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 dated December 22, 2022 claims 1-5 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The Examiner suggests “CHARGING SYSTEM FOR A POWER STORAGE DEVICE ON A VEHICLE”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites in line 10 “an integrated value”, however, it is unclear in light of the specification the meaning of the integrated value. It could be interpreted as a rate of change over time, or a combination of values, depending upon the definition used.
Claims 2-5 contain similar language and are rejected for the same reasoning. Further, they are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirose et al. JP2016082772A.
Regarding claim 1. Hirose discloses a vehicle (7) configured to perform external charging for charging a power storage device (8) mounted on the vehicle using power supplied from a system power supply (6) outside the vehicle, the vehicle comprising:
a control device (11) configured to set a command value of a charging current supplied from the system power supply (6) to the power storage device (8) through a charging device (1) during the external charging, and to control the charging current by transmitting the command value to the charging device (¶17 – control unit receives data regarding the output current value from the charger 1 and transmits data indicating the current command value to the control unit 5 of the charger); and
a storage device (4) that stores a program executed by the control device, wherein the control device is configured to
calculate an integrated value of the command value when the command value is larger than a threshold value (¶21 – the possible output current value is smaller than the obtained current command value), and
execute a reduction process of reducing the command value when the integrated value is large as compared with when the integrated value is small (¶20-21 – power storage device 8 lowers, or reduces, the current command value when the possible output current value is smaller.
Regarding claim 2. Hirose discloses that the control device is configured to start the reduction process when the integrated value becomes equal to or larger than a reference value (¶21 - when the current command value becomes larger than the output value, the current command value is decreased).
Regarding claim 5. Hirose discloses the control device is configured to reduce the command value as the integrated value increases in the reduction process (¶21 – when possible output current value is smaller than the current command value, the power storage device lowers the current command value).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose et al. JP2016082772A in view of Yasugi et al. JP2015136210A.
Regarding claim 3. Although Hirose discloses that control unit stops the power supply and ends the charging process when the difference between the current command value and the actual current input are greater or equal than a predetermined value (¶22), Hirose does not explicitly teach that the control device is configured to set the command value such that supply of the charging current from the charging device to the power storage device is stopped when a charging rate of the power storage device increases to a threshold charging rate; and the control device is configured to set the reference value to be lower as the charging rate increases to approach the threshold charging rate.
Yasugi discloses that the control device is configured to set the command value such that supply of the charging current from the charging device to the power storage device is stopped when a charging rate of the power storage device increases to a threshold charging rate (¶37 – when a target charging rate is reached charging and discharging are stopped); and
Yasugi discloses that the control device is configured to set the reference value to be lower as the charging rate increases to approach the threshold charging rate (¶37-40 – the output is reduced to the target output .
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the stopping of Yasugi to the charging of Hirose in order to prevent deterioration of the battery (Yasugi; ¶37).
Regarding claim 4. Although Hirose discloses that when the difference between the current command value and the actual current input are equal or greater than a predetermined value, charging is stopped (¶22), Hirose does not explicitly teach that the control device is configured to set the command value such that supply of the charging current from the charging device to the power storage device is stopped when a charging rate of the power storage device increases to a threshold charging rate; and the control device is configured to set the threshold value to be lower as the charging rate increases to approach the threshold charging rate.
Yasugi discloses that the control device is configured to set the command value such that supply of the charging current from the charging device to the power storage device is stopped when a charging rate of the power storage device increases to a threshold charging rate (¶37 – when a target charging rate is reached charging and discharging are stopped); and
Yasugi discloses that the control device is configured to set the threshold value to be lower as the charging rate increases to approach the threshold charging rate (¶37-40 – the output is reduced to the target output .
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the stopping of Yasugi to the charging of Hirose in order to prevent deterioration of the battery (Yasugi; ¶37).
Related Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Howard et al. US20140084856A1 discloses a system for wireless charging where the control circuit uses a current limit to control the charging.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859