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 .
Claims 1-9 have been presented for examination.
Claims 1-9 have been rejected.
The most recently amended set of claims has been examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and arguments, see pages 5-9, filed 03/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Zarders (US 20200318413 A1), further in view of Takahashi (US 20160137081 A1), and further in view of Hayashi (US 20120256588 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 1-3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Jun (US 20200190889 A1), in view of Zarders (US 20200318413 A1), and further in view of Duan (US 20210218073 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Jun discloses a charge control system for a battery mounted on a vehicle configured to perform charge in a state where a charge lid is opened [0103] “The controller 130 may determine a charging intention of the user, and in response to determining that the user has a charging intention, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., a charging system configured to open a vehicle charging cap to permit charging), the charge control system comprising:
a processor configured to [0103] “The controller 130 may determine a charging intention of the user, and in response to determining that the user has a charging intention, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., a processor configured to control the charging-cap opening operation).
determine that the vehicle is stopped at a charge site [0029] “wherein the controller may determine whether the vehicle is in a stationary state on the basis of the detected travel speed” (i.e., determine that the vehicle is stopped). [0030] “wherein the controller may determine whether a current position is a gas station or a charging station on the basis of the current position.” (i.e., determine that the vehicle is at a charge site).
determine necessity of charging the battery [0123] “the controller 130 may monitor the charged amount of the battery on the basis of at least one of the current, voltage, and temperature of the battery.” (i.e., monitoring the battery's charged amount to obtain information relevant to determining the necessity of charging). [0032] “The vehicle may further include an input configured to receive at least one of a replenishment time, a replenishment cost and a replenishment amount of the energy source.” (i.e., receiving charging-related information concerning replenishment of the battery).
perform an automatic opening operation of automatically opening the charge lid [0103] “The controller 130 may determine a charging intention of the user, and in response to determining that the user has a charging intention, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., performing an automatic opening operation of automatically opening the charge lid by controlling driving unit 150).
control the automatic opening operation based on an intention of a user [0103] “The controller 130 may determine a charging intention of the user, and in response to determining that the user has a charging intention, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., controlling the automatic opening operation based on an intention of a user). [0111] “The controller 130, in response to determining that the cap-opening signal is not received, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a, and in response to determining that the cap-opening signal is received, may not perform the automatic opening of the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., controlling whether the automatic opening operation is performed based on a user-related input signal).
wherein the processor is further configured to enable the automatic opening operation and automatically open the charge lid [0103] “The controller 130 may determine a charging intention of the user, and in response to determining that the user has a charging intention, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., enabling and automatically performing the charge-lid opening operation).
Jun does not expressly teach the full claim limitation regarding “when a user accepts, before the charge lid gets opened, the automatic opening operation in response to a notification inquiring necessity of the automatic opening operation.”
However, Zarders teaches when a user accepts, before the charge lid gets opened, the automatic opening operation in response to a notification inquiring necessity of the automatic opening operation [0013] “the remote server will notify the mobile device such that the mobile device will inquire whether the user would like the vehicle tailgate to open automatically when the user returns to the vehicle” (i.e., presenting a notification inquiring whether an automatic opening operation should be performed). [0013] “This can be done by, for example, displaying a notification on a display of the mobile device, in response to which the user can select whether or not to have the tailgate opened automatically when the user returns to the vehicle.” (i.e., allowing the user to accept or reject the automatic opening operation in response to the notification). [0013] “If the user indicates that the tailgate should be automatically opened upon returning to the vehicle, this information is transmitted to vehicle (e.g., via the remote server), and the vehicle then waits/listens for the remote key and/or smartkey (step S180).” (i.e., receiving user acceptance before opening and enabling the automatic opening operation in response to the acceptance). [0014] “If the user enters the opening distance, the vehicle tailgate will automatically open at that time (steps S210 and S300).” (i.e., automatically opening the vehicle panel after the user has previously accepted the automatic opening operation). [0034] “wherein if the user provides an indication, in reply to the inquiry, that the tailgate of the vehicle should not be automatically opened when the user returns to the vehicle, steps vii) and viii) are skipped and the method is ended.” (i.e., preventing automatic opening when the user does not accept the operation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jun's automatic charge-lid opening system with Zarders's notification and user-acceptance control technique, such that Jun's processor issues a notification inquiring whether automatic opening of the charge lid is necessary, receives the user's acceptance before the charge lid gets opened, and enables and automatically opens the charge lid in response to that acceptance. Jun already teaches automatic actuation of a charging cap based on an inferred charging intention, while Zarders teaches obtaining express user authorization before automatic actuation of a vehicle panel. Applying Zarders's technique to Jun would provide a predictable user-confirmation mechanism before performing Jun's automatic opening operation.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun and Zarders to improve user control and convenience by allowing the user to authorize automatic opening before the opening occurs. Zarders [0019] “The systems and method of embodiments of the subject invention provide an improved level of convenience over related art systems and methods for opening vehicle tailgates.”
The combination of Jun and Zarders does not expressly teach determining necessity of charging the battery.
However, Duan teaches determining necessity of charging the battery [0010] “calculating a target SOC based on the desired ending SOC and the delta SOC; and charging the traction battery responsive to a current SOC being less than the target SOC.” (i.e., determining necessity of charging the battery by comparing the current battery SOC with a target SOC threshold). [0040] “In one embodiment, BECM 160 controls charging of traction battery 101 in response to detecting connection of the electrified vehicle to an external power source by controlling charging of the vehicle to a target SOC based on an anticipated driving distance and battery temperature as described herein.” (i.e., controlling charging based on battery conditions and a determined charge target).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun and Zarders with the teachings of Duan to determine necessity of charging the battery based on a comparison of a current battery SOC with a target SOC, thereby allowing Jun's processor to determine whether charging is required based on battery conditions rather than solely on inferred charging intention. The charging-necessity determination would be performed before deciding whether to initiate Jun's charge-lid opening operation, with Zarders's inquiry and pre-opening acceptance control used when automatic opening is proposed.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, and Duan to improve battery charging efficiency and battery life by determining charging necessity based on actual and anticipated battery requirements. Duan [0013] “This may improve battery life in vehicles having high-capacity batteries that are often driven for short distances between charging events.”
Regarding Claim 2, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 1, Jun discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: allow a user to … enabling or disabling the automatic opening operation [0111] “The controller 130, in response to determining that the cap-opening signal is not received, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a, and in response to determining that the cap-opening signal is received, may not perform the automatic opening of the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., controlling whether automatic opening occurs in accordance with a user-related cap input).
Jun does not expressly teach allowing a user to select whether an automatic opening operation is enabled.
However, Zarders teaches allowing a user to select whether an automatic opening operation is enabled [0013] “the user can select whether or not to have the tailgate opened automatically when the user returns to the vehicle.” (i.e., allowing a user to select enabling or disabling an automatic opening operation). [0016] “This pattern recognition and/or automatic opening without user affirmation based on patterns can be disabled by the user (e.g., via the software on the mobile device).” (i.e., allowing the user to disable an automatic opening mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jun's automatic charge-lid opening system using Zarders's user-selectable automatic-opening control, such that the processor allows the user to select enabling or disabling the automatic opening operation of the charge lid.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun and Zarders to improve user control and convenience by allowing the user to disable undesired automatic opening while retaining the automatic-opening functionality when desired. Zarders [0019] “The systems and method of embodiments of the subject invention provide an improved level of convenience over related art systems and methods for opening vehicle tailgates”
Regarding Claim 3 the combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 2, Jun teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: determine that when the vehicle is stopped at the charge site [0029] “wherein the controller may determine whether the vehicle is in a stationary state on the basis of the detected travel speed” (i.e., determining that the vehicle is stopped). [0030] “wherein the controller may determine whether a current position is a gas station or a charging station on the basis of the current position.” (i.e., determining that the vehicle is stopped at the charge site).
Jun does not expressly teach issue a notification inquiring necessity of the automatic opening operation of the user.
However, Zarders teaches issue a notification inquiring necessity of the automatic opening operation of the user [0013] “the remote server will notify the mobile device such that the mobile device will inquire whether the user would like the vehicle tailgate to open automatically when the user returns to the vehicle” (i.e., issuing a notification inquiring whether an automatic opening operation should be performed). [0012] “the user (e.g., driver) parks the vehicle (e.g., at a storefront, in a parking garage, in a parking lot, near a physical place of business) and turns off the ignition (step S110).” (i.e., providing an automatic-opening control process associated with a stopped vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jun's charge-lid opening system using Zarders's notification technique, such that Jun's processor issues a notification inquiring whether automatic opening of the charging lid should be performed when the vehicle is stopped at a charging site. Jun already determines vehicle stoppage and charging-site location, while Zarders provides an inquiry concerning automatic vehicle-panel opening following a parking event.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun and Zarders to improve convenience and provide user control over automatic charge-lid opening before physically opening the charge lid. Zarders [0019] “The systems and method of embodiments of the subject invention provide an improved level of convenience over related art systems and methods for opening vehicle tailgates.”
The combination of Jun and Zarders does not expressly teach issuance of the notification upon determining that charge of the battery is necessary.
However, Duan teaches determining that charge of the battery is necessary [0010] “calculating a target SOC based on the desired ending SOC and the delta SOC; and charging the traction battery responsive to a current SOC being less than the target SOC.” [0040] “In one embodiment, BECM 160 controls charging of traction battery 101 in response to detecting connection of the electrified vehicle to an external power source by controlling charging of the vehicle to a target SOC based on an anticipated driving distance and battery temperature as described herein.” (i.e., determining that charging the battery is necessary).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Jun's processor to issue Zarders's automatic-opening inquiry when Jun determines that the vehicle is stopped at a charge site and Duan's SOC comparison indicates that battery charging is necessary. The processor would issue the inquiry before automatically opening Jun's charging lid and would enable and perform the opening operation upon receiving the user's acceptance.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, and Duan to improve the charging control system by determining that charging the battery is necessary before issuing a notification, thereby reducing unnecessary opening and charging operations to improve battery life and efficiency Duan [0022] “The present disclosure recognizes that with more long-range electrified vehicles becoming available, intelligent battery charging management based on actual and/or intended vehicle use may satisfy customer needs while extending battery life and improving battery operating efficiency.”
Regarding Claim 6, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 2, Jun discloses wherein: the processor is further configured to automatically open the charge lid when the vehicle is stopped at the charge site [0103] “The controller 130 may determine a charging intention of the user, and in response to determining that the user has a charging intention, may control the driving unit 150 to automatically open the charging cap 117a.” (i.e., automatically opening the charge lid according to the determined charging intention). [0029] “wherein the controller may determine whether the vehicle is in a stationary state on the basis of the detected travel speed” (i.e., determining that the vehicle is stopped). [0030] “wherein the controller may determine whether a current position is a gas station or a charging station on the basis of the current position.” (i.e., determining that the vehicle is stopped at a charge site).
Jun does not expressly teach “in a case where a user sets the automatic opening operation to be enabled in advance and that charging the battery is necessary.”
However, Zarders teaches in a case where a user sets the automatic opening operation to be enabled in advance [0017] “Instead, the user can indicate, via the software on the mobile device, that the tailgate should be opened automatically when the user returns to the vehicle” (i.e., setting the automatic opening operation to be enabled in advance). [0013] “If the user indicates that the tailgate should be automatically opened upon returning to the vehicle, this information is transmitted to vehicle (e.g., via the remote server), and the vehicle then waits/listens for the remote key and/or smartkey (step S180).” (i.e., enabling automatic opening based on an advance user instruction and subsequently performing the operation when an opening condition is satisfied). [0016] “This pattern recognition and/or automatic opening without user affirmation based on patterns can be disabled by the user (e.g., via the software on the mobile device).” (i.e., allowing the user to enable or disable an automatic-opening mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jun's automatic charge-lid opening system using Zarders's advance-authorization technique, such that a user sets automatic opening to be enabled before the opening event and Jun's processor subsequently performs automatic opening when the appropriate charging-site conditions are satisfied.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun and Zarders to improve user convenience by allowing advance authorization of automatic opening and reducing the need for repeated user interaction at the time of opening. Zarders [0019] “The systems and method of embodiments of the subject invention provide an improved level of convenience over related art systems and methods for opening vehicle tailgates.”
The combination of Jun and Zarders does not expressly teach that charging the battery is necessary.
However, Duan teaches that charging the battery is necessary [0010] “charging the traction battery responsive to a current SOC being less than the target SOC.” (i.e., determining that charging the battery is necessary based on a current SOC comparison).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun and Zarders with Duan's charging-necessity determination such that, when a user sets the automatic opening operation to be enabled in advance, Jun's processor automatically opens the charge lid when the vehicle is stopped at a charge site and the current SOC indicates that battery charging is necessary.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, and Duan to improve the charging control system by determining that charging the battery is necessary before issuing a notification, thereby reducing unnecessary opening and charging operations to improve battery life and efficiency Duan [0022] “The present disclosure recognizes that with more long-range electrified vehicles becoming available, intelligent battery charging management based on actual and/or intended vehicle use may satisfy customer needs while extending battery life and improving battery operating efficiency.”
Regarding Claim 8, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 1, the combination of Jun and Zarders does not expressly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: “acquire power consumption history of the battery; and set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on the power consumption history.”
However, Duan teaches acquire power consumption history of the battery [0023] “controlling battery charging of long-range or high-capacity vehicles that limit the battery charge SOC level based on a customer's need (which may be obtained from customer inputs or intelligently learned from driving/charging history and preference settings)” (i.e., using historical driving and charging information associated with battery consumption). [0044] “External cloud server 146 may determine an anticipated driving distance and/or target SOC, or may provide data to controller 140 for determination of the target or ending SOC based on historical vehicle trip data and/or traction battery charging data received by the external cloud server 146 from the electrified vehicle 102.” (i.e., acquiring historical vehicle trip and battery charging data to determine charging requirements). [0048] “In one embodiment, a self-learning model is used to provide the value of Dis_suggest based on history data about customer daily per charge travel distance and time when the vehicle is used and charged.” (i.e., using historical daily travel and battery charging information).
Duan further teaches set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on the power consumption history [0050] “This ΔSOC represents the range of SOC to be consumed to meet the propulsive energy request for the next trip, and may include various anticipated losses and accessory consumption depending on the particular implementation.” (i.e., predicting battery power consumption for anticipated vehicle operation). [0050] “The change or delta SOC may be a function of the anticipated driving distance, current true battery capacity, estimated battery temperature, and customer use history or historical trip information” (i.e., determining predicted battery consumption based in part on historical battery usage information). [0057] “The SOC charge level may then be determined at 390 according to: SOC.sub.charge=SOC.sub.end_opt+ΔSOC” (i.e., calculating a battery charging target based on the predicted SOC consumption). [0010] “calculating a target SOC based on the desired ending SOC and the delta SOC; and charging the traction battery responsive to a current SOC being less than the target SOC.” (i.e., using the calculated target SOC as a threshold to determine whether charging is necessary).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun and Zarders with Duan's history-based charging control technique to acquire power consumption history of the battery and set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on that power consumption history, thereby enabling Jun's processor to determine charging necessity using historical battery usage information and a corresponding battery SOC threshold.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, and Duan to improve the combination by providing more efficient battery charging control and extending battery life through charging decisions based on historical battery usage and anticipated consumption. Duan [0013] “This may improve battery life in vehicles having high-capacity batteries that are often driven for short distances between charging events.” (i.e., improving battery life through charging decisions based on anticipated battery usage).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Jun (US 20200190889 A1), in view of Zarders (US 20200318413 A1), further in view of Duan (US 20210218073 A1), and further in view of Seino (US 20120123676 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 3, Jun discloses wherein the processor is further configured to enable the automatic opening operation without issuing the notification when the charge site where the vehicle is stopped is a predetermined charge site … based on a navigation device [0183] “The controller 130 may determine whether the vehicle is located at a charging station on the basis of the current location information and navigation information during execution of a navigation mode, and in response to determining that the vehicle is located at the charging station, may determine that the user has a charging intention.” (i.e., identifying a charging site using navigation information and determining charging intention based on the charging location). 0029] “wherein the controller may determine whether the vehicle is in a stationary state on the basis of the detected travel speed” (i.e., determine that the vehicle is stopped). [0030] “wherein the controller may determine whether a current position is a gas station or a charging station on the basis of the current position.” (i.e., determine that the vehicle is at a charge site).
The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan does not teach when the charge site is a predetermined charge site registered in a navigation device.
However, Seino teaches when the charge site is a predetermined charge site registered in a navigation device [0060] “the charging point determiner 38 determines whether the charging point registration candidate position is registered (stored) in the private charging stand table 56 or the public charging stand table 58 in the map data storage unit 32, that is, is registered as a charging point.” (i.e., determining whether a charging location is registered in the navigation system; see also FIG. 4, Step S14). [0065] “the charging point register 40 registers (stores) the charging point registration candidate position involved in the combination of the charger type stored in the memory and the current position of the charging stand in the private charging stand table 56 or the public charging stand table 58” (i.e., storing charging-location information in the navigation device; see also FIG. 4, Step S16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan with Seino's registered charging-site information, such that Jun's processor identifies a predetermined charging site registered in the navigation device and applies Zarders's previously authorized automatic-opening mode when the vehicle is stopped at that site, thereby enabling automatic opening without issuing another notification requiring user acceptance.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, Duan, and Seino to improve charging control system by identifying previously registered charging sites Seino [0009] “To improve on this, the subject matter disclosed herein includes a new in-vehicle navigation apparatus and a new server apparatus capable of allowing other vehicles to use charging points where its own vehicle is charged while avoiding use of private charging points including private houses by the other vehicles.”
Regarding Claim 5, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 3, the combination of Jun and Duan does not teach when rapid charge equipment is installed at the charge site where the vehicle is stopped, the automatic opening operation is enabled without issuing the notification.
However, Zarders teaches the automatic opening operation is enabled without issuing the notification [0016] “the remote server can recognize patterns in user behavior (e.g., patterns in the user's commonly occurring and repeated trips to certain locations on certain days of the week (for example, if the user always parks in a particular lot and makes a mobile payment at a particular store every Saturday)). Thus, if the user has consistently indicated that the tailgate should be automatically opened after a particular type of repeated purchase, the remote server can communicate with the vehicle to always open the tailgate when the user approaches after making such a purchase without the need for the user to affirm the desire to have the tailgate automatically open (e.g., by interacting with the software of the mobile device). This pattern recognition and/or automatic opening without user affirmation based on patterns can be disabled by the user (e.g., via the software on the mobile device).” (i.e., enabling an automatic-opening without issuing the notification).
The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan does not expressly teach wherein: when rapid charge equipment is installed at the charge site where the vehicle is stopped.
However, Seino teaches wherein: when rapid charge equipment is installed at the charge site where the vehicle is stopped [0064] “the charging point determiner 38 determines that the charger type at the charging point registration candidate position is a rapid charger” (i.e., determining that the charging equipment at the charging point is rapid charging equipment, as described in FIG. 5, Step S15b). [0065] “the charging point register 40 registers (stores) the charging point registration candidate position involved in the combination of the charger type stored in the memory and the current position of the charging stand in the private charging stand table 56 or the public charging stand table 58” (i.e., storing charging-location information together with charging-equipment type information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan with Seino's rapid-charger identification and registration technique, such that Jun's processor recognizes a charging location having rapid charging equipment and uses that information as a condition for selecting a previously authorized automatic-opening mode without requiring an additional notification, consistent with Zarders's automatic-opening control.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, Duan, and Seino to improve charging control system by identifying charging equipment types at charging locations including rapid chargers Seino [0074] “The charging point distributor 28 in the server apparatus 12 distributes the charging point (position data about the charging stand with the charger type and a mark indicating the charging stand) in the public charging stand table 60 to the electric vehicle 16 via the communicator 30 when a new charging point having the public availability is registered in the public charging stand table 60”.
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Jun (US 20200190889 A1), in view of Zarders (US 20200318413 A1), further in view of Duan (US 20210218073 A1), further in view of Seino (US 20120123676 A1), and further in view of Takahashi (US 20160137081 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 1, the combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan does not expressly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a type of charge equipment and open a charge lid of a charge port corresponding to the type of the charge equipment from a plurality of charge lids of the vehicle.
However, Seino teaches determine a type of charge equipment [0064] “the charging point determiner 38 determines that the charger type at the charging point registration candidate position is a rapid charger if the charge speed [Ah/h] is higher than a certain charge speed threshold value and determines that the charger type at the charging point registration candidate position is a 200-V normal charger or a 100-V normal charger on the basis of the voltage applied to the charge plug if the charge speed [Ah/h] is not higher than the certain charge speed threshold value.” (i.e., determining whether charging equipment corresponds to rapid charging equipment which is a type of charge equipment; see also FIG. 5, Step S15b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan with Seino's charger-type identification technique so that the processor determines whether the charge equipment is rapid charging equipment or normal charging equipment.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, Duan, and Seino to improve charging control system by identifying charging equipment types at charging locations including rapid chargers Seino [0074] “The charging point distributor 28 in the server apparatus 12 distributes the charging point (position data about the charging stand with the charger type and a mark indicating the charging stand) in the public charging stand table 60 to the electric vehicle 16 via the communicator 30 when a new charging point having the public availability is registered in the public charging stand table 60”.
The combination of Jun, Zarders, Duan, and Seino does not expressly teach open a charge lid of a charge port corresponding to the type of the charge equipment from a plurality of charge lids of the vehicle.
However, Takahashi teaches open a charge lid of a charge port corresponding to the type of the charge equipment from a plurality of charge lids of the vehicle [0047] “There is imposed no particular limitation on where to dispose the normal charging inlet 4 and the quick charging inlet 5. As this occurs, the rear lid 11 is formed to a size which is wide enough to cover the area which corresponds to the quick charging inlet 5 of the charging inlet 3, while the front lid 12 is formed to a size which is wide enough to cover the area which corresponds to the normal charging inlet 4 of the charging inlet 3.” [0049] “the rear lid 11 and the front lid 12 are allowed to be opened and closed individually in a manual fashion. Specifically, as shown in FIG. 4A, in the lid apparatus 10, only the rear lid 11 can be opened to the fully opened position with the front lid 12 kept closed.” [0050] “only the front lid 12 can be opened to the fully opened position with the rear lid 11 kept closed. In this embodiment, as has been described above, the front lid 12 is formed to the size which is wide enough to cover the area which corresponds to the quick charging inlet 5 in the charging inlet 3, and therefore, with only the front lid 12 opened, a quick charging connector 110 can be connected to the quick charging inlet 5.” only the front lid 12 can be opened to the fully opened position with the rear lid 11 kept closed. In this embodiment, as has been described above, the front lid 12 is formed to the size which is wide enough to cover the area which corresponds to the quick charging inlet 5 in the charging inlet 3, and therefore, with only the front lid 12 opened, a quick charging connector 110 can be connected to the quick charging inlet 5. (i.e., open a charge lid of a charge port corresponding to the type of the charge equipment from a plurality of charge lids of the vehicle for normal or quick charging; see also FIG. 4A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun, Zarders, Duan, and Seino with the charging inlet lid structure of US 20160137081 A1, such that the vehicle has a plurality of independently operable charge lids, Jun's automatic opening control is applied to the individual lids, and the processor selects and opens the charge lid corresponding to the charging-equipment type determined using Seino's charging-equipment identification information.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, Duan, Seino, and Takahashi to improve charging compatibility and to reduce unnecessary exposure of charging inlets by opening only the charge lid corresponding to the type of charge equipment. Takahashi [0047] “There is imposed no particular limitation on where to dispose the normal charging inlet 4 and the quick charging inlet 5, and hence, the normal charging inlet 4 may be provided at the front side of the vehicle of the charging inlet 3. As this occurs, the rear lid 11 is formed to a size which is wide enough to cover the area which corresponds to the quick charging inlet 5 of the charging inlet 3, while the front lid 12 is formed to a size which is wide enough to cover the area which corresponds to the normal charging inlet 4 of the charging inlet 3.”
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Jun (US 20200190889 A1), in view of Zarders (US 20200318413 A1), further in view of Duan (US 20210218073 A1), and further in view of Hayashi (US 20120256588 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan teaches the charge control system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to:
Jun and Zarders do not expressly teach “acquire a travel schedule; and set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on a power consumption prediction value based on a travel plan for a next day”
However, Duan teaches acquire a travel schedule [0032] “Route planning or actual route/trip data as well as planned and/or actual vehicle charging data may be selectively transmitted to an external cloud server 146 for use in varying adaptive charge settings based on a selected goal.” (i.e., acquiring planned route/trip information associated with a travel schedule).
The combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan does not expressly teach “set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on a power consumption prediction value based on a travel plan for a next day.”
However, Hayashi teaches set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on a power consumption prediction value based on a travel plan for a next day [0039] “a route on each day of the week can be detected on the basis of a route to a destination set in the navigation apparatus 11 or a detected change in a current location.” (i.e., identifying day-specific travel route information). [0055] “the predicted amount of power consumption on the next day is large (is approximately 40%). Accordingly, it is determined that charging is necessary when the SOC is equal to or less than 40%” (i.e., setting a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on a power consumption prediction value for the next day).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jun, Zarders, and Duan with the teachings of Hayashi to set a threshold for determining the necessity of charging the battery based on a power consumption prediction value based on a travel plan for a next day, by applying Hayashi's next-day consumption prediction and charging-threshold determination to the planned route/trip information acquired using Duan's navigation system.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Jun, Zarders, Duan, and Hayashi to improve the accuracy of determining the necessity of charging the battery based on anticipated next-day vehicle travel and predicted power consumption. Hayashi [0011] “As a result, it is possible to increase the accuracy of determining whether the charging of the battery is necessary and the accuracy of calculating the target remaining amount of power.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon in the current rejections is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. Cao (US 20170259678 A1) teaches an electric vehicle charging system having a movable charge port and charging-port cover, wherein sensing circuitry detects a nearby charging station and a controller operates a motor to automatically expose the charging port. Takebayashi (US 20200148070 A1) teaches a vehicle charging system in which a control unit authenticates an electronic key and unlocks a quick-charging port cover to permit access to the charging port. Honjo (US 20210061115 A1) teaches a vehicle battery charging control system that receives a charge-start indication before charging, including a charging timer setting or charging-lid opening signal, and performs advance preparation for battery charging. These references are considered pertinent to the claimed charge control system and automatic charging-lid operation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUSSAM ALZATEEMEH whose telephone number is (703)756-1013. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached on (571) 270-3832. 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.
/HUSSAM ALDEEN ALZATEEMEH/
Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/CHRISTOPHER GEORGE FEES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
