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 .
Status of the Claims
In the communication filed on 12/14/2022 claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/14/2022 and 11/25/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Note, the foreign reference JPH11178240 is considered by the examiner however in the IDS dated 12/14/2022 it is listed as a country of origin being KR when it should have been JP.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the schematic for the discharge switch 380 and the charging switch 385 of Fig. 3 are incomplete (see annotated Fig. 3 below).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
PNG
media_image1.png
697
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification is missing paragraph numbers. An amendment to the specification is requested for paragraph numbers to be added in order to assist in the examination process.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 10, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (USPGPN 20110006731).
First, the examiner notes the reference voltage is defined by the applicant as the lowest voltage to be supplied to the load 230 in order to operate the components in load 230 in page 16 lines 5-7 of the disclosure. For examination purposes a reference voltage will be interpreted as the minimum voltage a load requires for the load to properly operate.
With respect to independent claims 1 and 10, Wang teaches a battery pack and method comprising a battery cell (Figs. 9-10; battery pack 904 and method for the battery pack 904 comprising battery cells 310).
Wang teaches a controller configured to control charging of the battery cell, using a charging switch (Fig. 9; a battery controller 920 configured to control charging of the battery cells 310 using a charging switch 430).
Wang teaches adjusting a discharge current by controlling a discharge switch of the battery pack (Fig. 9; ¶ [41]; one of ordinary skill understands a discharge current is supplied from the battery pack 304/904 to the system load 910 by controlling a discharging switch 432 of the battery pack 304/904. The elements labeled the same as in Fig. 4 have similar functions as those in Fig. 9, see ¶ [83]).
Wang teaches wherein the controller is configured to adjust a charging current supplied to the battery cell by controlling the charging switch to prevent a voltage of a load from being less than a reference voltage when a voltage of the battery cell is equal to or less than the reference voltage while power is being supplied to the battery pack and the load (Fig. 9; ¶ [87-88]; one of ordinary skill understands while power is being delivered to both the battery pack 904 and the load 910, if the battery cell voltage is at or below the reference level, the controller uses the charging switch 430 to reduce the charging current so the load voltage stays at or above the reference voltage).
With respect to dependent claim 3, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Wang teaches wherein the controller further comprises a discharge switch and is configured to control discharging of the battery cell, using the discharge switch (Fig. 9; ¶ [41]; one of ordinary skill understands a discharge current is supplied from the battery pack 304/904 to the system load 910 by controlling a discharging switch 432 of the battery pack 304/904. The elements labeled the same as in Fig. 4 have similar functions as those in Fig. 9, see ¶ [83]).
With respect to dependent claims 8 and 16, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 3 and 10, respectively. Further, Wang teaches wherein the controller is configured to reduce a charging current by controlling the charging switch so that a voltage of the battery cell remains at a target voltage when the voltage of the battery cell reaches the target voltage (Figs. 5-7; a constant voltage charging stage is reached when the average cell voltage > preset voltage V2. One of ordinary skill understands the charging switch is controlled to reduce the charging current so that the battery cell remains at the preset voltage V2).
With respect to dependent claim 18, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 10. Further, Wang teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising computer-readable instructions to cause a computer to perform the method (¶ [38]; the command converter 426 can be implemented by a processor. ¶ [87]; the battery controller 920 operates similar way to the steps described in relation to Fig. 5-Fig. 7 and inherently the command converter 426. One of ordinary skill understands for a processor to perform instructions it would need a memory comprising the computer-readable instructions).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2, 9, 11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (USPGPN 20110006731) and further in view of Tikhonski et al. (USPGPN 20200350779).
With respect to dependent claims 2 and 11, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 10, respectively. Further, Wang teaches wherein the controller is configured to turn off the charging switch when the charging of the battery cell is completed (Fig. 5; steps 528-530 charging is terminated when the battery cells are fully charged. ¶ [41]; charging is terminated when the charging switch 430 is switched off).
However, Wang fails to explicitly teach turn on the charging switch when a voltage of the load is less than a voltage of the battery cell after the charging of the battery cell is completed.
Tikhonski teaches turn on the charging switch when a voltage of the load is less than a voltage of the battery cell after the charging of the battery cell is completed (¶ [46-52, esp. 46 and 51]; “... the system 300 is configured so that the battery 308 provides power to the load 305 when the voltage from the PSU 301 feeding the distribution bus 304 decreases below a threshold level (e.g., below an allowable lower limit of a specified load voltage tolerance range) ...” and “... the FETs 310 and 311 in the “ON” state and the battery 308 sharing load current with the PSU 301 will continue until the low energy threshold of the energy storage element(s) in the PSU 301 is reached, at which time the PSU 301 will cease operation or switch off. At switch-off of the PSU 301, the battery 308 will take over powering the load 305.” One of ordinary skill understands this battery operation of power switching from the PSU 301 to the battery 308 would be in a state wherein the battery 308 is fully charged).
Wang discloses the claimed invention except for turning on the charging switch when a voltage of the load is less than a voltage of the battery cell after the charging of the battery cell is completed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wang’s battery pack by including Tikhonski’s PSU to battery logic for supplying power to the load, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claims 9 and 17, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 3 and 10, respectively. However, Wang fails to explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured to sense a voltage at one side of the charging switch to identify a voltage of the load.
Tikhonski teaches wherein the controller is configured to sense a voltage at one side of the charging switch to identify a voltage of the load (Fig. 3; the voltage of the distribution bus 304 is monitored inherently (“... the system 300 is configured so that the battery 308 provides power to the load 305 when the voltage from the PSU 301 feeding the distribution bus 304 decreases below a threshold level (e.g., below an allowable lower limit of a specified load voltage tolerance range) ...”). One of ordinary skill understands the measured voltage is for the load 305 and it is located on one side of the charging switch).
Wang discloses the claimed invention except for turning on the charging switch when a voltage of the load is less than a voltage of the battery cell after the charging of the battery cell is completed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wang’s battery pack by including Tikhonski’s PSU to battery logic for supplying power to the load, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to employ/use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, products) in the same way is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 4, 6-7, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (USPGPN 20110006731).
With respect to dependent claims 4 and 12, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 3 and 10, respectively. Further, Wang teaches turn off the charging switch when charging protection conditions are satisfied (¶ [69]; battery charging is terminated by switching off the charging switch 430 when any undesirable condition (e.g., over-voltage, over-current, and over-temperature) has occurred).
However, Wang fails to explicitly teach turn off the discharge switch when discharge protection conditions are satisfied.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wang’s battery protection logic to include battery discharge protection logic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claims 6 and 14, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 3 and 10, respectively. Further, Wang teaches wherein the controller is configured to reduce a charging current by controlling the charging switch when the charging current exceeds a target charging current (Fig. 7; the charging current is reduced when a target charging current is exceeded in steps 706-728. One of ordinary skill understands the charging switch is controlled by the controller to reduce the charging current).
However, Wang fails to explicitly teach reduce a discharge current by controlling the discharge switch when the discharge current exceeds a target discharge current.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wang’s battery protection logic to include battery discharge logic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
With respect to dependent claims 7 and 15, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 6 and 14, respectively. Further, Wang teaches wherein the controller is configured to turn on the charging switch to increase a charging current when the charging current is less than a target charging current (Fig. 7; the charging current is increased in step 710 from CCn wherein n=n+1 to a maximum n=max in step 716 when the charging current is less than maximum target at step 706. One of ordinary skill understands the charging switch is controlled by the controller to increase the charging current).
However, Wang fails to explicitly teach turn on the discharge switch to increase a discharge current when the discharge current is less than a target discharge current.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wang’s battery protection logic to include battery discharge logic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (USPGPN 20110006731) and further in view of Moon et al. (USPGPN 20200153055).
With respect to dependent claims 5 and 13, Wang teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 4 and 12, respectively.
First, the examiner notes at least one charging switch and at least one discharge switch refers to “at least one charging switch 385” and “at least one discharge switch 380” as illustrated in Fig. 3 of the disclosure. For examination purposes the at least one charging switch and the at least one discharge switch will be interpreted as additional charging and discharge switches in series.
However, Wang fails to explicitly teach wherein the controller further comprises at least one charging switch and at least one discharge switch, and is configured to turn off the at least one charging switch when the charging protection conditions are satisfied, and turn off the at least one discharge switch when the discharge protection conditions are satisfied.
Moon teaches wherein the controller further comprises at least one charging switch and at least one discharge switch, and is configured to turn off the at least one charging switch when the charging protection conditions are satisfied, and turn off the at least one discharge switch when the discharge protection conditions are satisfied (Fig. 4; a first protection circuit 411 and a second protection circuit 412. ¶ [52-53, 56, and 65]; one of ordinary skill understands the first protection circuit 411 and the second protection circuit are turned off when a charging or discharging protection condition is met. The protection circuit module 340 is the protection circuit 302 which includes the first protection circuit 411 and the second protection circuit 412).
Wang discloses the claimed invention except for the additional charging and discharge switches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Wang’s battery pack by adding Moon’s additional protection switches and logic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kristjansson et al. (USPGPN 20200395765) and further in view of Wang et al. (USPGPN 20110006731).
With respect to independent claim 19, Kristjansson teaches an electronic device comprising a first printed circuit board (PCB) comprising a charging connector (Fig. 1; an electronic device 100 comprising a device section 150 comprising a charging node 102. One of ordinary skill understands device section 150 comprises a printed circuit board).
Kristjansson teaches a charging circuit connected to the charging connector (Fig. 1; a charge circuit 115 connected to the charging node 102).
Kristjansson teaches a first load connected to the charging circuit through a wiring line (Fig. 1; a load 110 connected to the charge circuit 115 through a wiring line).
Kristjansson teaches a first battery pack (Fig. 1; a battery pack 104).
Kristjansson teaches the first battery pack comprises a first battery cell (Fig. 1; the battery pack 104 comprises a battery cell 103).
However, Kristjansson fails to explicitly teach a first controller configured to be connected to the wiring line to control charging and discharge of the first battery cell, using a first charging switch and a first discharge switch, wherein the first controller is configured to adjust a charging current supplied to the first battery cell by controlling the first charging switch to prevent a voltage of the first load from being less than a reference voltage when a voltage of the first battery cell is less than a threshold value while power is being supplied to the first load and the first battery pack through the charging circuit.
Wang teaches a first controller configured to be connected to the wiring line to control charging and discharge of the battery cell, using a first charging switch and a first discharge switch (Fig. 9; a battery controller 920 configured to be connected to the wiring line to control charging of the battery cells 310 using a charging switch 430. ¶ [41]; one of ordinary skill understands a discharge current is supplied from the battery pack 304/904 to the system load 910 by controlling a discharging switch 432 of the battery pack 304/904. The elements labeled the same as in Fig. 4 have similar functions as those in Fig. 9, see ¶ [83]).
Wang teaches wherein the first controller is configured to adjust a charging current supplied to the first battery cell by controlling the first charging switch to prevent a voltage of the first load from being less than a reference voltage when a voltage of the first battery cell is less than a threshold value while power is being supplied to the first load and the first battery pack through the charging circuit (Fig. 9; ¶ [87-88]; one of ordinary skill understands while power is being delivered to both the battery pack 904 and the load 910, if the battery cell voltage is at or below the reference level, the controller uses the charging switch 430 to reduce the charging current so the load voltage stays at or above the reference voltage).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Kristjansson’s electronic device by adding Wang’s battery and load charging current logic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kristjansson et al. (USPGPN 20200395765), in view of Wang et al. (USPGPN 20110006731), and further in view of Kim et al. (USPGPN 20200036198).
With respect to dependent claim 20, Kristjansson teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 19. Further, Kristjansson teaches a second PCB comprising a second load (Fig. 1; a device section 152 comprising a load 111. One of ordinary skill understands the device section 152 comprises a printed circuit board).
Kristjansson teaches a flexible device configured to connect the first PCB to the second PCB (Fig. 1; the wires running through the central hinged portion 112 connect device sections 150 and 152. Device sections 150/152 are known by one of ordinary skill to be printed circuit boards).
Kristjansson teaches a second battery pack comprising a second controller and a second battery cell connected to the second controller, wherein the wiring line is connected to the second load and the second controller through the flexible device (Fig. 1; a second battery pack 106 comprising a battery monitor 114, wherein the wiring line is connected to the load 111 and the battery monitor 114 through the central hinged portion 112. The second battery pack 106 comprises battery cells 105 and 107).
However, Kristjansson fails to explicitly teach a flexible printed circuit board (FPCB).
Kim teaches a flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) (Fig. 4; flexible PCB 430).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Kristjansson’s electronic device by adding Kim’s flexible printed circuit board, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to be aware that known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hawley et al. (USPGPN 20190148795) teaches a circuit for charging a battery pack. The circuit generally includes a voltage regulator circuit and charge pump circuitry having an input coupled to an output of the voltage regulator circuit, and an output coupled to a first battery charging terminal. In certain aspects, the first battery charging terminal may be configured to be coupled to a terminal of a first battery cell of the battery pack having multiple battery cells.
Gangstoe et al. (USPGPN 20070210758) teaches a battery pack can include one or more battery cells, current blocking transistors and a battery management system. The disclosed implementations handle over-currents drawn from the battery cells that cause unstable operation of the battery management system. The over-currents are handled without causing an undesired drop in voltage output from the battery cells. The disclosed implementations can handle over-currents even if the over-currents cause the battery management system supply voltage to drop below a minimum operating voltage level for a certain period of time. The disclosed implementations use current blocking transistors that can be configured to block current flow and ensure safe operation of the battery cells in cases where the current drawn from the battery cells would be sufficiently high for a sufficiently long period of time to cause damage to the battery cells.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Frank A Silva whose telephone number is (703)756-1698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 07:30 am -04:30 pm 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK ALEXIS SILVA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859