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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/5/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant' s amendment and response filed 6/5/2026 has been entered and made record. This application contains 6 pending claims.
Claims 1-3 have been amended.
Claims 4-6 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 6/5/2026 regarding claims rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 in claim 1-3 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues on pages 7-9 of the remark filed on 6/5/2026 that “Claims 1-3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as allegedly being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. This rejection should be withdrawn for at least the following reason. … Therefore, the subject matter of the claims do not fall within "an abstract idea that can be performed in the human mind". Accordingly, this rejection should be withdrawn.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees applicant’s argument. The steps of “calculate a shrinkage rate for each single electrode from a capacity shift amount of the deteriorated secondary battery, a deterioration amount of a positive electrode, and a deterioration amount of a negative electrode”; “calculate a curve representing characteristics of a charging state and an open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery by deforming the open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of the deteriorated secondary battery by the shrinkage rate for each single electrode based on a fixed point”; “calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery”, “correct the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery using a voltage drop amount in accordance with a DC resistance and a DC current of the deteriorated secondary battery”, and “calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction” are mathematical concepts, therefore, they are considered to be an abstract idea. The steps of “determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a low load time based on a result of comparison between a first threshold value and a first capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery”; and “determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a high load time based on a result of comparison between a second threshold value and a second capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction” are a combination of a mathematical concept and a mental process, therefore, they are considered to be an abstract idea. A human mind can observe and evaluate of collected information of a result of comparison between a first threshold value and a first capacity using a mathematical concept, and make determination, judgment and have opinion about a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the evaluation. Thus, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The applicant argues on page 7-9 of the remark filed that “Claims 1-3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as allegedly being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. This rejection should be withdrawn for at least the following reason. … By specifically reciting the above-noted sharing in the amended claims, it becomes possible to clarify the elements of the hardware control, that is, "which element is moved and how the element is moved". In other words, claims 1-3 are amended to better describe that the subject matter thereof is significantly more than an abstract idea itself.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees applicant’s argument. Significantly more can be demonstrated by additional elements that are not well-understood and conventional that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. However, the claims do not recite them. The additional elements “a storage device that stores a program; and a processor that executes the program stored in the storage device to: by way of an in-vehicle device provided on a vehicle”, “acquires an open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of a deteriorated secondary battery provided on the vehicle by a differential analysis of a voltage and a capacity and a charging and discharging curve fitting”; “by way of the in-vehicle device”; “transmit the curve representing characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery to a server device”; “by way of the server device”, “transmit a determination result by the server device to the in-vehicle device”; “output to a user of the vehicle via a display device operatively connected to the availability determination apparatus, first information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the low load time and second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time which are the determination result of the server device”, and “allow the user to select an optimum secondary use application of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the first information and the second information” are routine in monitoring a deterioration of a battery, and thus, well-understood and conventional. Therefore, the claims 1-3 do not contain additional elements that are not well-understood and conventional that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Hence, the Examiner submits that the rejections of Claims 1-3 are proper.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
As to claim 1, the claim recites “An availability determination apparatus, comprising:
a storage device that stores a program; and
a processor that executes the program stored in the storage device to:
by way of an in-vehicle device provided on a vehicle, acquire an open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of a deteriorated secondary battery provided on the vehicle by a differential analysis of a voltage and a capacity and a charging and discharging curve fitting;
by way of the in-vehicle device, calculate a shrinkage rate for each single electrode from a capacity shift amount of the deteriorated secondary battery, a deterioration amount of a positive electrode, and a deterioration amount of a negative electrode, and calculate a curve representing characteristics of a charging state and an open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery by deforming the open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of the deteriorated secondary battery by the shrinkage rate for each single electrode based on a fixed point;
transmit the curve representing characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery to a server device;
by way of the server device, calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery, and determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a low load time based on a result of comparison between a first threshold value and a first capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery;
by way of the server device, correct the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery using a voltage drop amount in accordance with a DC resistance and a DC current of the deteriorated secondary battery, calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction, and
determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a high load time based on a result of comparison between a second threshold value and a second capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction;
transmit a determination result by the server device to the in-vehicle device;
output to a user of the vehicle via a display device operatively connected to the availability determination apparatus, first information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the low load time and second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time which are the determination result of the server device, and
allow the user to select an optimum secondary use application of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the first information and the second information.”
Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claim is directed to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (apparatus for claim 1).
Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the bold type portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations) and mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions).
In claim 1, the steps of “calculate a shrinkage rate for each single electrode from a capacity shift amount of the deteriorated secondary battery, a deterioration amount of a positive electrode, and a deterioration amount of a negative electrode”, and
“calculate a curve representing characteristics of a charging state and an open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery by deforming the open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of the deteriorated secondary battery by the shrinkage rate for each single electrode based on a fixed point”;
“calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery”,
“correct the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery using a voltage drop amount in accordance with a DC resistance and a DC current of the deteriorated secondary battery”, and
“calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction” are mathematical concepts, therefore, they are considered to be an abstract idea.
The steps of “determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a low load time based on a result of comparison between a first threshold value and a first capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery”; and
“determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a high load time based on a result of comparison between a second threshold value and a second capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction” are a combination of a mathematical concept and a mental process, therefore, they are considered to be an abstract idea.
Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The claim comprises the following additional elements:
a storage device that stores a program; and a processor that executes the program stored in the storage device to: by way of an in-vehicle device provided on a vehicle, acquires an open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of a deteriorated secondary battery provided on the vehicle by a differential analysis of a voltage and a capacity and a charging and discharging curve fitting; by way of the in-vehicle device; transmit the curve representing characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery to a server device; by way of the server device, transmit a determination result by the server device to the in-vehicle device; output to a user of the vehicle via a display device operatively connected to the availability determination apparatus, first information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the low load time and second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time which are the determination result of the server device, and allow the user to select an optimum secondary use application of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the first information and the second information.
The additional elements “a storage device that stores a program; and a processor that executes the program stored in the storage device to: by way of an in-vehicle device provided on a vehicle”, “acquires an open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of a deteriorated secondary battery provided on the vehicle by a differential analysis of a voltage and a capacity and a charging and discharging curve fitting”; “by way of the in-vehicle device”; “transmit the curve representing characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery to a server device”; “by way of the server device”, “transmit a determination result by the server device to the in-vehicle device”; “output to a user of the vehicle via a display device operatively connected to the availability determination apparatus, first information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the low load time and second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time which are the determination result of the server device”, and “allow the user to select an optimum secondary use application of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the first information and the second information” are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, therefore, only add insignificant extra-solution activities to the judicial exception.
The additional elements “by way of the server device” and “by way of the in-vehicle device” are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are considered a generic computer element. As recited in the MPEP, 2106.05(b), merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2359-60, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1984 (2014). See also OIP Techs. v. Amazon.com, 788 F.3d 1359, 1364, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093-94.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claims elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, do not reflect improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, do not recite a particular machine, do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claim is directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
The above claim, does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generically recited and are well-understood/conventional in a relevant art as evidenced by the prior art of record (Step 2B analysis).
For example, acquire an open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of a deteriorated secondary battery provided on the vehicle by a differential analysis of a voltage and a capacity and a charging and discharging curve fitting is disclosed by "Fujita US 20170263984", FIG. 6A, FIG. 6B, FIG. 7, FIG. 10A, FIG. 11, [0020], [0035], [0036], [0037], [0046], [0070], [0077], [0079], [0084], [0090], [0102]; and “Sugiyama US 20200217901 A1”, Abstract, [0006], [0009], [0012], [0024], [0049], [0051], [0062], [0063], [0066], [0067].
For example, output to a user of the vehicle via a display device operatively connected to the availability determination apparatus, first information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the low load time and second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time which are the determination result of the server device Is disclosed by “Kazuno JP2021034150A, used US 20210053441 as translation”, [0004], [0021], [0077], [0098], [0143]; and “Komiyama US 20190195961”, [0005], [0010], [0014], [0055], [0060], [0073], [0114], FIG. 4.
The claim, therefore, is not patent eligible.
Independent claims 2 and 3 recite subject matter that are similar or analogous to that of claim 1, and therefore, the claims are also patent ineligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 4-6 provide additional features/steps which are considered part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims, and do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application.
The dependent claims are, therefore, also not eligible.
Examiner’s Note
Regarding Claims 1-6, the most pertinent prior arts are "Fujita US 20170263984",
"Tsuruta US 20180145356", "Tohda US 20130022843”, "Takahashi US 20150303719",
"Sugiyama US 20200217901", “Asada US 20090058364”, “Boehm US 20150094971”, “Ying US 20190143820”, “Kazuno JP2021034150A, used US 20210053441 as translation”, “Juels US 9235971 B1”, “Inoue US 20190317155”, and “Komiyama US 20190195961”.
As to claims 1-3, Sugiyama teaches a storage device that stores a program; and
a processor that executes the program stored in the storage device to: by way of an in-vehicle device provided on a vehicle (Sugiyama, [0003], [0028], [0029], [0141]);
by way of the server device (Sugiyama, [0141]).
Fujita teaches acquire an open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of a deteriorated secondary battery provided on the vehicle by a differential analysis of a voltage and a capacity and a charging and discharging curve fitting (Fujita, FIG. 6A, FIG. 6B, FIG. 7, FIG. 10A, FIG. 11, [0020], [0035], [0036], [0037], [0046], [0070], [0077], [0079], [0084], [0090], [0102]);
calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery (Fujita, [0021], [0023], [0077, FIG. 6A, FIG. 6B, FIG. 7]).
Tsuruta teaches by way of the in-vehicle device, calculate a shrinkage rate for each single electrode from a capacity shift amount of the deteriorated secondary battery, a deterioration amount of a positive electrode, and a deterioration amount of a negative electrode (Tsuruta, [0031], [0035], [0049], [0050], [0058], [0070], [0131], [0134]).
Tohda teaches calculate an upper limit voltage and a lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction based on the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction (Tohda, [0037], [0039]).
Kazuno teaches output to a user of the vehicle via a display device operatively connected to the availability determination apparatus, first information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the low load time and second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time (Kazuno, [0004], [0006], [0021], [0087], [0098], [0143], [0146]); and
second information indicative of the use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at the high load time (Kazuno, [0004], [0057], [0058], [0077], [0079], [0087], [0147]).
Inoue teaches transmit a determination result by the server device to the in-vehicle device (Inoue, [0147]).
However, the prior arts of record, alone or in combination, do not fairly teach or suggest “calculate a curve representing characteristics of a charging state and an open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery by deforming the open circuit potential curve for each single electrode before deterioration of the deteriorated secondary battery by the shrinkage rate for each single electrode based on a fixed point”;
“transmit the curve representing characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery to a server device”; and
“determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a low load time based on a result of comparison between a first threshold value and a first capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery”; and
“correct the curve representing the characteristics of the charging state and the open circuit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery using a voltage drop amount in accordance with a DC resistance and a DC current of the deteriorated secondary battery”;
“determine a use availability of the deteriorated secondary battery at a high load time based on a result of comparison between a second threshold value and a second capacity determined by the upper limit voltage and the lower limit voltage of the deteriorated secondary battery after correction”; and
“allow the user to select an optimum secondary use application of the deteriorated secondary battery based on the first information and the second information” including all limitations as claimed.
Dependent claims 4-6 are also distinguish over the prior art for at least the same reason as claims 1, 2, and 3.
Examiner notes, however, that claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, and therefore, not patent eligible.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
“Yezerets US 20210311129” teaches “Systems and methods for determining state of health (SOH) of a battery. For example, a method includes conditioning the battery by determining an initial state of charge of the battery; charging the battery from the initial state of charge to a first target state of charge via a predetermined multi-stage charging sequence; and determining SOH of the battery by charging the battery from the first target state of charge to a second target state of charge at an ICA charging rate; acquiring a voltage vs. capacity (QV) data of the battery during charging of the battery from the first target state of charge to the second target state of charge; obtaining an incremental capacity (IC) data based on at least the acquired QV data; pre-processing the IC data; extracting an incremental capacity analysis (ICA) peak from the IC data; and determining the SOH of the battery based upon the ICA peak.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAL CE MANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday- 8:30-12:00, 1:00-5:30 EST.
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, Catherine T Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/LAL CE MANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights