DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3 and 4 are pending. Claims 1, 3 and 4 are amended. Claim 2 is cancelled.
Claim Interpretation
Previous interpretation of claims 1 and 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is withdrawn in view of Applicant' s amendment filed 08/27/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites a battery characteristic estimation device comprising: a processor configured to: calculate a first electrical characteristic value of a secondary battery based on frequency-dependent data that is data of an output voltage of the secondary battery changed by a frequency of alternating current applied to the secondary battery; calculate a second electrical characteristic value of the secondary battery based on transient response data that is data of the output voltage of the secondary battery attenuated by a change in direct current applied to the secondary battery; and estimate an electrical characteristic value of the secondary battery based on the first electrical characteristic value and the second electrical characteristic value, wherein the first electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a reaction resistor, the second electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance, wherein the processor is further configured to maximize an energy efficiency of the second battery by estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the second battery.
Claim 3 recites a battery characteristic estimation method of causing a computer to: calculate a first electrical characteristic value of a secondary battery based on frequency-dependent data that is data of an output voltage of the secondary battery changed by a frequency of alternating current applied to the secondary battery; calculate a second electrical characteristic value of the secondary battery based on transient response data that is data of the output voltage of the secondary battery attenuated by a change in direct current applied to the secondary battery; and estimate an electrical characteristic value of the secondary battery based on the first electrical characteristic value and the second electrical characteristic value, wherein the first electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a reaction resistor, the second electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance, and further causing the computer to maximize an energy efficiency of the second battery by estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the second battery.
Claim 4 recites a computer-readable non-transient storage medium on which a program is stored to cause a computer to: calculate a first electrical characteristic value of a secondary battery on the basis of frequency-dependent data that is data of an output voltage of the secondary battery changed by a frequency of alternating current applied to the secondary battery; calculate a second electrical characteristic value of the secondary battery on the basis of transient response data that is data of the output voltage of the secondary battery attenuated by a change in direct current applied to the secondary battery; and estimate an electrical characteristic value of the secondary battery on the basis of the first electrical characteristic value and the second electrical characteristic value, wherein the first electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a reaction resistor, the second electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance, and further causing the computer to maximize an energy efficiency of the second battery by estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the second battery.
and thus grouped as Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations.
These judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements (claims 1, 3, and 4) the “processor, computer” are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions amount to no more than using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. All of which are considered not indicative of integration into a practical application (see “Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 4/ Monday, January 7, 2019 / Notices” – page 55, second column).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of the processor and computer are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and deemed insufficient to qualify as “significantly more” see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3 and 4 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 1 is objected to because the closest prior art, Takahashi [US 2016/0131719 A1], fails to anticipate or render obvious the first electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a reaction resistor, the second electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance, the processor is further configured to maximize an energy efficiency of the second battery by estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the second battery, in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by applicant.
Claim 3 is objected to because the closest prior art, Takahashi [US 2016/0131719 A1], fails to anticipate or render obvious the first electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a reaction resistor, the second electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance, and further causing the computer to maximize an energy efficiency of the second battery by estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the second battery, in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by applicant.
Claim 4 is objected to because the closest prior art, Takahashi [US 2016/0131719 A1], fails to anticipate or render obvious the first electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a reaction resistor, the second electrical characteristic value is an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance, and further causing the computer to maximize an energy efficiency of the second battery by estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the second battery, in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by applicant.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/27/2025, regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 for claims 1, 3 and 4 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the newly amended limitations to claims 1, 3 and 4, “…configured to maximize an energy efficiency …” require action by a processor and cannot be practically applied in mind and additionally are eligible because they do not recite a judicial exception (see page 6, first paragraph of the response).
In response, the Examiner disagrees and indicates the additional elements of the processor and computer are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and deemed insufficient to qualify as “significantly more” see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Furthermore, the newly added limitations are directed towards information data processing and analysis, i.e. estimating the impedance of the reaction resistor as an impedance of a reaction resistor of the second battery and estimating the impedance of the serial resistance and the diffusion resistance as an impedance of a serial resistance and a diffusion resistance of the secondary battery. Processing data are considered merely manipulation of data; thus, insufficient to qualify as “significantly more”. Furthermore, regarding, “improvements to another technology or technical field" via improving the “energy efficiency of the second battery”, the recitation "configured to maximize an energy efficiency of the secondary battery" is claiming a benefit of the claimed process; however, this is still considered data processing because the means for performing the maximizing is performing an estimation of the impedance, i.e. more data processing. Processing data is still encompassed within the aspects of information data processing and analysis which fall under data processing information, organizing information, and comparison analysis and is considered a judicial exception.
Relevant Prior Art / Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
EGAMI et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2013/0103224 A1) discloses a method for sequentially measuring impedance while applying a signal having a power output fluctuation.
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 RICKY GO whose telephone number is (571)270-3340. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Arleen M. Vazquez can be reached on (571) 272-2619. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RICKY GO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857