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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, regarding claims 1, 13, 25, & 26, that Yamashita fails to teach control of the electric storage device based on “local voltage of the electric storage device measured by the electric power converter” along with “the reference function” and instead teaches control based on “Bus Voltage”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Yamashita teaches in ¶0063 that “the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d calculates an input-&-output current target value on the basis of a different between a charge-&-discharge threshold value and the bus voltage detection value”. Yamashita further discloses in ¶0045 that a charge-&-discharge threshold value is generated on the basis of monitor results including state information (e.g. voltage) of the sub-stabilizing device 40. Yamashita’s ¶0064 further discloses that the charge-&-discharge threshold value is for the power storage device 41, and that the value of the charge-&-discharge threshold value may be set by the control circuit 42B. A person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the voltage of sub-stabilizing device 40 would mean the voltage of the power storage device 41, and based on Fig.5 that the control circuit 42B would measure the voltage of the storage device to determine the charge-&-discharge threshold by the indication of voltage measurements being input into charge-&-discharge control unit 42d. Therefore, Yamashita does teach control of the electric storage device based on “local voltage of the electric storage device measured by the electric power converter” along with “the reference function”.
Applicant further argues that claims 9 & 21 allegedly disclosed the “charge-&-discharge control unit 42d outputs to the driving unit based on measured voltage of the power storage device” and does not point to control of the electric storage device based on “local voltage of the electric storage device measured by the electric power converter” along with “the reference function”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As explained above, Yamashita teaches control of the electric storage device based on “local voltage of the electric storage device measured by the electric power converter” along with “the reference function” based on the citations provided above.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities:
It appears that an incorrect portion of the claim has been amended in an attempt to remedy the 112(b) rejection previously presented. The recitation of “the central control unit” in the last line was replaced with “a control unit of the electric power converter” instead of the recitation of “the control unit” in line 2 being replaced with “a control unit of the electric power converter”. This appears to have been in error since this amendment would introduce a third control unit controlling the electric power converter, which is not supported by the specification. For the purpose of this examination, examiner interprets the final line of claim 21 to read as “without involving a command from the central control unit”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The amended claim now includes a third recited control unit related to the control of the electric power converter, which is not supported by the Specification. See the objection of claim 21 above for Examiner’s interpretation of the claim as used in the prior art rejection of claim 21.
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.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the control unit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is a previously recited “central control unit” in claim 20 but there is no previously recited “control unit”. The applicant appears to have attempted to amend the claim to remedy this, however it appears that an incorrect portion of the claim language was amended and so it is unclear if the recitation in line 2 is referring to a new control unit or the previously introduced central control unit. For the purpose of this examination, examiner interprets this to read as “a control unit of the electric power converter”, as recited in claim 9 which claim 21 appears to recite the same limitations as a system.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 9, 11-15, 20, 21, & 23-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamashita et al. (WIPO Publication WO 2019/103059 A1 which has the US equivalent publication USPGPN 2020/0280183; hereinafter citing the US equivalent for ease of reference).
Regarding Claims 13 & 1, Yamashita (Figs.1 & 5) teaches an electric power system comprising an electric power element (40) including:
an electric power converter (42A);
and an electric storage device (41) electrically connected to the electric power converter, wherein
the electric power converter is configured to refer to, according to local voltage of the electric storage device (¶0063: “the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d calculates an input-&-output current target value on the basis of a different between a charge-&-discharge threshold value and the bus voltage detection value”; ¶0064: the charge-&-discharge threshold value is for the power storage device 41; ¶0045: a charge-&-discharge threshold value is generated on the basis of monitor results including state information (e.g. voltage) of the sub-stabilizing device 40) measured by the electric power converter (¶0064: the value of the charge-&-discharge threshold value may be set by the control circuit 42B), a reference function (42B/Fig.7-section a) as output target for the electric storage device (41), the reference function having drooping characteristic (¶0110) and representing a control target function (42e: driving circuit is controlling the function of the DC-DC conversion unit), and
control the electric storage device based on the local voltage and the reference function (42e: driving circuit is controlling the function of the DC-DC conversion unit; driving circuit receives an input from the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d which receives input based on a charge-&-discharge threshold value),
the reference function has a constant-input-output region over a predetermined voltage range (Fig.7, no charge or discharge power between charge/discharge thresholds in section a), and
the reference function is updated based on battery status of the electric storage device (¶0045: operation instructions and thresholds are determined based on battery status, e.g. voltage, current, and temperature, therefore a change in battery status would result in an updated reference function).
Regarding Claims 14 & 2, Yamashita (Fig.5) further teaches wherein the electric storage device is a stationary-type electric storage device (41),
a control unit (42d) of the electric power converter is configured to perform control based on the reference function for generating target value at time of performing local-control of the stationary-type electric storage device according to the local voltage measured by the electric power converter (charge-&-discharge threshold value based on voltage of power storage device 41),
the reference function has a constant-input-output region in which input-output of the stationary-type electric storage device is maintained at a constant value over a predetermined voltage range (Fig.7, no charge or discharge power between charge/discharge thresholds in section a), and
the reference function having the constant-input- output region is updated based on battery status of the stationary-type electric storage device (¶0045: operation instructions and thresholds are determined based on battery status, e.g. voltage, current, and temperature, therefore a change in battery status would result in an updated reference function).
Regarding Claims 15 & 3, Yamashita further teaches wherein change in battery status of the electric storage device represents change in charging rate, or change in deterioration state, or change in C rating (¶0045: operation instructions and thresholds are determined based on battery status including current; a C-rate is a charging or discharging current divided by battery capacity, therefore a change in current would equate to a change in C-rate).
Regarding Claims 20 & 8, Yamashita further teaches a central control (Fig.1, 80) unit that controls the electric power converter, wherein secondary control, which is meant for updating a reference function having drooping characteristic, is performed based on a command issued by the central control unit. (¶0045: monitoring-&-instruction device determines operation instructions and thresholds and transmits to sub-stabilizing devices).
Regarding Claims 21 & 9, Yamashita further teaches a control unit of the electric power converter performs control, which is based on the reference function and the local voltage of the electric storage device, without involving a command from the central control unit (Fig.5, charge-&-discharge control unit 42d outputs to the driving unit based on the charge-&-discharge threshold value and measured voltage of the power storage device; ¶0064: charge-&-discharge control unit outputs charge or discharge instructions).
Regarding Claims 23 & 11, Yamashita further teaches the reference function having drooping characteristic is configured to vary input-output amount of electric power or electric current according to variation in voltage (Fig.7, section a: charge and discharge power are varied according to voltage variation).
Regarding Claim 12, Yamashita further teaches the electric power converter is a DC/DC converter (Fig.5, 42A).
Regarding Claim 24, Yamashita further teaches a line to which the electric power element is electrically connected is a DC bus (Fig.5, 70).
Regarding Claim 25, Yamashita (Fig.5) teaches a control method for an electric power converter (42A) electrically connected to an electric storage device (41), the control method comprising:
a step of referring to, according to local voltage of the electric storage device (¶0063: “the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d calculates an input-&-output current target value on the basis of a different between a charge-&-discharge threshold value and the bus voltage detection value”; ¶0064: the charge-&-discharge threshold value is for the power storage device 41; ¶0045: a charge-&-discharge threshold value is generated on the basis of monitor results including state information (e.g. voltage) of the sub-stabilizing device 40) measured by the electric power converter (¶0064: the value of the charge-&-discharge threshold value may be set by the control circuit 42B), a reference function (42B/Fig.7-section a) as output target for the electric storage device (41), the reference function having drooping characteristic (¶0110) and representing a control target function (42e: driving circuit is controlling the function of the DC-DC conversion unit);
a step of controlling the electric storage device based on the local voltage and the reference function (42e: driving circuit is controlling the function of the DC-DC conversion unit; driving circuit receives an input from the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d which receives input based on a charge-&-discharge threshold value); and
a step of updating the reference function based on battery status of the electric storage device (¶0045: operation instructions and thresholds are determined based on battery status, e.g. voltage, current, and temperature, therefore a change in battery status would result in an updated reference function), wherein
the reference function has a constant-input-output region over a predetermined voltage range (Fig.7, no charge or discharge power between charge/discharge thresholds in section a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 4, 10, 16, & 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita.
Regarding Claims 4 & 16, Yamashita further teaches wherein input-output in the constant-input-output region is equal to 0 (Fig.7-section a, no charge or discharge power is supplied when bus voltage is within the charge and discharge thresholds).
Yamashita fails to explicitly teach this being zero when the charging rate of the electric storage device is a first charging rate (Examiner’s Note: Charging rate is interpreted to mean a state of charge/SOC of the electric storage device).
However, Yamashita explains that the charge & discharge thresholds are generated based on a measured voltage of the sub-stabilizing device (¶0045), and the SOC of the sub-stabilizing device can be determined using the well-known voltage method of generating an SOC.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Yamashita to have the constant-input-output region equal to 0 when the charging rate of the electric storage device is a first charging rate. Using a state of charge value allows for a more precise determination of the capacity of the battery when compared to a measured voltage value of the battery, which may remain consistent across multiple points of a voltage curve.
Regarding Claims 10 & 22, Yamashita discloses the claimed invention except for a control cycle of the secondary control is not explicitly disclosed as a being longer than a control cycle that is based on the reference function. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to set the control cycle of the secondary control to be a value longer than a control cycle based on the reference function, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Doing so would allow the system time to respond to the secondary control to account for transmission delays between a central controller and distributed power systems.
Claim(s) 5 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita, in view of Kobayashi et al. (Japanese Publication JP 2013179738 – published 2013).
Regarding Claims 5 & 17, Yamashita fails to explicitly teach wherein the reference function having drooping characteristic is updated such that when charging rate of the electric storage device drops to be equal to or lower than a second charging rate that is lower than the first charging rate, the constant- input-output region shifts toward input region in which charging current is supplied to the electric storage device, and when charging rate of the electric storage device increases to be equal to or higher than a third charging rate that is higher than the first charging rate, the constant-input-output region shifts toward output region in which the electric storage device is discharged.
However, Kobayashi teaches charging a secondary battery when the charging rate of the battery is below an operation lower limit value (Fig.7-B, time t7-t9) and discharging the secondary battery when the charging rate of the battery is above an operation upper limit (Fig.7-B, time t3-t4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Yamashita with Kobayashi to include second charging rate and third charging rate, where charging current is provided when the charging rate of the electric storage device is below the second charging rate and the electric storage device is discharged when the charging rate of the electric storage device is above the third charging rate. Doing so allows the system to avoid overcharging or over discharging the electric storage device.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamashita, in view of Liu (USPGPN 2019/0334349).
Regarding Claim 26, Yamashita (Figs.1 & 5) teaches the control method for an electric power system including an electric power element (40) including an electric power converter (42A) and an electric storage device (41) electrically connected to the electric power converter, the method including:
refer to, according to local voltage of the electric storage device (¶0063: “the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d calculates an input-&-output current target value on the basis of a different between a charge-&-discharge threshold value and the bus voltage detection value”; ¶0064: the charge-&-discharge threshold value is for the power storage device 41; ¶0045: a charge-&-discharge threshold value is generated on the basis of monitor results including state information (e.g. voltage) of the sub-stabilizing device 40) measured by the electric power converter (¶0064: the value of the charge-&-discharge threshold value may be set by the control circuit 42B), a reference function (42B/Fig.7-section a) as output target for the electric storage device (41) by the electric power converter (42A), the reference function having drooping characteristic (¶0110) and representing a control target function (42e: driving circuit is controlling the function of the DC-DC conversion unit);
control the electric storage device based on the local voltage and the reference function (42e: driving circuit is controlling the function of the DC-DC conversion unit; driving circuit receives an input from the charge-&-discharge control unit 42d which receives input based on a charge-&-discharge threshold value); and
update the reference function based on battery status of the electric storage device, wherein (¶0045: operation instructions and thresholds are determined based on battery status, e.g. voltage, current, and temperature, therefore a change in battery status would result in an updated reference function).
the reference function has a constant-input-output region over a predetermined voltage range (Fig.7, no charge or discharge power between charge/discharge thresholds in section a).
Yamashita fails to explicitly teach a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program which causes a processor to execute the method.
However, Liu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program which causes a processor to execute a control method for an electric power system (¶0011: memory storing instructions causes a processor to execute control of DC/DC converters for supplying battery power).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have stored the method on a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium, via a program, for a processor to execute the method. Doing so allows a computer system to execute the desired control without the need for human response and improves the consistency in repeated control that computers provide.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 18 & 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 6 & 18 recite wherein the reference function having drooping characteristic is updated such that when charging rate of the electric storage device drops from the first charging rate to a predetermined charging rate exceeding the second charging rate, voltage value of upper limit of the predetermined voltage range over which input-output within the constant-input-output region is equal to 0 shifts toward low-voltage side. The prior art of record fails to explicitly teach or suggest this limitation in combination with all other limitations recited in the claim.
Claims 7 & 19 depend from claims 6 & 18, respectively, and therefore are allowable for the same reasons.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOHN P ONDRASIK whose telephone number is (703)756-1963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
/JOHN P ONDRASIK/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights