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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks 35 U.S.C. § 101, filed on 11/26/2025, regarding 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection is persuasive in view of amendments filed on 11/26/2025. 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 has been considered but is moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s remark, on page 4, asserts that the addition of “the host computer prohibits an operation of the vehicle when there is the mismatch of the version information”, is not taught by applied references Hu nor Jho.
However, new reference Beaston teaches the shutting down of battery pack controller when detecting a mismatch of battery version. The shutting down of a controller clearly indicates a vehicle is not operational, making it unable to perform its main functions.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hu(CN 112540781 A) (hereinafter Hu) in view of Jho (KR 20200060147 A) (hereinafter Jho) in further view of Beaston (US 20180123357 A1) (hereinafter Beaston).
Regarding claim 1, A vehicle(Hu, paragraph 45, electric vehicle) comprising a plurality of battery packs(Hu, paragraph 12, plurality of slave battery pack) a battery management apparatus configured to manage the plurality of battery packs(Hu, paragraph 12, an electric device,…the electric device comprises a battery parallel system…the battery parallel system comprises a main battery pack and a plurality of slave battery pack, the main battery pack comprises a main battery management system, the plurality of slave battery pack comprises a plurality of slave battery management system), and a host computer of the battery management apparatus(Similar to the host computer, Hu discloses storage medium with computer instruction and processor that execute instruction of battery management system. Hu, paragraph 13, a storage medium, which is stored with at least one computer instruction, the computer instruction is loaded by a processor and used for executing the software upgrading method of the battery management system as described above ); wherein the battery management apparatus comprising:
a memory(Hu, paragraph 83, any entity or device capable of carrying the computer program code...computer memory); and
a processor(Hu, paragraph 13, the computer instruction is loaded by a processor), wherein
the processor is configured to;
store a first computer program used in the battery management apparatus (The battery management system of Hu is a software(program) that can be stored in the storage medium. Hu, paragraph 86, the storage medium is used for storing the program code and various data, for example, storing the program code of the software upgrading module 200 installed in the main battery management system BMS1. Hu, paragraph 85, the computer program can be stored in a computer readable storage medium; When the computer program is executed by the processing unit in the main battery management system BMS1. Hu, paragraph 46, the main battery pack comprises a main battery management system)and a second computer program used in each of the plurality of battery packs in the memory(As disclosed above, the storage medium stores various programs(Hu, paragraph 86).The program(software) stored in plurality of battery packs(slave battery packs) is the second program. Furthermore, the battery management system of Hu is a software(program) battery management system stored in the storage medium. Hu, paragraph 12, the plurality of slave battery pack comprises a plurality of slave battery management system Hu, paragraph 14, obtaining software version information of the main battery management system and a plurality of the software version information of the slave battery management system);
judge whether or not there is a mismatch between version information of the second computer program stored in each of the plurality of battery packs and version information of each of the first computer program and the second computer program stored in the memory(Hu, paragraph 32, determining whether the main battery management system and a plurality of the software version information of the slave battery management system are the same.
While Hu teaches about determination of whether the software version information of the main battery management system and the software version information of the slave plurality of battery management systems are the same, it specifically fails to teach an apparatus with battery packs connected in parallel; notify the host computer of the mismatch of the version information when there is the mismatch; and control an onboard broadcast apparatus to indicate that there is the mismatch of the version information; wherein the host computer prohibits an operation of the vehicle when there is the mismatch of the version information.
However, Jho, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about diagnosing software compatibility of battery management system discloses an apparatus with battery packs connected in parallel(Jho, paragraph 5, a battery pack in which a plurality of battery modules are connected in series and in parallel is widely used); Furthermore, Jho discloses the detecting of compatibility of the software of battery packs and battery management system(Jho, paragraph 14, a device for diagnosing compatibility between software of a secondary battery provided in a battery pack and BMS provided in the battery pack); notify the host computer of the mismatch of the version information when there is the mismatch(Jho, paragraph 56, the communication unit 500 may be electrically connected to the processor 300 to send and receive electrical signals. For example, if the software 213 is not compatible with the secondary battery mounted on the battery pack, the communication unit 500 may receive software 213 compatible with the secondary battery mounted on the battery pack from the server. Jho, paragraph 9, accurately diagnose whether or not software compatible with the secondary battery is mounted on the BMS, and notify the user accurately), control an onboard broadcast apparatus to indicate that there is the mismatch of the version information(Jho, paragraph 58, when the secondary battery installed in the battery pack and the software 213 are not compatible, the alarm unit 600 may transmit an alarm indicating that the software 213 is not compatible to the external device 70. . For example, the external device 70 may be a display device.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Hu with Jho’s compatibility software determination mechanism.Hu discloses detecting whether the versions of software installed in the main battery management system and the plurality of slave battery system is the same, but it does not specifically teach if the software is compatible or not. Jho however has the capability to determine whether software provided in the battery pack and BMS is compatible or incompatible. Furthermore, Jho teaches communication system similar to the notification system of the current application where it communicates the incompatibility of software versions to the server of the system to receive a compatible software. Compatible battery pack and battery management system software can help prolong the battery life and efficiency. However, a mismatched or incompatible program versions of a battery may cause battery degradation and safety issues.
While the combination of Hu and Jho teaches a battery management apparatus that detects battery version mismatch, it fails to disclose a system wherein the host computer prohibits an operation of the vehicle when there is the mismatch of the version information.
However, Beaston, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about battery storage control discloses a system wherein the host computer prohibits an operation of the vehicle when there is the mismatch of the version information(Beaston teaches the shutting down of battery pack controller when detecting a mismatch of battery version. The shutting down of controller clearly indicates a vehicle is not operational, making the system unable to perform its main functions. Beaston, paragraph 207, wherein the host computer prohibits an operation of the vehicle when there is the mismatch of the version information).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Hu and Jho with Beaston to shutdown battery controller of a vehicle when there is a mismatch of battery version so that the vehicle will not operate. By shutting controller down when there is mismatch of battery versions, it is possible to prevent damage to electrical system of the vehicle caused by incompatible voltage and current provided by a wrong battery. Furthermore, prohibiting the operating a vehicle with a mismatched battery version can prevent overheating of the battery, which can lead to a fire.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hu(CN 112540781 A) (hereinafter Hu) in view of Jho (KR 20200060147 A) (hereinafter Jho) in further view of Beaston (US 20180123357 A1) (hereinafter Beaston) in further view of Guan (CN 109455094 A)(hereinafter Guan).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Hu, Jho, and Beaston teach the vehicle according to claim 1(Hu, paragraph 12, battery management system; Jho, paragraph 14, a device for diagnosing compatibility; Beaston, paragraph 207, wherein the host computer prohibits an operation of the vehicle when there is the mismatch of the version information ), wherein the processor is further configured to judge whether or not there is the mismatch(Hu, paragraph 32, determining whether the main battery management system and a plurality of the software version information of the slave battery management system are the same. Jho, paragraph 14, a device for diagnosing compatibility between software of a secondary battery provided in a battery pack and BMS provided in the battery pack)
While the combination of Hu and Jho teach the determination of match or mismatch of battery pack program(software) versions, the specifically fails to disclose a mechanism where match/mismatch is initiated when the vehicle is started.
However, Guan, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about battery information automatic identifying system discloses determining the corresponding battery information when the vehicle is started (Guan, paragraph 33, electric automobile battery information automatic identifying method and system, battery controller through the vehicle identification ID is set, and in the remote intelligent terminal of the vehicle, battery cell number and the number is defined. When the vehicle is started, the battery controller sends identification ID to the remote intelligent terminal for matching, when the matching is successful, determining the corresponding battery type, battery core works, battery monomer number and number to form a cell data format corresponding to the vehicle )
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of combination of Hu, Jho, and Beaston with Guan’s initiating of battery information retrieval when the vehicle is started. Even though Guan does not specifically disclose the matching or mismatching of battery program version, it teaches the initiating of battery information retrieval when the vehicle is started. After the vehicle is started and battery information is received, it is possible to use Hu and Jho’s matching or mismatching detecting mechanism to determine if there is a mismatch between battery pack programs(software). By initiating the mismatch determination after the vehicle is started, it is possible to detect any version discrepancy that may have occurred due to software update or battery replacement. Furthermore, it is possible to avoid situations where problems only become apparent during critical driving moments.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure
SOONG (US 20120262110 A1) teaches about charging module and rechargeable battery assembly for electric vehicle. It discloses a battery management unit which is installed with a battery management system in form of a program. It further teaches about a Rechargeable Battery Module that has a plurality of rechargeable battery cells linked in series or in parallel and a first program installed in the management unit for managing the rechargeable battery cells. It also discloses an updating unit that’s connected to the charging module for automatically detecting version of the first program.
FAN (WO 2020034169 A1) teaches about a version requester, a version comparer, a remote downloader, and a battery manager;
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6850. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 5712727298. 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.
/BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665