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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 Request for Continued Examination (RCE) submission filed on 10/06/2025, and amended claims as filed on 09/18/2025 have been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amended claims, filed 09/18/2015, are accepted and appreciated by the examiner. Per filing of Request for Continued Examination, dated 10/06/2025, claims have been entered. Independent Claim 1 has been amended with claims 2-3, and 8-10 as previously presented (dated 05/20/2025). Examiner agrees with Applicant that support for amended claim language is found in at least [0055] as found in original specification dated 11/29/2022 with no new material.
Response to Arguments
Examiner acknowledges and appreciates Applicant’s remarks and arguments,
filed 09/18/2025, which have been reviewed and fully considered. Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s request to consider amendments to claims filed on 09/18/2025. Examiner appreciated Applicant’s remarks to clarify intended inventive concept in limitations of amended independent Claim1, specifically with regard to determination of a leakage condition location in both a positive side and a negative side of bus.
With regard to Applicant’s remarks concerning rejection of claims 1-3, and 8-10 under 35 U.S.C. §103, Examiner has carefully reviewed and fully considered applicant’s arguments. Specifically, Examiner has carefully reviewed arguments regarding independent, amended Claim 1, rejected in previous office action (Final rejection, dated 07/23/2025) over SUN (US 20160091551 A1) in view of YANO (US 20070285057 A1). Applicant argues that rejection failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, because the Office failed to properly determine the scope and content of the cited references. (Remarks, pg.8) Examiner respectfully disagrees. SUN is directed to same technical field, “leakage current detection for vehicles” (see SUN [0001]), as is YANO, citing “leakage detection circuit for an electric vehicle” (see YANO [0001]). One of ordinary skill in the at the time of the application would have been motivated to combine the mathematical disclosure of YANO, as cited in previous office action, with the method as disclosed by SUN, based on each reference directed to same field of endeavor and aimed at solving a leakage detection problem. Examiner holds that the obvious combination teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as presented on 05/20/2025 and considered in previous office action dated 07/23/2025, with sound rationale guided by . However, Examiner agrees with Applicant’s arguments that the obvious combination of SUN and YANO fail to teach or suggest with sufficient specificity the limitations as presented 09/18/2025, with significant amendment to independent Claim 1. Based on Applicant’s explanatory remarks (Remarks, pg. 9), and amended claim limitations, Examiner better understands intended meaning of Claim1.
As noted in Advisory Action dated 09/25/2025, amendments to claims necessitate new search and examination. Thus, Claims 1-3, and 8-10 are considered pending and under consideration herein and are addressed below in view of remarks filed by Applicant on 09/18/2025. In view of new grounds for rejection under 35 U.S.C §103, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments, Examiner finds the arguments are not persuasive. Amended claims art not distinguishable over the prior art. A detailed response to arguments with basis for rejection is presented below.
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.
As noted by Applicant (Remarks, pg. 8), Examiner notes application of guidance found in MPEP 2141 in determination of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. Specifically, factual inquiry steps described in 2141 (II): “An invention that would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill at the relevant time is not patentable. See 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a). As reiterated by the Supreme Court in KSR, the framework for the objective analysis for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 is stated in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966). Obviousness is a question of law based on underlying factual inquiries.” Further, the following steps for factual inquiries were used in evaluation of prior art used for obviousness rejection:
(A) Determining the scope and content of the prior art;
(B) Ascertaining the differences between the claimed invention and the prior
art; and
(C) Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over SUN (US 20160091551 A1) in view of YANO (US 20070285057 A1), and further in view of GALE (US 20190351771 A1).
(Examiner notes claims presented below without amendment mark up for clarity.)
With respect to Claim 1, SUN teaches:
The electric leakage detection method of detecting an electric leakage occurring position in an electricity distribution system
(SUN, [0001]: “application generally relates to leakage current detection for vehicles including a high-voltage bus”;
where a power source unit and an electric device are electrically connected to each other,
(See circuit configuration, FIG.3; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language “power source” to be analogous to reference language “battery 24” (FIG. 3), and limitation language “electric device” to be analogous to reference “electric machines 14” (labeled “M” in FIG.3). SUN teaches analogous electrical connections between these two elements, including “switches 42” and a “voltage bus 130” in FIG. 3.)
the electricity distribution system including:
a positive electrode electroconductive path which connects between a positive electrode of the power source unit and the electric device;
a negative electrode electroconductive path which connects between a negative electrode of the power source unit and the electric device;
(SUN teaches positive and negative electroconductive paths in FIG 3, depicting “Battery 24” connected to electric device (shown as “M 14”); SUN designates path connected to top (upper end) of “Battery 24” in FIG. 3 as connected to “positive terminal 124”; Likewise, SUN teaches negative path, connected to bottom of “battery 24”, connected to “negative terminal 126”, both described in [0021]. Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language “positive electroconductive path” and “negative electroconductive path” to be analogous to circuit pathways depicted in reference FIG. 3 connecting positive or negative battery terminal to device side, as in [0013]: “electrically connected to one or more power electronics modules 26” where examiner interprets “device side” to be analogous to portion of circuit shown in reference where “electric machines 14” are located. Examiner further notes that switch/connectors are labeled in FIG. 3 and described in [0013]: “contactors 42” with the same element number for both positive and negative electroconductive path connectors.)
a positive-side contactor attached to the positive electrode electroconductive path and configured to switch ON/OFF of connection between the power source unit and the electric device; and
a negative electrode electroconductive path which connects between a negative electrode of the power source unit and the electric device;
(SUN teaches the positive and negative contactor in [0013]: “contactors 42” and as depicted in FIG. 3, connecting power source (“Battery 24”) with electric device side described in [0013]: “Power Electronics Module 26…Electric machines 14”; Examiner notes SUN refers to both contactors with the same label ([0013]: “contactors 42”), but one of ordinary skill would understand which is positive or negative in FIG. 3, with negative side contactor shown position below battery connected to [0021]:“negative terminal 126”. Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation of “ON/OFF” as would be generally understood by one of ordinary skill, analogous to reference teaching switches producing ON/OFF condition described in [0013]: “One or more contactors 42 may isolate the traction battery 24 from other components when opened and connect the traction battery 24 to other components when closed”; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language “positive-side contactor” as described above, as contactor in conductive path connected to “positive terminal 124”;
the electric leakage detection method comprising:
first determination of turning at least one of the positive-side contactor or the negative side contactor ON and determining a value of a system electric leakage resistance Rz which is an electric leakage resistance of the entire electricity distribution system;
PNG
media_image1.png
320
324
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Examiner notes broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of claim limitation , based on consideration of “system leakage resistance” to me determination of system electrical leak, i.e., that there is a leak somewhere in the system as a whole, without isolating the leakage with positional information. The interpretation rationale is based on claim limitation language “resistance of the entire electricity distribution system”. SUN teaches determination of system leakage, configured with at least one of positive or negative side contactor ON; refer to FIG. 3 (included left for convenience, and annotated for discussion herein), with [0022]: “leakage detection circuitry 100 for detecting the presence of electrical isolation issues…connected to each terminal (124, 126) of the traction battery…when the contactors 42 are closed, the leakage detection circuitry is connected to the high-voltage bus 130.”; Examiner points SUN FIG.3, depicting various locations of resistors “RL”, described in [0030]: “RLeakage value may be analyzed to determine if the proper electrical isolation is present”; Examiner notes SUN places “RL” at various locations in the circuit (FIG. 3) to illustrate technique and method for determining positional isolation of leakage points for various system portions. Examiner points out that if “contactor 42” are closed, analogous to claim limitation of “ON”, with RL place in positions noted by * in the figure, a determination of a system leakage would be determined. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill that placing leakage resistor, “RL”, in various locations between system and ground, examination of resistance, RL at those locations would be accomplished and serve the goal of isolating a leakage position in the system.; Examiner notes that this claim limitation was presented as a single reference 103 rejection in a previous office action, where it was noted that SUN does not explicitly teach “leakage resistance, RZ”. However, as noted above, and as shown in figure below, and as would be understood by one of ordinary skill, the configuration disclosed by SUN in FIG.3 would have a reasonable expectation of success as shown in instant application FIG. 1. Thus, the testing configuration and method of SUN is analogous to Applicant’s claim limitation. SUN further describes in [0025]: “description of how electric leakage circuit 100 functions to measure leakage resistance, “RL”: “leakage detection circuit 100 provides a mechanism to estimate the leakage resistance 118 between the conductors 122, 128 and the chassis ground 120 to detect a leakage path”. Examiner asserts that while SUN does not explicitly name the leakage resistance, the method, electrode/connector configuration, and resulting determination of electrical leakage disclosed by SUN is analogous to claim limitation as presented.)
second determination of turning both of the positive-side contactor and the negative-side contactor OFF and determining a value of a power source-side electric leakage resistor RL which is a power source unit-side electric leakage resistance; and
(SUN teaches electrical leakage determination method where connections are configured with contactors OFF (“open”) in [0032]: “leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are open. Under this condition, any leakage condition may be identified as being associated with the traction battery 24.”; Examiner points again to FIG. 3, and as above [0013]: “One or more contactors 42 may isolate the traction battery 24 from other components when opened”; Examiner notes that the SUN names this configuration as “first”, but asserts that one of ordinary skill would understand measurements and steps to achieve a desired piece of locational information, as taught by SUN.; Examiner notes details for leakage condition detection method are found in reference para [0026]-[0033]; Examiner further notes that SUN does not use different variable names for leakage resistors placed at different points in the circuit, but one of ordinary skill would understand that current would flow through leakage resistors as shown in FIG. 3 to ground, allowing measurement and determination of a leakage resistance in a particular locations.)
and first determination of determining which of a power source unit-side region or an electric device-side region is causing the electric leakage based on the values of the system electric leakage resistance Rz and power source-side electric leakage resistor RL;
(Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language to directed to solving the problem of isolation of an electrical leakage based on a leakage resistance present at a specific location in a circuit, with interpretation rationale based resistors as shown in Applicant’s FIG. 1.; SUN teaches configuration and method for determining whether electrical leakage is on power side or device side, referring again to FIG. 3, with description by first determining if there is or is not an electrical leak in the power side (“traction battery 24”), described above, [0032]: “leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are open”, followed by [0033]: “If no leakage condition is detected within the traction battery 24, a second leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are closed….Under this condition, any leakage condition may be identified as being associated with the high-voltage bus 130.”; SUN FIG. 3 depicts the “power bus unit 130” on the electrical machine (device) side of the circuit, wherein if “contactors 42” are closed (ON) the electrical machine side is in electrical contact with the power side. Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language to be analogous to reference; SUN teaches analysis of using system resistance (disclosed by SUN, as discussed above). Examiner notes details for leakage condition detection method are found in reference para [0026]-[0033])
third determination of calculating a value of a device-side electric leakage resistance Rv which is an electric leakage resistance in the electric device
(Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language to mean determination of an electric leakage condition positionally located in the portion of the circuit where a device (energy user) is located, more specifically, an electric leakage at or due to an electric device. SUN teaches a method for testing for a current leakage at the circuit location where “electric machine 14” is located; Examiner notes claim limitation of “electric device” as analogous to “electric machine 14”; see SUN FIGs. 1 and 3, element “M 14”; SUN teaches method to determine an electric leakage isolated at “electric machine 14” (“M 14”), explained in detail in [0036]-[0038] explaining use of “switching element 110,112” for isolating component under test to be in electrical connection with “leakage detection circuit 100”, summarized in FIG. 5, steps 312, 314 and 320 teaching testing of “electric machine 14” for an isolated electric leakage. Examiner asserts that while SUN does not explicitly name variables with names as used by Applicant, one of ordinary skill would clearly understand the process of using test resistors to detect leakage resistance is analogous to instant application, with isolated leakage locations discovered by positional placement and monitoring of leakage resistor with connection to ground.)
wherein in the third determination, a value of a first device-side electric leakage resistance Rv1 which is a device-side electric leakage resistance Rv when the electric device is monitored;
(Examiner again notes BRI applied to claim limitation language “a value of a first device-side electric leakage resistor RV1 which is a device-side electric leakage resistance RV when the electric device is calculated” to mean the naming of a new variable, RV1, which is a determination of electric device-side electric leakage related to the electric device. Interpretation is supported by application specification [0014]-[0015], as well as limitation language that follows describing calculation and evaluation of RV1 to determine which of: the electric device OR electric device-side excluding device, is the source of the leakage if it is determined that there is a leak in the electric device-side (based on evaluation of RV); SUN teaches method for determination of electric leakage on the electric device-side and further isolation of a determination between the electric device or other components on the electric device side as in [0036]: “possible that a current leakage condition lies in one of the terminals 136 or wires of the electric machine 14…method of testing for a current leakage within the electric machine 14 and power electronics module 26 may help to determine the location of the leakage current.”; with details of method steps, based on FIG. 3 with [0037]: “leakage resistance 118 due to the electric machine 14 may be checked by electrically coupling each terminal 136 of the electric machine 14 to a common terminal (124 or 126) of the traction battery 24. This may be achieved by operating the switching devices 132, 134 within the power electronics module 26.” , and [0038]: “leakage condition may now be checked by operating the leakage detection circuit 100 as described previously”; Examiner notes again SUN disclosure in FIG. 3 of leakage resistor placement at multiple areas in system circuit, with isolation of a particular component or portion undertest facilitated by switching configurations, as described above, as would be understood by one of ordinary skill.)
second determination of determining which of the electric device or an electric device- side region excluding the electric device is causing the electric leakage based on the value of the first device-side electric leakage resistance Rv1 if it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the electric device-side region in the first determination,
(Examiner points to details described directly above regarding SUN applied to measurement of application variable named “RV1”, as analogous to determination of leakage at position of (or due to) electric-device, reference, FIG. 3, “M 14” ; also, as above, see Fig. 5 and details of determination method in [0036] – [0041]; Examiner points specifically to [0036]: “method of testing for a current leakage within the electric machine 14 and power electronics module 26 may help to determine the location of the leakage current” and [0038]: “If an excessive leakage current is detected, the source of the issue may be traced to the electric machine 14.”; Examiner notes interpretation of reference terms “electric machine and power electronics module” as analogous to claim limitation language of “electric device side excluding electric device”, the rationale would be understood by one of ordinary skill, since reference element “electric machine” is a periphery device connected through the high-voltage bus, which is tested for leakage in prior measurement and analogous to “electric device” in application; details of determining which of the high voltage bus or other components excluding the high voltage bus are described by SUN in [0034]: “third leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are closed and no leakage is detected on the high-voltage bus 130.”; and further in FIG. 5 with [0039]: “FIG. 5 is a flowchart of a possible sequence of operations that may be performed by a controller to isolate the location of an excessive leakage current in a high-voltage system.”; Examiner notes steps analogous to those claimed in instant application with detailed instructions for connections directed to isolation of a leakage resistance location detailed, as noted above in SUN [0039]-[0041] describing procedure for the iterative operation of electric leakage resistance circuit with various regions under test.)
wherein in the second determination, the value of the first device-side electric leakage resistance Rv1 is compared with a third threshold value D3, it is determined that an electric leakage is occurring in the electric device if the first device-side electric leakage resistance Rv1 is equal to or higher than the third threshold value D3, and it is determined that an electric leakage is occurring in the electric device-side region excluding the electric device if the value of the first device-side electric leakage resistance Rv1 is less than the third threshold value D3;
(SUN teaches a comparative analysis of leakage resistance values and the use of a predetermine threshold value for determining an electric leakage throughout disclosure; for example, abstract: “leakage path is detected when a leakage resistance associated with the leakage path is less than a predetermined resistance.”; As described above, SUN teaches positional location of electric leakage by various placement and measurement of leakage (test) resister, named “RL” positioned at key points in circuit and connected to ground; see FIG. 3, with [0021]: “electrical isolation may be described as a leakage resistance 118 between the chassis ground 120 and a terminal (124, 126) of the traction battery 24…Note that the leakage resistance 118 may occur at various locations…leakage resistances 118 shown are illustrative of various locations at which the leakage current may flow”; SUN teaches explicit method for testing by isolating components other than “M 14” (analogous to application “electric device”) in [0033]:”If no leakage condition is detected within the traction battery 24, a second leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are closed. All other components connected to the high-voltage bus 130 should be disabled. Under this condition, any leakage condition may be identified as being associated with the high-voltage bus 130. Additional testing may be done to identify the exact location. For example, the leakage condition may be in a component that is connected to the high-voltage bus 130” and [0034]: “leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are closed and no leakage is detected on the high-voltage bus 130”; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language to mean generally, a method step wherein, when an electric leakage is determining a comparative process based on a threshold value is used to further determine that the electric leakage is due to a component other than the electric device. Examiner notes reference includes methods using analogous leakage detection circuit for isolating electric leakage in high-voltage bus or in components connected to the high-voltage bus, all are considered as on the electric-device side, as would be understood by one of ordinary skill.)
and fourth determination of determining a value of a positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP which is an electric leakage resistance of a positive electrode electroconductive path (30) and a value of a negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN which is an electric leakage resistance of a negative electrode electroconductive path; and
(Examiner notes, as in previous office action, interpretation of claim limitation language for this method step to mean generally, a determination of whether an electric leakage is located on a positive electroconductive path, or if an electrical leakage is conversely located on a negative electroconductive path, which would be understood by one of ordinary skill to mean simply an electroconductive connection to a positive battery terminal (SUN FIG. 3, positive terminal 124) or voltage source, or to a negative battery terminal (SUN FIG.3, negative terminal 126), respectively, analogous to instant application (32) and (42), respectively; One of ordinary skill would understand SUN teaches a method step analogous to that claimed. Examiner points to SUN [0026] and [0027], where a detailed description of the “Leakage Diagnostic” process, with FIG. 5, and as described above, with diagnostic steps performed at various positions in the circuit, allowing for specific positional location determination, including determination of whether leakage is on a positive or negative side, as interpreted above, and analogous to claim limitation language, accomplished with use of two circuits, isolated, as described in [0026]: “ switching one of the switching elements 110, 112 at a given time”, and as depicted in FIG. 4A and 4B. Referring to FIG. 4A, and further in [0026]: “leakage resistance 118 on the negative conductor 128 of the high-voltage bus 130 may be determined when the switch 110 associated with the positive conductor 122 is closed…current 200 flows through the current limiting resistor 102 and the voltage measurement resistor 104 associated with the positive terminal 124”, as shown in FIG. 4A; Negative side leakage diagnostic test dis similarly describe in [0027], and shown in FIG. 4B; Examiner points, as in previous office action, to grounding structure of SUN’s circuit, see [0025]: “Since the traction battery 24 is not referenced to chassis ground 120, any current flow passes through the leakage resistance 118 in order to complete the circuit”; Examiner notes this condition is true at various positions shown in FIG. 3. Referring to FIG. 4A-B; SUN teaches leakage diagnostic process is logically applied when a particular location of an electric leakage is discovered, as shown in FIG. 5, with iterations to monitor electric leakage conditions, as in [0028]: “switching elements 110, 112 of the leakage detection circuit 100 may be periodically switched and monitored to detect a change in the electrical isolation of the traction battery 24 and the high-voltage bus 130” )
electric leakage occurring position determination of determining an electric leakage occurring position in the electric device-side region excluding the electric device, based on the values of the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistance RLP and the negative electrode- side electric leakage resistance RLN if it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the electric device-side region excluding the electric device in the second determination,
(Examiner points to interpretation of claim limitation and application of SUN directly above; SUN teaches iterative application of a “Leakage Diagnostic” technique to determine positive or negative side location, as in [0026]–[0027]; Examiner notes SUN is clear regarding “Leakage Diagnostic” involving “Leakage Detection Circuit” (SUN, FIG. 3, element 100) is applied as described in [0033]: “If no leakage condition is detected within the traction battery 24, a second leakage detection cycle may be initiated when the main contactors 42 are closed. All other components connected to the high-voltage bus 130 should be disabled. Under this condition, any leakage condition may be identified as being associated with the high-voltage bus 130. Additional testing may be done to identify the exact location.”; Examiner asserts this is a determination of leakage on the electric device side, where the high voltage bus 130 is located, and all other components (including “M 14”) are excluded.)
and in the fourth determination, at least one of the positive-side contactor or the negative-side contactor is turned ON,
(SUN teaches preferential connection configuration in FIG. 5, to isolate various portions of circuit, as discussed in detail above)
However, SUN is silent to the language of:
[calculating a value of a device-side] electric leakage resistance Rv which is an electric leakage resistance in the electric device, based on the following equation (1). [Math. 1]
PNG
media_image2.png
97
297
media_image2.png
Greyscale
;
and wherein, in the determining an electric leakage occurrence position, the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is compared with a sixth threshold value D6, and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is compared with the sixth threshold value D6,
if the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the positive electrode electroconductive path,
if the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the negative electrode electroconductive path,
and if both the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN exceed the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in a device common to both the positive electrode electroconductive path and the negative electrode electroconductive path.
Nevertheless, YANO teaches:
[calculating a value of a device-side] electric leakage resistance Rv which is an electric leakage resistance in the electric device, based on the following equation (1). [Math. 1]
PNG
media_image2.png
97
297
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(As noted in previous office action, Eq (1) is interpreted as being based on a known method of modeling a system equivalent (or “effective”) resistance, RZ, as the parallel connection of a power-side leakage resistance, RL, and the device side leakage resistance, RV, which can be expressed mathematically
1
R
Z
=
1
R
L
+
1
R
v
where solving this equation for RV, representing the device side leakage resistance yields the application equation (1) above. YANO teaches this mathematical approach, made clear in comparing application equations expressing RZ (Eq. 4), RL ( Eq. 5), in terms of measured voltages and first and second detection resistors (“Ra and Rb”) with analogous expressions disclosed in YANO, Equation 2 [0015], Equation 3 [0034] (“the case where there is no leakage in battery pack”); Examiner notes model would be known to one of ordinary skill in the art for modeling measurements based on a voltage divider-type measurement systems to determine electrical leakage, with circuits shown in Fig. 3,4,5 and described in [0025] “FIG. 3 shows an exemplary leakage detection circuit” and [0026] “leakage detection circuit 1 shown in FIG. 3 includes first and second leakage detection switches 11 and 12, a controller 6, a leakage detection resistor 5, a voltage detector 4, and a calculator 7… detection switches 11 and 12 are connected to the high and low voltage sides of the battery pack 2, respectively”. Examiner assert these circuits and method are analogous to instant application.)
However, SUN, as modified by YANO, and as taught above, is silent to the language of:
wherein, in the determining an electric leakage occurrence position, the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is compared with a sixth threshold value D6, and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is compared with the sixth threshold value D6,
if the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the positive electrode electroconductive path,
if the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the negative electrode electroconductive path,
and if both the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN exceed the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in a device common to both the positive electrode electroconductive path and the negative electrode electroconductive path.
Nevertheless, GALE teaches:
wherein, in the determining an electric leakage occurrence position, the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is compared with a sixth threshold value D6, and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is compared with the sixth threshold value D6,
(GALE is in same technical field, see [0003]: “present invention relates in general to electrified vehicles using a high voltage bus, and, more specifically, to accurate estimation of the effective isolation resistance present between each high-power bus and a chassis ground.”; GALE is directed to performing analogous method for determination of leakage resistance values to ascertain positional leakage, see [0005]: “typical leakage detector circuit operates by periodically connecting one bus at a time to chassis ground through a current-limiting resistance, and using the resulting current flow to calculate the leakage resistance…battery voltage divided by the calculated leakage resistance characterizes the electrical isolation.”; GALE teaches measurements to determine electrical leakage of positive side or negative side of bus, see FIG. 2,with [0021]: “power source 30 is selectively coupled to a positive bus 31 and a negative bus 32 via contactor switches 33. Buses 31 and 32 may be further coupled…inverter 36 which drives a traction motor 37…chassis ground 40 represents conductive parts of the vehicle whose electrical potential is taken as a reference”; GALE teaches isolation of positional location of leakage on a positive or negative bus, see [0022]: “Electrical isolation of buses 31 and 32 is determined by the electrical leakage resistance between each bus and chassis 40…leakage resistance 41 represents the level of isolation between positive bus 31 and chassis 40. Leakage resistance 42 represents the isolation between negative bus 32 and chassis 40”; GALE teaches analysis of leakage resistance by comparison with threshold value, as does SUN, for example, see FIG.6 element 76, and FIG. 7 with [0033]: “failure can be predicted in response to a magnitude of a resistance value falling below a threshold”, or see Claim 3; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language of “threshold” as generally meaning analysis and/or decisions made by comparing a measured result with an expected, anticipated, or limiting value based on understanding of a particular physical arrangement.)
if the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the positive electrode electroconductive path,
if the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the negative electrode electroconductive path,
(GALE teaches evaluation of positive bus path and negative bus path independently, see FIG. 3, (included to right), with [0023]: “FIG. 3 shows apparatus for detecting leakage resistance wherein a first detector circuit 45 is arranged between positive bus 31 and chassis ground 40 and a second detector circuit 46 is arranged between negative bus 32 and chassis ground 40. First detector circuit 45 includes a current-limiting resistor 50 in series with a sampling switch 51 and a current-sensing resistor 52. A controller circuit 47 is connected to
PNG
media_image3.png
381
483
media_image3.png
Greyscale
switch 51 for selectively activating switch 51 so that a resulting first current flowing through detector circuit 45 creates a voltage across current-sensing resistor 52 proportional to the current passing through resistor 52 which is provided to controller circuit 47. Likewise, second detector circuit 46 includes a series connection of a current-limiting resistor 53, sampling switch 54, and current-sensing resistor 55 similarly connected to controller circuit 47. Controller circuit 47 may include a microcontroller such as in a battery energy controller module.”; Examiner points to example of implementing comparative resistance value, with mathematical expressions and circuit analysis methods for determining positive- and negative-path resistance values, Rlp and Rlm, see [0025]-[0026], and Eq. 4, Eq. 5, mathematically analogous to those in instant application.)
and if both the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN exceed the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in a device common to both the positive electrode electroconductive path and the negative electrode electroconductive path.
(GALE teaches method for determination of leakage resistance values measured for both negative and positive paths from bus, using understanding of balance, see [0006]: “resistance may exist between the positive bus and chassis ground as well as a resistance of equal value between the negative bus and chassis ground”; GALE teaches prediction of device connected to bus based on resistance leakage as measured on both positive and negative sides of bus, the concept of “balanced leakage resistance” for example, Claim 1 “predicting a failure of a device connected to the buses and creating the balanced leakage resistance”, and further in Claim 2, and Claim 3: “step of predicting a failure is comprised of: comparing the estimated balanced leakage resistance to a predetermined threshold”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application to modify SUN to determine an electric leakage resistance in the electric device, based on equation (1), shown above, such as that of YANO.
One of ordinary skill would be motivated to modify SUN to determine an electric leakage resistance in the electric device, based on mathematical equation (1), shown above, as disclosed by YANO because the method would be understood as a reliable way to efficiently and accurately determine an isolated electric leakage based on measurements made in a voltage-divider-based detection circuit, as is disclosed in SUN. One of ordinary skill would be familiar the mathematical model expressed in terms of timed voltage measurements as a way to ascertain both the presence of an electric leakage and also to ascertain an isolated location (position) of the leakage, even in a complicated circuit, such as that disclosed by SUN. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of including a quantitative comparative method as taught by YANO with the method and system of SUN to improve the reliability and accuracy of isolating a positional location of an electrical leakage point in a bus system.
Examiner further notes in previous office action, addressing the obviousness for one of ordinary skill to use modifications of the methods and system within the disclosure of SUN based on the order of steps recited in the instant application. While SUN teaches this leakage condition for the entire system [0022] as the “second” or “third leakage detection cycle” ([0033]-[0034]), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify the method disclosed by SUN to organize or re-order steps of detection (whole system, or isolation of power side depending on electrical or without electric device/machine electrically connected to power source). One would be motivated to do so in order to improve the efficiency of isolating the location of and electric leakage to one side or the other (i.e., power side, or device side). Logically, as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, if no leak in the power side is detected, and any subsequent electrical leakage is detected in the configuration with power source connected to electric device side, such a leak would necessary be known to be on the device side. Either order would result in determining whether leakage is in the electric device side or the power source side. This obvious revision to the disclosure of SUN, based on other portions of the disclosure, which would simplify the method of SUN into a single comparative evaluation could advance process of electrical leakage location determination more efficiently. For additional motivation, Examiner points to detailed figure included in previous office action (dated 07/23/2025) with notes regarding comparison of SUN disclosure with that of the instant application, focused on instant application FIG. 1 and SUN FIG. 3.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO, as taught above, to include method steps for diagnosing negative and positive side of bus, including: wherein, in the determining an electric leakage occurrence position, the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is compared with a sixth threshold value D6, and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is compared with the sixth threshold value D6; and, if the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the positive electrode electroconductive path, and, if the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN is equal to or less than the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the negative electrode electroconductive path, and if both the positive electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLP and the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistor RLN exceed the sixth threshold value D6, it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in a device common to both the positive electrode electroconductive path and the negative electrode electroconductive path, such as that of GALE.
One of ordinary skill would be motivated to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO, as taught above, to include detailed method steps aimed at diagnosing electrical leakage of positive and negative paths connected to a bus, as described above, as taught by GALE because it would be understood as a way to more accurately determine and isolate an electric leakage location in complicated circuit. One of ordinary skill would see an obvious combination and advantage to combine the method of SUN, wherein measurements of bus connection positive and negative side are taught, as modified by YANO to include more quantitative analysis methods, with the more focused teaching of GALE, directed to careful, accurate analysis of leakage resistance specific to bus connections and to devices connected and powered by the bus. By implementing GALE’s teaching of decoupling power source in a systematic method of determining multiple leakage resistances, and using comparative analysis, similar to the method of SUN, one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving a more specific positional location for an electric leakage.
Examiner agrees with Applicant’s argument that SUN, modified by YANO did not explicitly teach “a detecting method for detecting the detailed leakage position of the high-voltage bus 130”. Examiner points out that SUN does teach a diagnostic step for determining electric leakage related to a positive and negative side of bus, but falls short, which leaves further, more detailed diagnosis as a hint or suggestion. However, the combination of SUN, as modified by YANO, and further modified by GALE, does provide an obvious combination that would suggest a reasonable expectation of success meeting all limitations of claim 1. GALE explicitly teaches an analysis method that aligns with the method of SUN, and repeats mathematical relationships of YANO, satisfying steps (A), (B) and (C) of steps for factual inquiries based on KSR framework for the objective analysis evaluation of prior art used for obviousness rejection, such that Claim 1 does not differentiate over prior art.
With respect to Claim 2, SUN, in view of YANO, and further in view of GALE, teaches:
The electric leakage detection method according to claim 1,
(See above, references as applied to Claim1.)
SUN further teaches:
wherein the first determination includes:
entire determination of comparing the value of the system electric leakage
resistance Rz with a first threshold value D1, determining that an electric leakage is not occurring in the entire electricity distribution system if the value of the system electric leakage resistance Rz is equal to or higher than the first threshold value D1, and determining that an electric leakage is occurring in the electricity distribution system if the value of the system electric leakage resistance Rz is less than the first threshold value D1; and
(Examiner notes discussion establishing how SUN discloses measuring system electrical leakage (“RZ” in application) with contacts 42 closed, referred to as “second leakage detection cycle” in reference. As discussed above, SUN discloses carrying out this step following determination of leakage present in power side; SUN teaches the method of comparative evaluation with reference values in abstract: “leakage path is detected when a leakage resistance associated with the leakage path is less than a predetermined resistance”; with a quantitative example in [0030]: “RLeakage value may be analyzed to determine if the proper electrical isolation is present. For example, a leakage resistance 118 of less than 39K ohms may indicate a severe leakage condition”; Examiner notes interpretation of claim limitation language “threshold” as analogous to reference language “predetermined resistance”; Examiner further notes SUN teaches a systematic step by step analysis method, analogous to instant application, where steps may be in different order without loss of generality, and would be understood by one of ordinary skill.)
region determination of comparing the value of the power source-side electric leakage resistor RL with a second threshold value D2 if it is determined that the electric leakage is occurring in the electricity distribution system in the entire determination, determining that the electric leakage is occurring in the electric device-side region if the value of the power source-side electric leakage resistor RL is equal to or higher than the second threshold value D2, and determining that the electric leakage is occurring in the power source unit-side region if the power source-side electric leakage resistor RL is less than the second threshold value D2.
(SUN discloses electric leakage position determination through comparative analysis, as discussed above, and determination of leakage in traction battery (power source-side), as above in [0032], with isolation to power side disclosed, as discussed above, in [0033], where determination is made using comparative analysis as described above.)
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over SUN (US 20160091551 A1) in view of YANO (US 20070285057 A1) and GALE (US 20190351771 A1), as applied to Claim 2 above, and further in view of FURUKAWA (US 20030137319 A1).
With respect to Claim 3, SUN, in view of YANO, and further in view of GALE, teaches:
The electric leakage detection method according to claim 2,
(See above, reference applied to Claim 2.)
SUN further teaches:
the first determination further includes, [comparison] of difference between the values of the system electric leakage resistance Rz and the power source-side electric leakage resistor RL is calculated [and] compared with a fourth threshold value D4, it is determined that an electric leakage is occurring in the electric device-side region if the difference is equal to or higher than the fourth threshold value D4, and it is determined that an electric leakage is occurring in the power source unit-side region if the difference is less than the fourth threshold value D4.
However, SUN, as modified by YANO, and further modified by GALE, as taught above, is silent to the language of:
[determination further includes] an absolute value
PNG
media_image4.png
37
144
media_image4.png
Greyscale
of difference between the values of the system electric leakage resistance Rz and the power source-side electric leakage resistor RL
Nevertheless, FURAKAWA teaches:
[determination further includes] an absolute value
PNG
media_image4.png
37
144
media_image4.png
Greyscale
of difference between the values of the system electric leakage resistance Rz and the power source-side electric leakage resistor RL
(FURAKAWA is in same technical field, see [0001]: “invention relates to leak detecting circuits for power source devices for use in electric motor vehicles and the like”; FURAKAWA teaches use of absolute value calculation for determining electric leakage, see circuits shown in FIGs 8,9,10 with [0021]: “detects the occurrence of leaks in terms of the absolute values of voltage levels”; Examiner points to claim limitation language with variable names, RZ, and RL as discussion in application specification [0042] and [0045], respectively, where mathematical calculation of the difference RZ−RL results in a product of the voltage detection resistor value, Ra with a difference of the values timed voltage values, Vg(t1), Vg(t2), Vs(t1), and Vs(t2) as defined in Applicant’s specification, [0019]; Examiner notes one with ordinary skill in the art would understand the value of Ra, voltage detecting resistor in application Fig. 1 Electric Leakage Detection Unit 50 to be a positive value, such that the absolute value calculation is dependent on difference in timed voltage measurements, analogous to FURAKAWA; Examiner notes that GALE does recited use of absolute value of differences is leakage resistance for analysis (See Eq. 7). However, FURAKAWA explicitly teaches mathematical expressions aligned with analysis found in claim limitation.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, to calculate and use absolute value
R
Z
-
R
L
difference, such as that of FURUKAWA.
One with ordinary skill would have been motivated to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, to include the use of an absolute value calculation, as taught by FURUKAWA, because the use of differences of voltages and particularly absolute values allows for detection of leaks at relatively low ground fault resistance, and allows for variation in power source device, as disclosed by FURUKAWA. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of using quantitative analysis involving absolute value of resistance differences to better determine location of the electrical leakage in the location of the power-side or electric device-side because it would be understood that comparison of the absolute differences would result in a more accurate analysis of leakage resistance values and would improve the ability to ascertain a positional location of a leak point.
(CLAIMS 4-7 Cancelled)
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over SUN (US 20160091551 A1) in view of YANO (US 20070285057 A1) and GALE (US 20190351771 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of NAKAYAMA (US 20220120823 A1).
Claim 8 , SUN, in view of YANO, and further in view of GALE, teaches:
The electric leakage detection method according to claim 1,
(See above, references applied to Claim 1.)
However, SUN, as modified by YANO, and further modified by GALE, as taught above, is silent to the language of:
wherein the electricity distribution system includes:
a reference electrical potential difference detection unit configured to
detect a reference electrical potential difference Vs which is an electrical potential difference between a first terminal connected to a predetermined position of the power source unit and a second terminal connected to a position with a different electrical potential from the first terminal;
and an electric leakage voltage detection unit connected to the first
terminal and the second terminal and is connected to ground at its midpoint,
the electric leakage voltage detection unit includes:
a first switch connected to the first terminal side;
a first voltage detection resistor provided between the first switch and
the midpoint;
a second switch connected to the second terminal side; and
a second voltage detection resistor provided between the second
switch and the midpoint.
Nevertheless, NAKAYAMA teaches:
wherein the electricity distribution system includes:
a reference electrical potential difference detection unit configured to
detect a reference electrical potential difference Vs which is an electrical potential difference between a first terminal connected to a predetermined position of the power source unit and a second terminal connected to a position with a different electrical potential from the first terminal;
(NAKAYAMA is in same technical field, see [0001]: “relates to an electrical fault detection device which detects a ground fault of a load in a vehicle insulated from a chassis ground, and a vehicle power supply system”; NAKAYAMA teaches potential detection unit, see FIGs. 3, 4, 5 element 13 – control unit which includes 13b (shown in FIG.4) voltage measurement unit; FIG. 3 depicts measurement unit connected in a bus circuit as described in claim limitation.)
and an electric leakage voltage detection unit connected to the first
terminal and the second terminal and is connected to ground at its midpoint,
(NAKAYAMA teaches voltage detection unit connected as shown in FIG. 3 depicting ground connected at the midpoint between four resistors, R1, R2, R3, R4 in electrical contact with positive and negative power source (battery) via switches SWp and SWm in voltage dividing circuit 11 which serves as the electric leakage voltage detection unit.)
the electric leakage voltage detection unit includes:
a first switch connected to the first terminal side;
(NAKAYAMA teaches electric leakage voltage detection unit, discussed above, including “element 13 control unit” depicted in FIGs. 3, 4, 5, including element “voltage measurement unit 13b”; NAKAYAMA teaches switches, “SWp” and “SWm” as described above, connecting voltage detection unit to terminals in “voltage dividing circuit 11” as part of “electric leakage detection device 10”, as depicted in FIG. 3 )
a first voltage detection resistor provided between the first switch and
the midpoint;
(NAKAYMA teaches detection resistor between first switch and midpoint in FIG. 3., where ground is shown at midpoint between four resistors, R1, R2, R3, R4 in electrical contact with positive and negative power source (battery))
a second switch connected to the second terminal side; and
a second voltage detection resistor provided between the second
switch and the midpoint.
(See as above, depiction of switches “SWp” and “SWm” as depicted in FIG. 3 in voltage dividing circuit as a part of “electric leakage detection device 10”; NAKAYAMA teaches voltage detection resistor between second switch and midpoint in FIG. 3., where ground is shown at the midpoint between four resistors, R1, R2, R3, R4 in electrical contact with positive and negative power source (battery)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, to include method steps of: a reference electrical potential difference detection unit configured to detect a reference electrical potential difference VS which is an electrical potential difference between a first terminal connected to a predetermined position of the power source unit and a second terminal connected to a position with a different electrical potential from the first terminal; and an electric leakage voltage detection unit connected to the first terminal and the second terminal and is connected to ground at its midpoint, where the electric leakage voltage detection unit includes: a first switch connected to the first terminal side; a first voltage detection resistor provided between the first switch and the midpoint; a second switch connected to the second terminal side; and a second voltage detection resistor provided between the second switch and the midpoint, such as that of NAKAYAMA.
One of ordinary skill would be motivated to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, to include the modifications to method and steps described above, as taught by NAKAYAMA because it would be understood as a way to efficiently enable the measurements as described by SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE by arrange terminal positions, grounding points, switches, and resistor position configurations for making leakage resistance measurements that would result in an accurate and reliable positional location of electrical leakage points. One of ordinary skill would realize the obvious advantage of implementing the logistical components as taught by NAKAYAMA as part of the method of SUN and modified by YANO and GALE, as way to produce a straightforward way to make measurements for multiple locations in a circuit. The components and connections of YANO would be known by one of ordinary skill essential components of a voltage divider-circuit-based leakage detection unit allowing for logical means of isolating and determining presence and location of an electrical system leakage but would learn a nuanced connection strategy from NAKAYAMA that would improve the method and system disclosed by SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above.
With respect to Claim 9, SUN, in view of YANO and GALE, and further in view of NAKAYAMA, teaches:
The electric leakage detection method according to claim 8,
(See above, references as applied to Claim 8)
However, SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, and further modified by NAKAYAMA, is silent to the language of
wherein in the fourth determination, the value of the positive electrode-side
electric leakage resistance RLP is calculated based on the following equation (2), and the value of the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistance RLN is calculated based on the following equation (3),
[Math 2]
PNG
media_image5.png
90
486
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[Math 3]
PNG
media_image6.png
100
491
media_image6.png
Greyscale
provided that in the equations (2) and (3), "Vg(t1)” represents a first ground voltage Vg(t1) detected by the electric leakage voltage detection unit at a first timing t1 when the first switch is turned ON and the second switch is turned OFF with at least one of the positive-side contactor or the negative-side contactor ON, "Vs (t1)" represents a first reference electrical potential difference Vs (t1) detected by the reference electrical potential difference detection unit at the first timing t1, "Vg (t2)" represents a second ground voltage “Vg(t2)” detected by the electric leakage voltage detection unit at a second timing t2 when the first switch is turned OFF and the second switch is turned ON with at least one of the positive-side contactor or the negative-side contactor ON, and "VS(t2)" represents a second reference electrical potential difference VS(t2) detected by the reference electrical potential difference detection unit at the second timing t2.
Nevertheless, YANO further teaches:
wherein in the fourth determination, the value of the positive electrode-side
electric leakage resistance RLP is calculated based on the following equation (2), and the value of the negative electrode-side electric leakage resistance RLN is calculated based on the equations as shown above “ [Math 2]” and “[Math 3]”, provided that in the equations (2) and (3), "Vg(t1)” represents a first ground voltage Vg(t1) detected by the electric leakage voltage detection unit at a first timing t1 when the first switch is turned ON and the second switch is turned OFF with at least one of the positive-side contactor or the negative-side contactor ON, "Vs (t1)" represents a first reference electrical potential difference Vs (t1) detected by the reference electrical potential difference detection unit at the first timing t1, "Vg (t2)" represents a second ground voltage “Vg(t2)” detected by the electric leakage voltage detection unit at a second timing t2 when the first switch is turned OFF and the second switch is turned ON with at least one of the positive-side contactor or the negative-side contactor ON, and "VS(t2)" represents a second reference electrical potential difference VS(t2) detected by the reference electrical potential difference detection unit at the second timing t2.
(YANO teaches mathematical expressions shown above, with reference to FIG.3 in [0025]: “FIG. 3 shows an exemplary leakage detection circuit for an electric vehicle as one embodiment according to the present invention…leakage detection circuit for an electric vehicle 1 shown in this Figure is added to a battery pack 2 including n batteries”; and [0015], Equation 2, with description of leakage detection circuit in [0016]: “Vt(t1) is the total voltage value of the battery pack at the timing t1 where the first and second leakage detection switches are turned ON and OFF, respectively; Vh(t1) is the first leakage voltage value that is generated in the first voltage detection resistor at the timing t1; Vt(t2) is the total voltage value of the battery pack at the timing t2 where the first and second leakage detection switches are turned OFF and ON, respectively; and Vg(t1) is the second leakage voltage value that is generated in the second voltage detection resistor at the timing t2.”; YANO teaches detailed descriptions of mathematical derivations for leakage detection circuit measurements in [0034]-[0040]; Examiner notes any differences between claimed mathematical expressions and those taught by YANO can be derived with algebraic manipulations.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, and further modified by NAKAYAMA, as taught above, to include the mathematical expressions shown above in a fourth detection using timed voltage as described above, such as that further disclosed by YANO.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, and further modified by NAKAYAMA, as taught above, with elements and methods as discussed above as further taught by YANO, because the mathematical expressions and further modifications of the timed voltage measurements would further improve the efficiency and reliability of electric leakage determination as disclosed by SUN, modified by YANO, GALE and NAKAYAMA, as above. One of ordinary skill would understand the advantage of combining the positive and negative differential voltage measurements as taught in YANO with the method of SUN to achieve improved accuracy for determination of an electrical leakage position. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of including explicit mathematical, quantitative analysis to improve the overall results of the method of SUN as modified by YANO, GALE and NAKAYAMA.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over SUN (US 20160091551 A1) in view of YANO (US 20070285057 A1), GALE (US 20190351771 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of FURAKAWA (US 20030137319 A1) and NAKAYAMA (US 20220120823 A1).
With respect to Claim 10, SUN, in view of YANO and further in view of GALE, teaches:
The electric leakage detection method according to claim 1,
(See above, references as applied to Claim 1.)
However, SUN as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, is silent to the language of:
further comprising:
fifth determination of obtaining a reference electrical potential difference Vs which is an electrical potential difference between the first terminal connected to a predetermined position of the power source unit and the second terminal connected to a portion with a different electrical potential from the first terminal if it is determined that an electric leakage is occurring in the power source unit-side region in the first determination;
sixth determination of calculating a power source-side electric leakage voltage VL which is an electrical potential difference between the reference terminal and the electric leakage occurring position with either one of the first terminal or the second terminal as a reference terminal; and
seventh determination of determining a distance from the reference terminal to the electric leakage occurring position based on the ratio (VL/VS) of the power source-side electric leakage voltage VL to the reference electrical potential difference Vs, wherein the power source unit includes multiple power sources.
Nevertheless, FURUKAWA teaches:
fifth determination of obtaining a reference electrical potential difference Vs which is an electrical potential difference between the first terminal connected to a predetermined position of the power source unit and the second terminal connected to a portion with a different electrical potential from the first terminal if it is determined that an electric leakage is occurring in the power source unit-side region in the first determination;
(See as above FURAKAWA teaches a circuit configuration for determining potential difference as described in instant application, [0023]: “leak detecting circuit wherein a pair of positive and negative power lines extending from respective opposite electrodes of a cell unit are connected to each other by four voltage dividing resistors R1A, R1B, R2A, R2B connected to one another in series, and a midpoint between the two voltage dividing resistors R1A, R1B arranged on the positive power line side and the two voltage dividing resistors R2A, R2B arranged on the negative power line side is grounded.” Examiner notes that FURAKAWA does not refer to the measurement as a “fifth”, however, an iterative method for determination of leakage at multiple points is describe, analogous to claim limitation.)
sixth determination of calculating a power source-side electric leakage voltage VL which is an electrical potential difference between the reference terminal and the electric leakage occurring position with either one of the first terminal or the second terminal as a reference terminal;
(see FURAKAWA as described above, potential difference measured at various locations iteratively; Examiner notes as above, FURAKAWA does not name measurement steps numerically, but multiple, iterative measurements are disclosed for leakage position determination, analogous to instant application. Examiner asserts that logical order of steps would be understood by one of ordinary skill based on desired locations for investigation of leakage resistance. )
However, SUN as modified by YANO and GALE, and further modified by FURUKAWA, as taught above, is silent to the language of:
seventh detection determination of detecting determining a distance from the reference terminal to the electric leakage occurring position based on the ratio (VLN s) of the power source-side electric leakage voltage VL to the reference electrical potential difference Vs, wherein the power source unit includes multiple power sources.
Nevertheless, NAKAYAMA teaches:
seventh detection determination of detecting determining a distance from the reference terminal to the electric leakage occurring position based on the ratio (VLN s) of the power source-side electric leakage voltage VL to the reference electrical potential difference Vs, wherein the power source unit includes multiple power sources.
(Referring again to FIG. 3, NAKAYAMA teaches electric leakage determination with specified position and with multiple power sources involve, in [0033]: “control unit 13 estimates the total voltage Vbat of the power storage unit 20 on the basis of the ratio of the voltage Vob measured by the voltage measurement unit 12, the combined resistance value of the first resistor R 1, the second resistor R 2, the third resistor R 3, and the fourth resistor R 4, and the combined resistance value of the second resistor R 2 and the third resistor R3.”; and [0034]: “control unit 13 calculates a ratio r (= VobNbat) between the total voltage Vbat of the power storage unit 20 and the measured voltage Vob.”; Examiner notes that this method is analogous to the method described in Applicant’s specification [0060] using the variable k as defined by instant application Equation 10.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, to include fifth determination of obtaining a reference electrical potential difference (with details listed above) and a sixth determination of calculating a power source-side electric leakage voltage VL which is an electrical potential difference between the reference terminal and the electric leakage occurring position with either one of the first terminal or the second terminal as a reference terminal, such as that of FURAKAWA.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to further modify SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE, as taught above, to include the steps as described directly above, as taught by FURAKAWA because it would be understood as a way to more accurately and reliably determine the presence and location of an electrical leakage. One of ordinary skill would understand that advantage of additional iterative measurements arranged in a logical way, as taught by FURAKAWA, as a straightforward and efficient way to arrange measurements step to improve and enhance the method and system disclosed by SUN, as modified by YANO and GALE. One of ordinary skill would understand the obvious combination of these three disclosures directed to the same technical field with analogous goals as an advantageous way to determine the presence and isolated location of an electric leakage in a system efficiently, accurately, and reliably.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SUN as modified by YANO, GALE, and FURUKAWA, as taught above, to include a seventh determination of determining a distance from the reference terminal to the electric leakage occurring position based on the ratio (VLN s) of the power source-side electric leakage voltage VL to the reference electrical potential difference Vs, wherein the power source unit includes multiple power sources, such as that of NAKAYAMA.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to further modify SUN as modified by YANO, GALE, and FURUKAWA, as taught above, to include the seventh determination of positional determination as described above, as taught by NAKAYAMA because it would be understood as a practical way of locating an electrical leakage position and a way to precisely determine an electrical leakage in more points in a circuit configuration. The additional measurement combine with the method and steps of SUN, as modified by YANO, GALE, and FURUKAWA, would provide the advantage of specific positionality of the leakage in even a complicated circuit configuration, as disclosed in FURAKAWA.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure has been included in previous office actions, dated 01/26/2025 and 07/23/2025.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONI D SAUNCY whose telephone number is (703)756-4589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. ET.
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, Lisa Caputo can be reached at (571) 272-2388. 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.
/TONI D SAUNCY/Examiner, Art Unit 2863
/LISA M CAPUTO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2863
Prosecution Insights