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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant argument and amendment filed on 03/09/2026 are considered. Claims 1 and 9 are amended. Claims 2, 3, 6-8, 10, 11 and 14-16 are cancelled.
Claim rejection under 35 U.S.C 101: Examiner views, the applicant argument for the amended independent claims 1 and 9 regarding the patent eligible subject matter is not persuasive, because the limitation of “controlling, by the CPU (140), charging or discharging of the battery (10) based on the obtained state of charge and state of health to maintain the battery (10) within the safe operating area” is not supported by the specification. From the applicant referred paragraphs [0002], [0044] and [0045] for the limitation, examiner views the actual control of the charge and discharge of the battery is not disclosed in these paragraphs. The limitation is viewed to be a new matter to the application.
Because of the lack of support in the specification of above discussed limitation, the abstract ideas in the claims do not integrate into practical application. Similarly, the improvement in the battery management system functionality cannot be realized and the claimed limitations are determined to be insignificant because of the above limitation.
Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C 101 is not withdrawn.
Regarding amended independent claims 1 and 9,
Hu et al. (CN 111060822 A) generally teaches a method or system for estimating state of charge and state of health of a battery comprising the steps of:
receiving, by the CPU (140) via the voltage sensing circuitry (110) and the current sensing circuitry (120), real-time measurements of voltages across cells of the battery (10) and currents passing through cells of the battery (10) (page 2 line 19, battery management system (BMS) which requires real time collecting the electric automobile battery group in the terminal voltage and temperature of each battery charging and discharging current data,)
initializing, by the CPU (140), a first vector (x) and a second vector (Θ) based on initial known values of voltage, state of charge of the battery, impedance and charge capacity (Q) of the battery (10) (page 4 line 1. Step S1): select the power battery to be tested, establish a state equation based on the Rint (0-order RC) model, order RC model first order RC model, respectively establishing the state equation, determining the system state and model parameter of the online identification …
page 6 line 11. only with one ohmic resistor Rint model, there is no need to on-line estimation parameter by least squares, only needs to acquire the real-time current, terminal voltage, at k moment according to the SOC value calculated by the ampere -, constructed by step S3) open-circuit voltage Uoc and the relationship between the state of charge SOC,real time numerical value to obtain the corresponding open circuit voltage, so anti-thrust ohmic resistor R0;)
Here established state equation is viewed as initialized state vectors (first and second vectors) that comprise voltage and state of charge (SOC) and the charge capacity Q (ampher-hour) and Ohmic resistance (impedance) based on the selected battery to be tested.
estimating and updating, by the CPU (140) the first vector (x) using a first Kalman filter based on a first equivalent circuit solver, wherein the first vector(x) is a state vector comprising voltage variables and the state of charge of the battery (10) and wherein the second vector (Θ) is assumed to be fixed during this estimation (page 8 Line 5 (step S42): self-adaptation expand Kalman filtering algorithm is specifically as follows, wherein, to order RC for example, other two reduced matrix dimension)
page 8 line 9 ((step S422): the state and covariance prior estimation: FORMULA, for k=1, 2, ..., finishing the priori estimation the following operation, the state and covariance estimates to calculate current time from a previous time (k-1) + (k))
Herein the first vector is estimated (i.e., state vector) and updated using a Kalman filter at different time t, based on a RC equivalent circuit model (first equivalent circuit solver). Assuming second vector is fixed during the first vector estimation.
However, the further search and consideration do not find prior art to teach estimating and updating by the CPU (140), the second vector (Θ), wherein the second vector (Θ) is a parameter vector comprising impedance elements and charge capacity (Q) of the battery (10), by performing both of the following concurrently:
a first estimation based on an electrolyte Enhanced Single Particle Model (eSPM); and
a second estimation using a second Kalman filter based on a second equivalent circuit solver;
merging, by the CPU (140), the updated values of the second vector (Θ) obtained from the eSPM model and the second Kalman filter to generate a merged parameter vector;
obtaining, by the CPU (140), the state of charge of the battery (10) from the updated value of the first vector (x) and obtaining the state of the health of the battery (10) from the merged parameter vector and
controlling, by the CPU (140), charging or discharging of the battery (10) based on the obtained state of charge and state of health to maintain the battery (10) within the safe operating area.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 9, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 9 recite “controlling, by the CPU (140), charging or discharging of the battery (10) based on the obtained state of charge and state of health to maintain the battery (10) within the safe operating area.” The specification does not provide support for the limitation. Therefore, the limitation is considered to be a new matter.
Dependent claims 4, 5, 12 and 13 are also rejected under 112 (a) due to dependency on their independent claims 1 and 9.
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, 4, 5, 9, 12, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, claim 1 recites:
A method (200) for operating a battery (10) within a safe operating area by accurately estimating state of charge and state of health in a battery (10), management system (100) comprising a voltage sensing circuitry (110), a current sensing circuitry (120) and a central processing unit (CPU) (140), the method comprising the steps of:
receiving, by the CPU (140) via the voltage sensing circuitry (110) and the current sensing circuitry (120), real-time measurements of voltages across cells of the battery (10) and currents passing through cells of the battery (10)
initializing, by the CPU (140), a first vector (x) and a second vector (Θ) based on initial known values of voltage, state of charge of the battery, impedance and charge capacity (Q) of the battery (10);
estimating and updating, by the CPU (140) the first vector (x) using a first Kalman filter based on a first equivalent circuit solver, wherein the first vector(x) is a state vector comprising voltage variables and the state of charge of the battery (10) and wherein the second vector (Θ) is assumed to be fixed during this estimation;
estimating and updating by the CPU (140), the second vector (Θ), wherein the second vector (Θ) is a parameter vector comprising impedance elements and charge capacity (Q) of the battery (10), by performing both of the following concurrently:
a first estimation based on an electrolyte Enhanced Single Particle Model (eSPM); and
a second estimation using a second Kalman filter based on a second equivalent circuit solver;
merging, by the CPU (140), the updated values of the second vector (Θ) obtained from the eSPM model and the second Kalman filter to generate a merged parameter vector;
obtaining, by the CPU (140), the state of charge of the battery (10) from the updated value of the first vector (x) and obtaining the state of the health of the battery (10) from the merged parameter vector and
Controlling, by the CPU (140), charging or discharging of the battery (10) based on the obtained state of charge and state of health to maintain the battery (10) within the safe operating area.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above.
Under the step 1 of the eligibility analysis, it is determined whether the claims are drawn to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter fall within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C 101: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in the statutory category of (process).
Under the step 2A, prong one, it is considered whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that cover mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations) and mental process – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion.
For example, a step of initializing, by the CPU (140), a first vector (x) and a second vector (Θ) based on initial known values of voltage, state of charge of the battery, impedance and charge capacity (Q) of the battery (10); (is considered to be a mental process);
estimating and updating, by the CPU (140) the first vector (x) using a first Kalman filter based on a first equivalent circuit solver, wherein the first vector(x) is a state vector comprising voltage variables and the state of charge of the battery (10) and wherein the second vector (Θ) is assumed to be fixed during this estimation; (estimating section is considered to be a mathematical relationship from equivalent circuit solver or model, updating and assuming section is considered to be a mental process)
estimating and updating by the CPU (140), the second vector (Θ), wherein the second vector (Θ) is a parameter vector comprising impedance elements and charge capacity (Q) of the battery (10), by performing both of the following concurrently:
a first estimation based on an electrolyte Enhanced Single Particle Model (eSPM); and
a second estimation using a second Kalman filter based on a second equivalent circuit solver;
(estimating section is considered to be a mathematical relationship and updating section is considered to be a mental process);
merging, by the CPU (140), the updated values of the second vector (Θ) obtained from the eSPM model and the second Kalman filter to generate a merged parameter vector;(is considered to be mathematical relationship);
obtaining, by the CPU (140), the state of charge of the battery (10) from the updated value of the first vector (x) and obtaining the state of the health of the battery (10) from the merged parameter vector (is considered to be a mathematical relationships),) (is considered to be a mathematical relationships).
These mathematical and mental steps represent that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of the independent claims 9.
Next, under the step 2A, prong two, it is considered whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, it is evaluated whether the claim recites meaningful additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
In claim 1, the additional elements/steps (voltage sensing circuitry, current sensing circuitry, a central processing unit) are sensors and processor recited in generality and represent extra- solution activity to the judicial exception. The additional element in the preamble of “A method (200) for…” is not qualified for a meaningful limitation because it only generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements/steps “a voltage sensing circuitry for sensing…” and “a current sensing circuitry…” are also recited in generality which seem to merely be gathering data and not really performing any kind of inventive step to provide any meaningful additional element. Central processing unit seems to perform all the calculation and estimations to output the result. Also, it represents an extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. All uses of judicial exception require it. Controlling, by the CPU (140) charging or discharging of the battery… is determined to be insignificant limitation due to lack of support in the specification.
In claim 9, the additional elements/steps recite the similar additional elements/steps as of claim 1. The additional elements/steps (voltage sensing circuitry, current sensing circuitry, a central processing unit) are sensors and processor recited in generality and represent extra- solution activity to the judicial exception. The additional element in the preamble of “A system for estimating state of charge” is not qualified for a meaningful limitation because it only generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements/steps “a voltage sensing circuitry for sensing…” and “a current sensing circuitry…” are also recited in generality which seem to merely be gathering data and not really performing any kind of inventive step to provide any meaningful additional element. Central processing unit seems to perform all the calculation and estimations to output the result. Also, it represents an extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. All uses of judicial exception require it. Controlling, by the CPU (140) charging or discharging of the battery… is determined to be insignificant limitation due to lack of support in the specification.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the step 2B.
Considering the claim as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would not know the practical application of the present invention since the claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in some meaningful way.
The independent claims, therefore, are not patent eligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, the claims 4, 5 and 12, 13 comprise the analogous subject matter and also comprise additional features/steps which are the part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims 1 and 9 (additionally comprising mathematical relationship/mental process steps) and, therefore, the dependent claims are not eligible without additional elements that reflect a practical application and qualified for significantly more for substantially similar reason as discussed with regards to claim 1 and 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARAD TIMILSINA whose telephone number is (571)272-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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.
/SHARAD TIMILSINA/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights