperature of the cell 111 transmitted by the cell management unit 120, a current value flowing in the battery system 100 transmitted by the current detection unit 130, and a total voltage value of the assembled battery 110 transmitted by the voltage detection unit 140.”Paragraph [0043] – “The temperature measured by the temperature detection unit 125 is used in various types of calculations for detecting the state of the cell 111, the cell group 112, or the assembled battery 110.”], the method comprising:
a step of calculating [Paragraphs [0052]-[0057], Equations 1 and 2] an electric charge capacity [Paragraphs [0052]-[0057], “SOH of the cell 111”] and a state of charge (SOC) of each cell [Paragraphs [0052]-[0057], “SOC of the cell 111”], using the current [Paragraph [0053] – “The parameter Ic indicates a charge current [A], the parameter Id indicates a discharge current [A]”] and the temperature [Equations 1 and 2 – “T(0)” and “T”], the voltage of each cell [Equation 1 – “OCV(0)”], an open circuit voltage (OCV-SOC) function [Paragraph [0052] – “apply the OCV to the SOC table 181 to obtain the SOC of the cell 111.”Paragraph [0053] – “The parameter SOC0 indicates the SOC when charging/discharging starts, and is determined based on the SOC table 181 (SOCMap in Equation 1).” The SOCMap utilizes OCV(0).], and a resistance table (or resistance)[Paragraph [0055] – “The R0(SOC, T) indicates the internal resistance [Ω] of the cell 111 in the case of a new article.”], and calculating an amount of unbalance, which is an estimated value of the SOC [Paragraphs [0052]-[0057], “SOC of the cell 111”Equation 1 – “SOC(t)”], and a resistance of each cell when the battery pack is fully charged [Paragraph [0056] – “A value of R0 corresponding to the SOC and the temperature during charging/discharging can be obtained through the following Equation 4.”Equation 4 – “R0=RMap(SOC(t), T(t))”Equation 4 relies on “SOC(t),” which would disclose values including a fully charged state per Paragraph [0041] – “the vehicle is charged until a predetermined condition is satisfied in the assembled battery 110.”]; and
a step of calculating the energy capacity of the battery pack [Paragraph [0058] – “Since the both-end voltage of the cell 111 does not exceed an upper limit voltage or a lower limit voltage, the battery state calculation unit 151 calculates an allowable charge current and an allowable discharge current using the SOC, the SOH, the battery temperature of the cell 111 during charging/discharging. An allowable discharge current Idmax can be obtained through the following Equation 5a, and the allowable charge current can be obtained through the following 5b.”Paragraph [0065] – “The probability diagnosis unit 153 outputs a warning signal indicating the result to a host device (for example, the vehicle control unit 200). The host device lights on, for example, a warning lamp to urge a user to request a repair of the vehicle such as replacing the battery.”] using the electric charge capacity [Equations 5a and 5b – “SOH”], the amount of unbalance [Equations 5a and 5b – “SOH”], and the resistance [Equations 5a and 5b – “RMap(SOC(t), T(t))”],
wherein a user is notified of a result of determining whether or not a threshold condition for the energy capacity of the battery pack is satisfied [Paragraph [0065] – “In a case where the difference between the actual voltage and the model voltage is equal to or more than a predetermined threshold, the probability diagnosis unit 153 can diagnose that the calculation accuracy of the SOH calculated by the parameter calculation unit 152 is low. The probability diagnosis unit 153 outputs a warning signal indicating the result to a host device (for example, the vehicle control unit 200). The host device lights on, for example, a warning lamp to urge a user to request a repair of the vehicle such as replacing the battery.”].
Nakao fails to disclose obtaining coefficients of the electric charge capacity, an initial value of the SOC, and the resistance of each of the cells that minimize a difference between an estimated voltage and an actual voltage of each of the cells.
However, Torai discloses the use of a sum of squares process for determining appropriate coefficients for battery parameters that minimizes the difference between estimated and actual voltages [See Paragraphs [0115] and [0132]]. It would have been obvious to use such a process to determine parameter coefficients in the determination of battery pack energy capacity in order to ensure that the results of doing so are accurate.
Regarding Claim 25, Nakao discloses a device for diagnosing a battery pack [Paragraph [0031] – “The assembled battery control unit 150 detects the state of the assembled battery 110 based on the received information.”], the device and the battery pack being disposed within an electric vehicle (EV)[Paragraph [0027] – “In the following embodiments, the description will be made about a case where the invention is applied to a battery system included in a power source of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). The configurations of the embodiments in the following description can be applied to a battery control circuit of a battery apparatus included in the power source of a car such as a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) or an electric vehicle (EV), and an industrial vehicle such as a hybrid railway vehicle.”], comprising: a SOC calculation unit [Paragraph [0016] – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing another method of a battery state calculation unit 151 to calculate the SOC of a cell 111.”]; a battery pack energy capacity calculation unit [Paragraph [0058] – “Since the both-end voltage of the cell 111 does not exceed an upper limit voltage or a lower limit voltage, the battery state calculation unit 151 calculates an allowable charge current and an allowable discharge current using the SOC, the SOH, the battery temperature of the cell 111 during charging/discharging. An allowable discharge current Idmax can be obtained through the following Equation 5a, and the allowable charge current can be obtained through the following 5b.”]; and a storage device having a resistance table [Paragraph [0059] – “The parameter RMap is the data table which describes the correspondence relation between the SOC, the temperature, and the internal resistance, and can be stored in the memory unit 180 in advance.”].
Regarding Claim 9, Nakao discloses that the SOC of each cell when the battery pack is fully charged is obtained using an initial value of the SOC and the electric charge capacity of the cell and an electric charge until any of the cells is fully charged [Equation 4 relies on “SOC(t),” which would disclose values including an initial charge value, a corresponding relative capacity value (Paragraph [0053] – “Qmax”), and a value corresponding to a fully charged state per Paragraph [0041] – “the vehicle is charged until a predetermined condition is satisfied in the assembled battery 110.”].
Regarding Claim 12, Nakao discloses that a function indicating deterioration of the battery pack is obtained using data on the energy capacity of the battery pack, wherein a replacement time of the battery pack is predicted from this function, and wherein a user is notified of the replacement time [Paragraph [0065] – “In a case where the difference between the actual voltage and the model voltage is equal to or more than a predetermined threshold, the probability diagnosis unit 153 can diagnose that the calculation accuracy of the SOH calculated by the parameter calculation unit 152 is low. The probability diagnosis unit 153 outputs a warning signal indicating the result to a host device (for example, the vehicle control unit 200). The host device lights on, for example, a warning lamp to urge a user to request a repair of the vehicle such as replacing the battery.”].
Regarding Claim 15, Nakao discloses a step of obtaining function data of the OCV for each cell [Paragraph [0050] – “The SOC table 181 contains data describing a correspondence relation between the OCV of the cell 111 and the SOC of the cell 111 in a format such as a table or a function.”]; and a step of creating the resistance table of each cell using the function data and the detected data [Paragraph [0059] – “The parameter RMap is the data table which describes the correspondence relation between the SOC, the temperature, and the internal resistance, and can be stored in the memory unit 180 in advance.”].
Regarding Claim 16, Nakao discloses the function data is obtained by function approximation using the voltage and the SOC of each cell [Paragraph [0050] – “The SOC table 181 contains data describing a correspondence relation between the OCV of the cell 111 and the SOC of the cell 111 in a format such as a table or a function.”] before and after a paused state having no charge nor discharge of the battery pack [Paragraph [0077] – “As illustrated in FIG. 13, when the battery current does not flow, or the battery current is weak and the both-end voltage of the battery falls within a range considered as equivalent as the OCV, the model voltage expressed by Equation 6 can be considered as the OCV. Then, in this second embodiment, the probability diagnosis unit 153 converts the SOC calculated based on Equation 1 into the OCV based on the SOC table 181, and compares the OCV with the model voltage so as to diagnose the probability of the SOC.”See Fig. 13, diagnosis of SOC occurs both prior to and after the middle 0-current period.].
Regarding Claim 17, Nakao discloses the detected data includes a representative SOC of the battery pack, and wherein the representative SOC is used as the SOC [Paragraph [0056] – “A value of R0 maybe stored in the memory unit 180 in advance as the data table according to the SOC and the temperature of the cell 111.”].
Regarding Claim 18, Nakao discloses in the resistance table of the cell, using past ones of the function data, the representative SOC, and the detected data [Paragraph [0050] – “The SOC table 181 contains data describing a correspondence relation between the OCV of the cell 111 and the SOC of the cell 111 in a format such as a table or a function.”], data of the resistance during charging of the cell corresponding to each temperature and each SOC is obtained [Paragraph [0056] – “A value of R0 maybe stored in the memory unit 180 in advance as the data table according to the SOC and the temperature of the cell 111.”] by function approximation as a value obtained by dividing the difference between the OCV and the voltage of the cell by the current of the cell [Paragraph [0055] – “The parameter R1 indicates the internal resistance [Ω] of the subject cell 111. The R0(SOC, T) indicates the internal resistance [Ω] of the cell 111 in the case of a new article. The parameter R1 can be calculated based on a ratio of a current change (ΔI=I2−I1) during charging/discharging and a voltage change (ΔV=V2−V1) as described in the following Equation 3.”Equation 3 – “R1=ΔV/ΔI”Paragraph [0059] – “The parameter RMap is the data table which describes the correspondence relation between the SOC, the temperature, and the internal resistance, and can be stored in the memory unit 180 in advance.”].
Regarding Claim 19, Nakao discloses the voltage of each cell is measured by performing a capacity check test of the battery pack, and wherein the function data of the OCV is obtained using the voltage value [Paragraph [0050] – “The SOC table 181 contains data describing a correspondence relation between the OCV of the cell 111 and the SOC of the cell 111 in a format such as a table or a function.”].
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al. (US 20150369873 A1)[hereinafter “Nakao”], Torai et al. (US 20170212170 A1)[hereinafter “Torai”], and Lee et al. (US 20200235588 A1)[hereinafter “Lee”].
Regarding Claim 7, Nakao fails to disclose that the energy capacity of the battery pack is calculated by calculating both the current energy capacity and the energy capacity after unbalance is eliminated. However, Lee discloses performing an SOC recalculating step after performing call balancing of unbalanced battery cells [See Fig. 4, steps S111 and S113]. It would have been obvious to balance battery cells to prevent overcharging or overdischarging [See Paragraph [0004] of Lee]. It would have been obvious to recalculate SOC after doing so in order to properly assess the SOC of the battery.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al. (US 20150369873 A1)[hereinafter “Nakao”], Torai et al. (US 20170212170 A1)[hereinafter “Torai”], and Axelsson et al. (US 20200124681 A1)[hereinafter “Axelsson”].
Regarding Claim 13, Nakao fails to disclose that a time when the speed of progress of the deterioration becomes equal to or greater than a predetermined value is predicted from the function indicating the deterioration, and the user is notified of the time. However, Axelsson discloses the evaluation of SOH rate of change of a battery over time and the effect on battery life with regard to an end-of-life threshold [See Fig. 1 and Paragraphs [0042]-[0043]]. It would have been obvious to monitor SOH rate of change and inform a user as to the predicted impact on battery life so that the user could be made aware of an approaching EOL for the battery.
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al. (US 20150369873 A1)[hereinafter “Nakao”], Torai et al. (US 20170212170 A1)[hereinafter “Torai”], and Wang et al. (US 10371753 B1)[hereinafter “Wang”].
Regarding Claim 20, Nakao fails to disclose that, when a positive electrode material and a negative electrode material of the cell are known, the function data of the OCV is obtained by function approximation using a potential table of the positive electrode material and the negative electrode material. However, Wang discloses such a manner of determining OCV-SOC curves [See Column 1 line 64 to Column 2 line 22 and Figs. 3A/3B]. It would have been obvious to use such an approach in order to have a reference OCV-SOC curve prior to evaluating a new battery type.
Regarding Claim 21, the combination would disclose that the resistance table is created using the function data of the OCV obtained by the function approximation and a resistance table of the positive electrode material and the negative electrode material [Use of a predetermined OCV-SOC curve from Wang with the evaluation method of Nakao.Paragraph [0055] of Nakao – “The parameter R1 indicates the internal resistance [Ω] of the subject cell 111. The R0(SOC, T) indicates the internal resistance [Ω] of the cell 111 in the case of a new article. The parameter R1 can be calculated based on a ratio of a current change (ΔI=I2−I1) during charging/discharging and a voltage change (ΔV=V2−V1) as described in the following Equation 3.”Equation 3 – “R1=ΔV/ΔI”Paragraph [0059] of Nakao – “The parameter RMap is the data table which describes the correspondence relation between the SOC, the temperature, and the internal resistance, and can be stored in the memory unit 180 in advance.”].
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al. (US 20150369873 A1)[hereinafter “Nakao”], Torai et al. (US 20170212170 A1)[hereinafter “Torai”], and Wade et al. (US 20150046106 A1)[hereinafter “Wade”].
Regarding Claim 24, Nakao fails to disclose that a user is notified of a result of determining whether or not at least one of the mileage of the electric vehicle, the number of rapid charging times of the battery pack, the number of times the temperature of the battery pack exceeds a threshold, an assessed price when the battery pack is used in the electric vehicle, an assessed price when the battery pack is used in a vehicle other than the electric vehicle is satisfied as a threshold condition. However, Wade discloses event monitoring and reporting for batteries including events exceeding charging and temperature thresholds [See Paragraphs [0082]-[0095]]. It would have been obvious to monitor and report on such events such that battery users could appropriately adjust their behaviors.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image1.png
314
782
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
459
784
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
79
784
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s reference to their technique is a reference to the abstract idea itself – the mathematical algorithm for evaluating the parameters of a vehicle battery. Regardless of whether Applicant’s algorithm is new or not, "A claim for a new abstract idea is still an abstract idea. The search for a § 101 inventive concept is thus distinct from demonstrating § 102 novelty." Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation, 839 F.3d 1138, 1151 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image4.png
269
780
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The notification of the algorithm results to a user amounts to the recitation of mere extra-solution activity.
Examiner’s Note: Claim 25 does not recite the battery pack as a device component. Since it does not, it can not be argued that the claim recites an improved battery pack that is improved by including the recited calculation unit.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image5.png
410
778
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
524
773
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner agrees. However, Torai is not relied on for disclosing the minimizing the cell voltages. Torai discloses the use of a sum of squares process for determining appropriate coefficients for battery parameters that minimizes the difference between estimated and actual voltages [See Paragraphs [0115] and [0132]].
It would have been obvious to use such a process relative to estimated and actual cell voltages (i.e., for the cells of Nakao) in the determination of battery pack energy capacity in order to ensure that the results of doing so are accurate.
The Examiner notes that Claims 10 and 14 are not rejected over prior art.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image7.png
310
782
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner agrees. However, Torai is not relied on for disclosing the determination of coefficients for these specific parameters. Torai discloses the use of a sum of squares process for determining appropriate coefficients for battery parameters that minimizes the difference between estimated and actual voltages [See Paragraphs [0115] and [0132]].
It would have been obvious to use such a process to determine parameter coefficients (i.e., for the parameters of Nakao) in the determination of battery pack energy capacity in order to ensure that the results of doing so are accurate.
The Examiner notes that Claims 10 and 14 are not rejected over prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20150070024 A1 – BATTERY PACK, APPARATUS INCLUDING BATTERY PACK, AND METHOD OF MANAGING BATTERY PACK
US 20110133697 A1 – BATTERY PACK CAPABLE OF CALCULATING RELATIVE REMAINING CAPACITY
US 20180106867 A1 – METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ESTIMATING REMAINING AVAILABLE ENERGY OF A POWER BATTERY
US 20180106867 A1 – METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ESTIMATING REMAINING AVAILABLE ENERGY OF A POWER BATTERY
US 20130271068 A1 – BATTERY CONTROL APPARATUS AND BATTERY CONTROL METHOD
US 20050237024 A1 – Method Of Charging Secondary Battery, Method Of Calculating Remaining Capacity Rate Of Secondary Battery, And Battery Pack
US 20140084867 A1 – SECONDARY BATTERY DEVICE AND BATTERY CAPACITY ESTIMATION SYSTEM
US 20160118816 A1 – Method Of Controlling Secondary Battery
Aizpuru et al., Battery pack tests to detect unbalancing effects in series connected Li-ion cells, IEEE, 2013
Chun et al., State-of-Charge and Remaining Charge Estimation of Series-Connected Lithium-Ion Batteries for Cell Balancing Scheme, IEEE, 2015
Lin et al., Analytic Bound on Accuracy of Battery State and Parameter Estimation, Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 2015
Qi et al., A Control Strategy for Dynamic Balancing of Lithium Iron Phosphate Battery Based on the Performance of Cell Voltage, ITEC, 2014
Shin et al., A Statistical Model-Based Cell-to-Cell Variability Management of Li-ion Battery Pack, IEEE, 2015
Xia et al., A computationally efficient implementation of a full and reduced-order electrochemistry-based model for Li-Ion batteries, Applied Energy, 2017
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT QUIGLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4879. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM 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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at (571) 272-2619. 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.
/KYLE R QUIGLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights