DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
In the communication dated June 8, 2026, claims 1-2, 4-14, 16-18 are pending. Claims 1 and 12 are amended and claims 3 and 15 are presently cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, see the remarks, filed June 8, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 12 under 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of newly cited references of Hashimoto et al. JP2007276654A and Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A as detailed further 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.
Claims 12-14 and 16-18 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.
Claims 12, line 6 recites “a controller”, which, for clarity should be amended to recite “the controller”, unless the applicant is referring to a separate controller, in which case, this should be clearly indicated within the claim language.
Claims 13-14 and 16-18 are rejected at least due to their dependency from a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto et al. JP2007276654A in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A.
Regarding claim 1. Hashimoto discloses a battery management apparatus (FIG. 1) comprising:
a controller (microcomputer 10); and
a switch (2) configured to control an electrical connection with between a battery module (1) and the controller (10);
wherein the controller (10) is configured to:
control measurement of a voltage of a battery cell included in the battery module (page 4, ¶4 - “a microcomputer (hereinafter abbreviated as a microcomputer) 10 that measures an open circuit (open circuit) voltage” and page 4, ¶7 - “the microcomputer 10 can take in the voltage across the lead battery 1 as a digital value”);
control a driving current transferred from the battery module to the controller through the electrical connection (page 6, ¶2 - “the operating power is supplied from the lead battery 1 to the microcomputer 10 via the switch 2 in the on state”).
Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose to control the switch to disconnect the battery module from the controller during measurement of the voltage of the battery cell.
Mamoru discloses control the switch to disconnect the battery module from the controller during measurement of the voltage of the battery cell (page 3, ¶10 - “the switching unit 21 turns the connection unit 40 off when the acquisition unit 22 acquires the open circuit voltage of the power supply unit 30”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the control of Mamoru to the system of Hashimoto in order to use an open circuit voltage to accurate determine a charging rate and avoid overcharging or overdischarging (Mamoru; page 1, last paragraph, page 2, ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 5. Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose that the controller is further configured to generate a control signal to turn off the switch during measurement of the voltage.
Mamoru discloses that the controller (“the battery control unit 20 includes a switching unit 21”) is further configured to generate a control signal to turn off the switch during measurement of the voltage (“the switching unit 21 turns the connection unit 40 off when the acquisition unit 22 acquires the open circuit voltage of the power supply unit 30”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the control of Mamoru to the system of Hashimoto in order to use an open circuit voltage to accurate determine a charging rate and avoid overcharging or overdischarging (Mamoru; page 1, last paragraph, page 2, ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 6. Hashimoto discloses that the switch (2) is contained within the controller (the controller being considered elements 2/10).
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto et al. JP2007276654A in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A in further view of Honda et al US20220283244A1.
Regarding claim 2. Hashimoto discloses that when the switch (2) is turned on, the battery module (1) and the controller (10) are electrically connected to each other (FIG. 1).
Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose that the driving current is transferred to the controller through an internal resistor of the battery module.
Honda discloses that the driving current is transferred through an internal resistor of the battery module (¶56 – FIG. 2 – battery cell Cb of FIG. 1 is expressed by a series circuit of an internal resistor R1 and a voltage source V1).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to output a current through an internal resistor, as taught by Honda, to the controller of Hashimoto as it is well known in the art that an internal resistor is included in a battery module (Honda; FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 4. Hashimoto discloses that the battery module (1) comprises a plurality of battery cells (FIG. 1 – illustrates a plurality of cells within battery 1), and wherein each battery cell includes a respective internal resistor provided at opposite ends of the battery cells.
Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose each battery cell includes a respective internal resistor provided at opposite ends of the battery cells.
Honda discloses each battery cell includes a respective internal resistor provided at opposite ends of the battery cells (¶56 – FIG. 2 – battery cell Cb of FIG. 1 is expressed by a series circuit of an internal resistor R1 and a voltage source V1).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to output a current through an internal resistor, as taught by Honda, to the controller of Hashimoto as it is well known in the art that an internal resistor is included in a battery module (Honda; FIG. 2).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto et al. JP2007276654A in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A in further view of Csibi et al. US20170273158A1.
Regarding claim 8. Hashimoto does not explicitly teach a power supply configured to supply a power supply driving current to the controller.
Csibi discloses a power supply (4) configured to supply a power supply driving current to the controller (5) (¶8 - lower supply capacitor storing at least the designated upper threshold of the input voltage of the controller, discharging at least some of the electric energy that is stored in the power supply capacitor into a controller to power the controller ).
Although Csibi is related to powering a lighting system, it is analogous because it relates to current control to a load. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a power supply to power the control in order to provide the amount of power required to operate the system (Csibi; ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 9. Hashimoto does not explicitly teach the power supply is further configured to supply stored power to the controller while the switch is off.
Csibi discloses the power supply (4) is further configured to supply stored power to the controller (5) while the switch is off (¶8 – voltage discharged to the controller to power the controller, then closing the switch to power a device – the voltage is first discharged to the controller while the switch is off).
Although Csibi is related to powering a lighting system, it is analogous because it relates to current control to a load. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a power supply to power the control in order to provide the amount of power required to operate the system (Csibi; ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 10. Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose the power supply comprises at least one capacitor.
Csibi discloses the power supply comprises at least one capacitor (¶8 – power supply capacitor of the power supply circuit).
Although Csibi is related to powering a lighting system, it is analogous because it relates to current control to a load. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a power supply to power the control in order to provide the amount of power required to operate the system (Csibi; ¶3-4).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hashimoto et al. JP2007276654A in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A and Csibi et al. US20170273158A1 and further in view of Lei US20170368957A1.
Regarding claim 11. Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose that the capacitor of the power supply is configured to be charged with power from the battery module while the switch is in an on state.
Lei discloses the capacitor (120) of the power supply (¶49 – power supply includes a capacitor module) is configured to be charged with power from the battery module while the switch (131) is in an on state (¶50 – internal battery module 110 is used to charge the capacitor module; FIG. 1 – when switch 131 is closed, the battery 110 charges capacitor 120).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of invention to provide a bidirectional configuration in order for the battery to provide means for the battery to both charge and discharge thus preventing both over and under charging.
Claims 12-13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US20100231166A1 in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A.
Regarding claim 12. Lee discloses a battery system (FIG. 2 and 4) comprising:
a battery module (110) comprising a plurality of battery cells (B1-Bn);
an electricity storage unit connected to the battery module to store a corresponding voltage of each battery cell (¶37 – capacitor 131 –potential of the battery cell is charged to the capacitor 131);
a controller (150); and
a switch (120) positioned between the battery module (110) and a controller (150) (FIG. 2) to control an electrical connection between the battery module and the controller,
wherein the controller (150) is configured to:
for each battery cell, control measurement of a voltage of the battery cell based on the corresponding voltage stored in the electricity storage unit (¶36 – “The microprocessor 150 controls the switch module 120 to measure a potential of each cell composing the battery module 110 via the voltage sensor 130”).
Lee does not explicitly disclose to control a driving current transferred from the battery module to the controller through the electrical connection; and control the switch to disconnect the battery module from the controller during measurement of the voltage of the battery cell.
Mamoru discloses to control a driving current transferred from the battery module to the controller through the electrical connection (page 3, ¶2 – “The battery pack 10 supplies power to the main control unit 60”); and
control the switch to disconnect the battery module from the controller during measurement of the voltage of the battery cell (page 3, ¶10 - “the switching unit 21 turns the connection unit 40 off when the acquisition unit 22 acquires the open circuit voltage of the power supply unit 30”).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the control of Mamoru to the system of Hashimoto in order to use an open circuit voltage to accurate determine a charging rate and avoid overcharging or overdischarging (Mamoru; page 1, last paragraph, page 2, ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 13. Although Lee does not explicitly teach that the electricity storage unit (capacitor 131) comprises a plurality of capacitors, each capacitor provided to corresponding to a respective the battery cells, respectively, Lee does teach that the capacitor is connected in parallel to the individual cell (¶37). It is implicit that there is a capacitor that corresponds to each of the battery cells since the capacitor is connected in parallel to each.
laim 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US20100231166A1 in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A in further view of Honda et al US20220283244A1.
Regarding claim 14. Lee discloses that when the switch (120) is turned on, the battery module (110) and the controller (150) are electrically connected to each other (FIG. 2).
Lee does not explicitly disclose that the driving current is transferred to the controller through an internal resistor of the battery module.
Honda discloses that the driving current is transferred through an internal resistor of the battery module (¶56 – FIG. 2 – battery cell Cb of FIG. 1 is expressed by a series circuit of an internal resistor R1 and a voltage source V1).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to output a current through an internal resistor, as taught by Honda, to the controller of Lee as it is well known in the art that an internal resistor is included in a battery module (Honda; FIG. 2).
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US20100231166A1 in view of Mamoru et al. JP2014013210A in further view of Csibi et al. US20170273158A1.
Regarding claim 16. Lee does not explicitly teach a power supply configured to supply a power supply driving current to the controller.
Csibi discloses a power supply (4) configured to supply a power supply driving current to the controller (5) (¶8 - lower supply capacitor storing at least the designated upper threshold of the input voltage of the controller, discharging at least some of the electric energy that is stored in the power supply capacitor into a controller to power the controller).
Although Csibi is related to powering a lighting system, it is analogous because it relates to current control to a load. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a power supply to power the control in order to provide the amount of power required to operate the system (Csibi; ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 17. Lee does not explicitly teach the power supply is further configured to supply stored power to the controller while the switch is off.
Csibi discloses the power supply (4) is further configured to supply stored power to the controller (5) while the switch is off (¶8 – voltage discharged to the controller to power the controller, then closing the switch to power a device – the voltage is first discharged to the controller while the switch is off).
Although Csibi is related to powering a lighting system, it is analogous because it relates to current control to a load. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a power supply to power the control in order to provide the amount of power required to operate the system (Csibi; ¶3-4).
Regarding claim 18. Lee does not explicitly disclose the power supply comprises at least one capacitor.
Csibi discloses the power supply comprises at least one capacitor (¶8 – power supply capacitor of the power supply circuit).
Although Csibi is related to powering a lighting system, it is analogous because it relates to current control to a load. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a power supply to power the control in order to provide the amount of power required to operate the system (Csibi; ¶3-4).
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 PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM..
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights