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 .
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recites calculating a real time maximal energy storage capacity, or obtaining history, comparing the history, the history records include, etcetera. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims are directed to an abstract idea, the claims are directed to obtaining information but do not do anything with the information that is obtained i.e. when a threshold is passed the controller initiates charging of the battery cell or removes the battery cell from operation or draws current from the battery cell. The claims does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the structure of the circuits and unites is already known within the art as seen by Lee (US 20190305386) below.
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 (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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1-7 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee (US 2019/0305386).
As to claim 1, Lee discloses a distributed battery management system (figure 3-10 #400, best seen in figure 3, [0042], also discussed throughout), for managing a plurality of battery management units (figures 3-10 #306 or #502, best seen in figures 3, 7 and 8, [0042], [0053], discussed throughout), each of the battery management units including: a first battery cell (figures 3-10 #402 or #604, best seen in figure 6, [0056], discussed throughout), forming an electrical connection at least with a second battery cell in a second battery management unit (figures 1-10, best seen in figures 7, 8 and 10, as there are several batteries and #306 S-BMU connected together); a monitor circuit (figures 1-10, #502, [0053]; #304, [0042]; #410, [0046]; discussed throughout), monitoring a discharge process of the first battery cell via the electrical connection, to record a discharge voltage time history of the first battery cell ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout); and a calculation unit, calculating a real-time maximal energy storage capacity of the first battery cell, by an electrochemical equation calculated based on the discharge voltage time history and an electrical current time history of the first battery cell during the discharge process ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout; the prior art discusses using the charge/discharge cycles, temperature, voltage, SOH, SOC to determine the state of each cell thus the prior art reads on the instant claimed invention; also #302, [0050]-[0051], discussed throughout).
As to claim 2, Lee discloses wherein, the calculation unit is in a one-to-one disposition in the battery management unit; or, the calculation unit is disposed in the distributed battery management system, to have a one-to-many connection with the battery management units (figures 1-10, the prior art has both as [0053], discusses the use of each individual cell and [0056], is the larger circuit and has the data for each individual cell, this is also discussed throughout).
As to claim 3, Lee discloses further including a signal communication unit, providing a signal connection between the battery management units, wherein the signal communication unit is in a one-to-one disposition in each of the battery management units, or the signal communication unit is disposed in the distributed battery management system, to have a one-to-many connection with the battery management units (figures 1-10 #414 or #506, 706, [0060], [0046], [0053], [0055], discussed throughout).
As to claim 4, Lee discloses further including a master control unit, controlling charge and discharge of the battery management units through the signal connection (figures 1-10, #304 or #302, [0046], discussed throughout).
As to claim 5, Lee discloses wherein, the signal connection includes a wired signal connection or a wireless signal connection (figures 1-10 #414 or #506, [0046], [0053], [0055], discussed throughout).
As to claim 6, Lee discloses wherein, the electrical current time history is obtained by sensing a discharge current of the first battery cell, sensing a discharge current in the charge-discharge connection, or conversion from the voltage time history ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout).
As to claim 7, Lee discloses wherein, the electrochemical equation is a discharge characteristic equation based on the discharge voltage time history, the electrical current time history and the real-time maximal energy storage capacity in the battery cell of the electrochemical reaction ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout, all the information is used).
As to claim 9, Lee discloses a battery resume record device (figures 1-10 #400, [0046], discussed throughout), including: a calculation unit, calculating a real-time maximal energy storage capacity of the first battery cell (figures 1-10 #302, [0050]-[0051], discussed throughout); and a memory unit, storing a history record of the real-time maximal energy storage capacity of the battery cell as an identity resume of the first battery cell; wherein, the real-time maximal energy storage capacity is a closed form solution of an electrochemical equation calculating a voltage and a current of the battery cell during a discharging process, and the real-time maximal energy storage capacity is in a one-to-one correlation with the battery cell ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout; the prior art discusses using the charge/discharge cycles, temperature, voltage, SOH, SOC to determine the state of each cell thus the prior art reads on the instant claimed invention).
As to claim 10, Lee discloses further including: a comparison unit, comparing the history record of the maximal energy storage capacity, with the maximal energy storage capacity of the battery cell, to determine whether the history record corresponds to the battery cell ([0053], [0056], the information is used as charge discharge cycles thus there is memory and it is being comparted to find the state of the batteries; also discussed throughout).
As to claim 11, Lee discloses wherein, the history record includes state of health (SOH), state of charge (SOC), or end of life of the battery cell ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout).
As to claim 12, Lee discloses a distributed battery management system (figure 3-10 #400, best seen in figure 3, [0042], also discussed throughout), including: a plurality of battery management units (figures 3-10 #306 or #502, best seen in figures 3, 7 and 8, [0042], [0053], discussed throughout), wherein a first battery management unit including: first battery cell (figures 3-10 #402 or #604, best seen in figure 6, [0056], discussed throughout), forming a charge-discharge connection at least with a second battery cell in a second battery management unit (figures 1-10, best seen in figures 7, 8 and 10, as there are several batteries and #306 S-BMU connected together); and a monitor circuit, monitoring a discharge process of the first battery cell via the charge-discharge connection, to record a discharge voltage time history of the first battery cell ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout); a closed-form solution processor, calculating a real-time maximal energy storage capacity of the first battery cell, by calculating a closed form solution of an electrochemical equation corresponding to a charge/discharge characteristic of the first battery cell, based on the discharge voltage time history and an electrical current time history of the first battery cell ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout; the prior art discusses using the charge/discharge cycles, temperature, voltage, SOH, SOC to determine the state of each cell thus the prior art reads on the instant claimed invention; also #302, [0050]-[0051], discussed throughout; NOTE as it is using the history of the cell it is not solving the problem in a single pass and would be considered a closed form solution processor); and a signal communication unit, providing a signal connection between the battery management units to form a signal connection (figures 1-10 #414 or #506, [0046], [0053], [0055], discussed throughout).
As to claim 13, Lee discloses wherein, the electrical current time history is obtained by sensing a discharge current of the first battery cell, sensing a discharge current in the charge-discharge connection, or by conversion from the voltage time history ([0053], [0056], discussed throughout, all the information is used).
As to claim 14, Lee discloses wherein, the closed-form solution processor is in a one-to-one disposition in each of the battery management units; or, the closed-form solution processor is disposed in the distributed battery management system to have a one-to-many connection with the battery management units (figures 3-10, discussed throughout).
As to claim 15, Lee discloses wherein, the signal communication unit is in a one-to-one disposition in each of the battery management units, or the signal communication unit is disposed in the distributed battery management system, to have one-to-many connection with the battery management units (figures 3-10, discussed throughout).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chiyajo (US 2016/0097818).
As to claim 8, Lee is silent to wherein, the groundings of the battery management units connected by the charge-discharge connection, are isolated from each other. Chiyajo disclose a battery pack with a filter circuit ([0013]) wherein a capacitor filter is between each battery terminal and ground ([0010], figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invitation to use the configuration from Chiyajo within Lee as the arrangement removes noise ([0010], Chiyajo, discussed throughout). Additionally it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use more grounds in each battery module to increase safety.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights