DETAILED ACTION
Amendment filed on 3/13/26 is acknowledged. Claim 18 is canceled and claims 22-27 are added. Currently claims 9-11, 13-17, and 19-27 are pending and examined as shown below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/13/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim interpretation of the contingent statement, applicant argues that according to MPEP 2111.04, at least one of the limitations must happened. The examiner disagrees. The claim recites
“…adjusting the at least one rechargeable battery from a first operating state to a second operating state via a first signal when a first threshold value is reached once or when a second threshold value is reached for a predetermined number;
wherein a further signal is emitted … upon the adjusting of at least one rechargeable battery from the first operating state to the second operating state occurs”.
The claim, as recited, does not require the adjustment of the first operating state to the second operating state or a further signal is emitted” since the adjustment only takes place when either of the cited conditions are met. However, neither one of the conditions must be detected since various other conditions can exist during operation that do not require the adjustment to take place (i.e. below the first threshold value, below a second threshold value or reaching a second threshold value but below a predetermined number).
Claim Interpretation
Claim 9 is directed to a method that includes a contingent limitation of “adjusting …when first threshold value is reached once or when a second threshold value is reached”(emphasis added). Under the BRI, the condition the second data deviate may not occur and therefore the step of indicating the deviation …” does not need to be performed due to the contingent limitations. Similarly, features of the dependent claims that rely on the contingent limitation does not need to be performed.
See MPEP 2111.04 “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.
The rest of the dependent claims do not cure this deficiency and therefore rejected accordingly. Correction/clarification required.
Claim 18 recites “a further signal emitted...”. It is unclear if the further signal in claim 18 is the same as the “further signal of claim 9.
In addition, claim 18 recites “the further signal being transmitted to the control device to change the rechargeable battery from the first to the second operating state. However, claim 1 recites the first signal is used to perform this function.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9-11, 13-23, and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Mull et al., US 2014/0342193 A1 (cited in the IDS).
Regarding claim 9, Mull discloses a method for operating a system [Par 0025 Fig. 1-7] containing at least one rechargeable battery [Battery 112/240, Fig. 1-2], a data processing apparatus [Controller 210, Fig. 2] with a memory device [Memory 214, Fig. 2], a control device [Controlling module 110/230, Fig. 1-2], at least one sensor [Fig. 3, par. 31-50] and a transmitting and receiving device [Par 0027, ll. 1-2, Network interface 216], the method comprising the steps of:
capturing values via the at least one sensor [Par 0062, ll. 5-11, and step 702 of Fig. 7 show values are captured via the at least one sensor];
transmitting the captured values to the data processing apparatus [step 706] using the transmitting and receiving device [Par 20 and 30, processor 212 which is part of data processing apparatus (controller 210) may communicate with monitoring/controlling units via I2C bus, SMBus, or wirelessly or via LAN, WAN, VPN, Internet, telecommunication network, Bluetooth, NFC, etc.];
comparing the captured values with threshold values stored in the memory device [Par 0051, 0053, controller 422 may control various parameters associated with the battery and/or its individual cells (i.e. threshold values are stored). These thresholds can be used to trigger one or more controlling events. A comparison is made between captured (measured) values and the threshold values];
storing an event of a captured value reaching a threshold value in the memory device [Par 32-33, 51, 58, Storage device 506 of the server stores information received from controller 114, Par 0053, Battery parameter controller 422 set and control the thresholds associated with the battery cells];
Note: based on the BRI of the contingent limitation, the adjusting the at least one rechargeable battery from a first operating state to a second operating state via signal and a further signal do not need to occur. In the alternative, Mull also teaches
adjusting the at least one rechargeable battery from a first operating state to a second operating state via signal when a first threshold value is reached once or when a second threshold value is reached for a predetermined number [ Par. 51 and 53, threshold may be used to trigger one or more controlling/triggering events; battery health regulator 412 may turn on/off switches to charge/discharge in turn generating a first signal to adjust the state of the battery]
wherein a further signal is emitted by the transmitting and receiving device when the adjusting of the at least one rechargeable battery from the first operating state to a second operating state occur [Par. 59, Cloud 610 may receive status reports from batteries through communicating with their respective controllers via network interface. Fig. 702-706, detect characteristic of the battery and sending signal to the server ].
Claim 10, Mull discloses the method as recited in claim 9. Mull further discloses, wherein an output of electrical energy from the at least one rechargeable battery is at least temporarily blocked by adjusting the at least one rechargeable battery from the first operating state to a second operating state [Par 0051, battery health regulator 412 may turn off the discharging switch when the condition of the cell improves, see also par. 63; directly interfering with the operation of the battery, such as turn off (e.g., disconnect) the battery, reduce charging/discharging voltage or current, etc ].
Claim 11, Mull discloses the method as recited in claim 9. Mull further discloses wherein an intake of electrical energy into the at least one rechargeable battery is at least temporarily blocked by adjusting the at least one rechargeable battery from the first operating state to a second operating state [Par 0052, battery health regulator 412 may also turn off switch 448 to shut down the entire charging circuit of the battery, see also par. 63 directly interfering with the operation of the battery, such as turn off (e.g., disconnect) the battery, reduce charging/discharging voltage or current, etc.].
Claim 13, Mull discloses the method as recited in claim 9. Mull further discloses wherein the threshold values stored in the memory device are changed by adjusting the at least one rechargeable battery from the first operating state to a second operating state [Par 0064, the system may set up certain thresholds for the battery for charging and discharging and thresholds may be set up for batteries at different locations].
Claim 14 similarly repeats the same limitations as recited in claim 9 and is rejected accordingly.
Claim 15, Mull discloses the system as recited in claim 14. Mull further discloses wherein the data processing device is in the form of an external IT infrastructure [Fig. 1-2 and 6, the battery management device is part of a network].
Claim 16, Mull discloses the system as recited in claim 15. Mull further discloses wherein the external IT infrastructure is a cloud [Fig. 5, cloud 610].
Claim 17, Mull discloses the system as recited in claim 14. Mull further discloses wherein the at least one rechargeable battery contains the data processing device [Par 0021, ll. 4-6; controller 114 may be integrated into battery unit 112 with other controlling circuits].
Regarding claim 19, Mull discloses the system as recited in claim 14. Mull further discloses wherein the sensor is a temperature sensor [Fig. 3 and par 36, thermocoupler 308].
Regarding claim 20, Mull discloses the system as recited in claim 14. Mull further discloses wherein the sensor senses a state value of the rechargeable battery [see par 32, current sensor 302 may detect/monitor current value of battery 240 or its individual cells during charging and/or discharging process. See also par. 21 and operations of voltage controller 432 of Fig. 4)
Regarding claim 21, Mull discloses the system as recited in claim 14. Mull further discloses wherein the further signal is emitted to a smartphone of a user by the adjusting [par 60, smartphone ].
Claim 22 (new): Muller teaches the system as recited in claim 14 wherein the sensor is a pressure sensor [ par. 21, a pressure sensor 320]
Claim 23 (new): Muller teaches the system as recited in claim 14 wherein the at least one rechargeable battery is a plurality of rechargeable batteries [par. 2, 21, rechargeable batteries]
Claim 26 (new): Muller teaches the ystem as recited in claim 14 wherein the transmitting and receiving device uses Bluetooth technology [ par. 57, Bluethooth]
Claim 27 (new): Muller teaches the e system as recited in claim 14 wherein the at least one rechargeable battery has a housing and the sensor is positioned at a side of the housing [par. 36, internal, inside battery cell].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Muller
Claim 24 (new): Muller teaches the system as recited in claim 14 wherein the at least one rechargeable battery comprises a plurality of rechargeable batteries [Fig. 2 and 6] but does not disclose exactly four rechargeable batteries. However, given the description of applicant’s own disclosure [specification, par. 14, 16, 22, 48-50 that no specific requirement is found for “exactly four rechargeable batteries], thus this is a designed choice in order to provide sufficient number of batteries to effectively manage batteries under battery utilization framework and expand the functionality thereof [Muller, par. 2-3].
Claim(s) 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muller in view of Thompson 20180246552.
Claim 25 (new): Muller teaches the method as recited in claim 9 and further teaches the status and/or characteristics the information regarding the batteries is monitored, recorded and stored [par. 18-19. Par. 32-33 Processor 212 may store the information locally, e.g., in memory 214] but does not specify a number of times that the values are captured. Given the fact that Muller teaches recording changes of the battery characteristic, the number of times that the values being capture would be recorded since Muller teaches continuous monitoring and capturing data. In the alternative, Thompson teaches a method for event tracking and health assessment of battery the environment condition and parameters are being monitored and recorded and including battery characteristics [par. 5] wherein the number of trigger event are recorded and stored [par. 5, 27 and 38 and table 1]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement the teaching of Thompson to enable diagnosis of the cause and proactive actions to be taken to correct any determined problems for future systems [par. 7 and 10]
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIM HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-4147. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:00am-4:0pm.
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, JAWEED ABBASZADEH can be reached at (571)270-1640. 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.
/KIM HUYNH/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2176
Prosecution Insights