Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/113,578

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLED BATTERY HEATING

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 23, 2023
Examiner
HENZE, DAVID V
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Iontra Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
492 granted / 699 resolved
+2.4% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
748
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 699 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority With respect to claim 1, the support for the sinusoidal wave with a rising edge to a body portion with a constant current (as in figs. 9A-10B) is not found in the parent application 17/699,016 of this continuation-in-part application, nor in provisional applications 63/313,147 or 63/163,011. The parent application also does not mention a “constant current” portion (only the general use of CC-CV charging) nor the separate “body portion” of the signal. Provisional application 63/313,147 has an asymmetric waveform in figure 6, but not the constant current portion like in the instant applications figures 9A-10B. Provisional application 63 / 163 , 011 does not illustrate the waveforms at all, and also does not mention a separate “body portion” or a “constant current” portion of the signal. Thus, claim 1 does not receive the priority dates of parent application 17/699,016 nor provisional applications 63/313,147 and 63/163,011, but does find support in provisional application 63/331,633. The same analysis as above applies to claims 6 and 10 which find support only in provisional application 63/331,633. Claims 2-5, 7-9 and 11-12 receive the priority date of 17/699,016 and 63/313,147, but not of 63/163,011. Claims 1-12 all receive the priority of provisional application 63/331,633. The table below summarizes the priority dates of the to-be-examined claims (excluding withdrawn claims 13-33 ) . Claim Priority Date Claim 1 April 15, 2022 Claim 2 February 23, 2022 Claim 3 February 23, 2022 Claim 4 February 23, 2022 Claim 5 February 23, 2022 Claim 6 April 15, 2022 Claim 7 February 23, 2022 Claim 8 February 23, 2022 Claim 9 February 23, 2022 Claim 10 April 15, 2022 Claim 11 February 23, 2022 Claim 12 February 23, 2022 Election/Restrictions Claims 13-33 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected FILLIN "Enter the appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on February 27, 2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 10 is 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 10 recites “ wherein the temperature of the battery is based on a time of application of the repeating signal where the second portion comprises the alternating current ”. It isn’t clear if this means that the temperature is affected by the alternating current or it is calculated by the alternating current. For the purpose of Examination, Examiner is interpreting the limitation as either. 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 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)(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- 5 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)( 2 ) as being FILLIN "Insert either—clearly anticipated—or—anticipated—with an explanation at the end of the paragraph." \d "[ 3 ]" anticipated by Huang et al. US PGPUB 2022/0219568. Regarding claim 1, Huang discloses a method of heating a battery [figs. 3-7] comprising: generating a repeating signal to apply to a battery [fig. 3; hybrid wave applied to the battery for heating; pars. 11-16, 56-58, 85-86, 88 & 93-96], the repeating signal comprising a first portion and a second portion over a period, the first portion defining a sinusoidally shaped leading edge rising to a body portion comprising a constant current and terminating at a falling edge, the first portion defining a first percentage of the period, the second portion comprising an alternating current following the falling edge of the first portion, the second portion defining a second percentage of the period where the first percentage and the second percentage comprise the period [pars. 11-16, 56-58, 85-86, 88 & 93-96; fig. 3; the hybrid wave has a period, with a first portion defining a sinusoidal shaped leading edge rising to a constant current portion (see the trough of the first sine wave, the signal rises from the trough to a constant current flat portion), which then terminates at the falling edge (of the square wave) and completes the negative portion of the square wave and then completes the period, with the first portion comprising the portion from the positive zero crossing of the sine wave to the beginning of the falling edge of the square wave, thus the first portion and the second portion each comprises percentages of the period] Regarding claim 2, Huang discloses wherein the repeating signal is a current signal [fig. 3; a current signal; pars. 44-45 & 58]. Regarding claim 3, Huang discloses wherein the sinusoidally shaped leading edge is of a first frequency associated with a first harmonic that when applied to the battery has a relatively low impedance as compared to other harmonics [pars. 55-57; the sine wave has a first frequency that heats the battery less than the square wave, which is comprised of a plurality of harmonics (par. 55), thus has a relatively lower impedance than other harmonics]. Regarding claim 4, Huang discloses wherein the alternating current is centered at about zero amps [fig. 3]. Regarding claim 5, Huang discloses wherein the alternating current defines a sine wave with a positive current portion and a negative current portion [fig. 3; the hybrid wave comprises a sine wave (and a square wave as well, Examiner notes the use of the transitional phrase “comprise” as opposed to “consist”)]. Regarding claim 8, Huang discloses wherein the second portion forms an alternating current to a zero charge current when a temperature of the battery rises about a threshold [figs. 3 & 7; when the temperature of the battery rises above some threshold (any arbitrary threshold, Examiner notes that the threshold is not claimed as a stored or fixed value) since the temperature gradient is rising, the alternating signal is changed to a different one, but that also has a zero charge current (figs. 3 & 7)]. Regarding claim 9, Huang discloses wherein the temperature of the battery is based on a sensed temperature [par. 78; a temperature is “detected” by the battery management unit] . Regarding claim 10, Huang discloses wherein the temperature of the battery is based on a time of application of the repeating signal where the second portion comprises the alternating current [fig. 7; the temperature of the battery changes due to the applied repeating signal (“temperature rise rate”)]. Regarding claim 11 , Huang discloses wherein the repeating pattern is applied to the battery when the battery temperature is below a threshold [pars. 58, 60 & 78; fig. 3]. Regarding claim 1 2 , Huang discloses wherein generating an alternating current signal to apply to the battery below a temperature, and then generating the repeating signal comprising the first portion and the second portion when the battery reaches the temperature [pars. 55-58, 60 & 78; fig. 3; an alternating current signal is applied below some arbitrary temperature (“a temperature”, not a specific threshold is claimed) at which heating is performed like the first sine wave of fig. 3, and then the remainder of the hybrid signal of fig. 3 is generating (i.e. the first sine wave is generated at a temperature very close to the “reached temperature” and by time the sine wave is finished the square wave is generated]. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US PGPUB 2022/0219568 in view of Rastegar US PGPUB 2021/0307113. Regarding claim 6, Huang discloses wherein the alternating current is applied with a positive direct current offset. However, Rastegar discloses a battery heating system [ abs.] w herein the alternating current is applied with a positive direct current offset [ abs; par. 104, 110, 128 & 164; a DC offset is applied or DC charging can take place with a superimposed AC current for heating the battery (par. 128)]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huang to further include wherein the alternating current is applied with a positive direct current offset for the purpose of heating the battery if the temperature drops to an unsafe level while the battery is charging , as taught by Rastegar (par . 128 ). Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US PGPUB 2022/0219568 in view of Coe et al. US PGPUB 2010/0201320. Regarding claim 7, Huang does not explicitly disclose wherein the sinusoidally shaped leading edge is changed to a second frequency of a second harmonic when the impedance of the second harmonic is lower than the impedance of the first harmonic. However, Coe discloses a battery charging system wherein the sinusoidally shaped leading edge is changed to a second frequency of a second harmonic when the impedance of the second harmonic is lower than the impedance of the first harmonic [pars. 5, 7, 18, 27 & 34-35; fig. 7B; the sinusoidal pulse (par. 27) can be changed to a different frequency/harmonic to lower the impedance]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wherein the sinusoidally shaped leading edge is changed to a second frequency of a second harmonic when the impedance of the second harmonic is lower than the impedance of the first harmonic to further include for the purpose of using the optimal frequency , as taught by Coe (pars. 34-35 ). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Huang et al. US PGPUB 2022/0209707 discloses a battery heating method using a plurality of harmonics of a frequency. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DAVID V HENZE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3317 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M to F, 9am to 7pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Taelor Kim can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-7166 . 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. /DAVID V HENZE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 23, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600261
INTEGRATION BETWEEN UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM AND UNMANNED GROUND ROBOTIC VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603418
ANTENNA FOR CHARGING AND MEASURMENT, AND METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MEASURING RADIO WAVES AND WIRELESS CHARGING USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600257
CHARGER MANAGEMENT DEVICE AND CHARGING CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587024
CONTROL METHOD OF POWER SUPPLY AND PORTABLE ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING RESERVED BATTERY CAPACITY CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583354
CHARGER PEAK POWER OPTIMIZATION FOR FLEET DEPOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+23.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 699 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month