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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 7-8, 15 and 17 are amended.
Claim 6 is canceled.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "“the machine” on line 10 and the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 16-20 are rejected based on their inherited deficiencies.
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 1-5 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under step 1, claim 1-5 and 7-20 belongs to a statutory category.
Under Step 2A prong 1, the claims as a whole are identified as being directed to a judicial exception as claim 1 and similarly 8 and 15 recite(s) to “detect mis-assembly of a battery pack” and “determine whether the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information” are directed to mental processes and/or mathematical concepts as they amount to mental decisions and/or mathematical comparisons.
Under Step 2A prong 2, evaluating whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application of that exception, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because “a battery management system”, “the battery management system comprising: a data bus; a plurality of measurement devices configured to obtain measurements from a plurality of battery modules of the battery pack, wherein the plurality of measurement devices are connected to the data bus; and a controller including a first port and a second port, wherein the first port and the second port are each connected to the data bus, and wherein the controller is configured to: provide first instructions to the plurality of measurement devices via the first port”, “provide second instructions to the plurality of measurement devices via the second port”, “wherein the battery pack is configured to provide power to the component” and “wherein the non-volatile memories store device information associated with the measurement devices, the device information including the one or more first unique identifiers and the one or more second unique identifiers” and in claim 8 “a machine” are considered to be generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer and/or are considered to be generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The elements of “receive one or more first responses from one or more first measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the first instructions, wherein the one or more first responses include first unique identifier information identifying one or more first unique identifiers associated with the one or more first measurement devices;”, “receive one or more second responses from one or more second measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the second instructions, wherein the one or more second responses include second unique identifier information identifying one or more second unique identifiers associated with the one or more second measurement devices;”, and “wherein the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information are obtained by interrogating non-volatile memories of the measurement devices” are considered to be data gathering steps required to use the correlation do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity. In claim 8, the elements “prevent damage to a component of a machine based on determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled” are considered to be mere instructions to apply an exception as they provided only a result-oriented solution and lacked details as to how the computer performed the modifications, which was equivalent to the words “apply it”.
Under Step 2B, evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept both individually and in combination, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “a battery management system”, “the battery management system comprising: a data bus; a plurality of measurement devices configured to obtain measurements from a plurality of battery modules of the battery pack, wherein the plurality of measurement devices are connected to the data bus; and a controller including a first port and a second port, wherein the first port and the second port are each connected to the data bus, and wherein the controller is configured to: provide first instructions to the plurality of measurement devices via the first port”, “provide second instructions to the plurality of measurement devices via the second port”, “wherein the battery pack is configured to provide power to the component” and “wherein the non-volatile memories store device information associated with the measurement devices, the device information including the one or more first unique identifiers and the one or more second unique identifiers” and in claim 8 “a machine” are considered to be merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself per MPEP 2106.05(h) and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i and see prior art of record). The elements of “receive one or more first responses from one or more first measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the first instructions, wherein the one or more first responses include first unique identifier information identifying one or more first unique identifiers associated with the one or more first measurement devices;”, “receive one or more second responses from one or more second measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the second instructions, wherein the one or more second responses include second unique identifier information identifying one or more second unique identifiers associated with the one or more second measurement devices;”, and “wherein the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information are obtained by interrogating non-volatile memories of the measurement devices” are considered to be adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception per MPEP 2106.05(g) (i or ii) and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d)(see prior art of record). In claim 8, the elements “prevent damage to a component of a machine based on determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled” are considered to be mere instructions to apply an exception per MPEP 2106.05(f) as the limitations do not provide a meaningful limitation because it merely states that the abstract idea should be applied to achieve a desired result.
Claims 2-4, 11-13, 16, 18-19 are further directed to the abstract ideas cited above.
In claim 5 and similarly 14, “determine, based on the one or more first responses, that at least one measurement device of the plurality of measurement devices has not provided a response;” are further directed to the abstract ideas cited above.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because “provide the second instructions based on determining that the at least one measurement device has not provided a response” are considered to be generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “provide the second instructions based on determining that the at least one measurement device has not provided a response” are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d).
In claims 7 and 9-10, the elements are not integrated into a practical application or does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are considered to be generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer and are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baglino (US 20110003183 A1).
In claim 8, Baglino discloses a machine (Fig. 1), comprising: a data bus (Fig. 1, 130 Par. 29 “network bus”); a plurality of measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125) configured to obtain measurements from a plurality of battery modules (Fig. 1, 1051, 1052, ect, Par .32) of a battery pack (Fig. 1, 1051-N), wherein the plurality of measurement devices are connected to the data bus (See Fig. 1); and a controller (Fig. 1, 110), connected to the data bus, configured to: provide first instructions to the plurality of measurement devices (Par. 32), receive one or more first responses from one or more first measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the first instructions (Par. 32), wherein the one or more first responses include first unique identifier information identifying one or more first unique identifiers associated with the one or more first measurement devices (Par. 32-33, 36, “assigned ID.sub.1” Fig. 3 310, 315); provide second instructions to the plurality of measurement devices, receive one or more second responses from one or more second measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the second instructions, wherein the one or more second responses include second unique identifier information identifying one or more second unique identifiers associated with the one or more second measurement devices (Par. 35-37, Fig. 3, 320); compare the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “compares the measured positional attribute with an implied positional attribute” “a mis-match”); and determine whether the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on comparing the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “compares the measured positional attribute with an implied positional attribute” “a mis-match”); wherein the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information are obtained by interrogating non-volatile memories of the measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125s Par. 22 “Processing sub-system includes a memory for saving/storing desired information” Par. 36 “process 200 reads the stored IDs from the memory of processing sub-system 125”); wherein the non-volatile memories store device information associated with the measurement devices, the device information including the one or more first unique identifiers and the one or more second unique identifiers (Par. 24 “each processing sub-system 125 includes identifier (ID)”) and prevent damage to a component (Par. 37 “operation including deactivation of any potentially misbehaving battery module) of a machine (Fig. 1, Par. 26 “battery modules are distributed in various locations in the vehicle or machine”), based on determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled (Par. 37 “compares the measured positional attribute with an implied positional attribute” “a mis-match”); wherein the battery pack is configured to provide power to the component (Par. 18, 26 “battery modules are distributed in various locations in the vehicle or machine”).
In claim 10, Baglino further discloses wherein a measurement device, of the plurality of measurement devices, includes a non-volatile memory (Par. 24 “memory”), and wherein the non-volatile memory is configured to store a unique identifier of the measurement device (Par. 24 “an identifier (ID)”).
In claim 11, Baglino further discloses determine that at least one unique identifier, identified by the first unique identifier information, is also identified by the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “mis-match” examiner notes that some of the unique IDs can match, however the differences in ID are flagged); and determine that a first number of battery modules, of the plurality of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105), exceeds a second number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105) expected to be included in the battery pack (Par. 33, 37); and determine that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the first number of battery modules exceeds the second number of battery modules (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 12, Baglino further discloses determine that at least one unique identifier, identified by the first unique identifier information, is not also identified by the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “mis-match”); determine that a first number of battery modules, of the plurality of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105), is less than a second number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105) expected to be included in the battery pack (Par. 33, 37); and determine that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the first number of battery modules is less than the second number of battery modules (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 13, Baglino further discloses determine that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled (Par. 34 “mis-installation”); and provide a notification indicating that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled (Par. 37 “indicate a reason for additional diagnostic, servicing, maintenance”).
In claim 14, Baglino further discloses determine, based on the one or more first responses, that at least one measurement device of the plurality of measurement devices has not provided a response (Par. 36-37 “implies an expected ID”, “a discrepancy may indicate a short, an open, or other condition affecting the determined positional attribute”); and provide the second instructions based on determining that the at least one measurement device has not provided a response (Par. 37 “additional diagnostic”).
In claim 15, Baglino discloses a method (Fig. 3) performed by a controller (Fig. 1, 110), the method comprising: providing first instructions to a plurality of measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125, Par. 32), wherein the plurality of measurement devices are configured to obtain measurements (Fig. 1 Par. 32-33, 36, “assigned ID.sub.1” Fig. 3 310, 315) from a plurality of battery modules (Fig. 1, 1051, 1052, ect, Par .32) of a battery pack (Fig. 1, 1051-N) ; receiving one or more first responses from one or more first measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the first instructions (Par. 32), wherein the one or more first responses include first unique identifier information identifying one or more first unique identifiers associated with the one or more first measurement devices (Par. 32-33, 36, “assigned ID.sub.1”); and determining, prior to the machine performing an operation (Par. 37 “deactivation of any potentially misbehaving battery module” examiner considers any operation performed by the vehicle that comes after deactivating one of the modules to be said “operation”), based on the one or more first unique identifiers, that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled (Par. 37 “compares the measured positional attribute with an implied positional attribute” “a mis-match”); wherein the first unique identifier information is obtained by interrogating non-volatile memories of the measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125s Par. 22 “Processing sub-system includes a memory for saving/storing desired information” Par. 36 “process 200 reads the stored IDs from the memory of processing sub-system 125”); wherein the non-volatile memories store device information associated with the one or more first measurement devices, the device information including the one or more first unique identifiers (Par. 11 “each of the modules including a memory for storing a module identifier (ID)”), wherein the battery pack is configured to provide power to a component of the machine (Par. 18, 26 “battery modules are distributed in various locations in the vehicle or machine”).
In claim 16, Baglino further discloses wherein the one or more first unique identifiers are a first plurality of unique identifiers (Par. 24 27 “unique ID”), and wherein the method further comprises: determining that an order of the first plurality of unique identifiers is incorrect (Par. 37 “mis-match”); and determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the order of the first plurality of unique identifiers is incorrect (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 17, Baglino further discloses providing second instructions to the plurality of measurement devices (Par. 35-37, Fig. 3, 320); receiving one or more second responses from one or more second measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the second instructions, wherein the one or more second responses include second unique identifier information identifying one or more second unique identifiers associated with the one or more second measurement devices (Par. 35-37, Fig. 3, 320); wherein the second unique identifier information is obtained by interrogating non-volatile memories of the one or more second measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125s Par. 22 “Processing sub-system includes a memory for saving/storing desired information” Par. 36 “process 200 reads the stored IDs from the memory of processing sub-system 125”); wherein the non-volatile memories store device information associated with the one or more second measurements devices, the device information including the one or more second unique identifiers (Par. 24 “each processing sub-system 125 includes identifier (ID)” Par. 35-37 “static IDs” Par. 11 “each of the modules including a memory for storing a module identifier (ID)”); comparing the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information; and determining whether the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on comparing the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information (Par. 37).
In claim 18, Baglino discloses all of claim 17. Baglino further discloses determining that at least one unique identifier, identified by the first unique identifier information, is also identified by the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “mis-match” examiner notes that some of the unique IDs can match, however the differences in ID are flagged); determining that a first number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105), of the plurality of battery modules, exceeds a second number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105) expected to be included in the battery pack (Par. 33, 37); and determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the first number of battery modules exceeds the second number of battery modules (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 19, Baglino discloses all of claim 17. Baglino further discloses determining that at least one unique identifier, identified by the first unique identifier information, is not also identified by the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “mis-match”); determining that a first number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105), of the plurality of battery modules, is less than a second number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105) expected to be included in the battery pack (Par. 33, 37); and determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the first number of battery modules is less than the second number of battery modules (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 20, Baglino further discloses determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled (Par. 34 “mis-installation”); and providing a notification indicating that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled (Par. 37 “indicate a reason for additional diagnostic, servicing, maintenance”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baglino (US 20110003183 A1) in view of Hunter (US 20060193095 A1).
In claim 1, Baglino discloses a battery management system (Fig. 1) configured to detect mis-assembly of a battery pack (Fig. 1, 1051-N Par. 34 “mis-installation”), the battery management system comprising: a data bus (Fig. 1, 130 Par. 29 “network bus”); a plurality of measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125) configured to obtain measurements from a plurality of battery modules of the battery pack (Fig. 1, 1051, 1052, ect, Par .32), wherein the plurality of measurement devices are connected to the data bus (See Fig. 1); and a controller (Fig. 1, 110), connected to the data bus, configured to: provide first instructions to the plurality of measurement devices (Par. 32), receive one or more first responses from one or more first measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the first instructions (Par. 32), wherein the one or more first responses include first unique identifier information identifying one or more first unique identifiers associated with the one or more first measurement devices (Par. 32-33, 36, “assigned ID.sub.1” Fig. 3 310, 315); provide second instructions to the plurality of measurement devices, receive one or more second responses from one or more second measurement devices of the plurality of measurement devices based on providing the second instructions (Par. 35-37, Fig. 3, 320), wherein the one or more second responses include second unique identifier information identifying one or more second unique identifiers associated with the one or more second measurement devices (Par. 35-37 “static IDs” “positional attributes”); and determine whether the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information (Fig. 3, 325 Par. 37 “compares the measured positional attribute with an implied positional attribute” “a mis-match”); wherein the first unique identifier information and the second unique identifier information are obtained by interrogating non-volatile memories of the measurement devices (Fig. 1, 125s Par. 22 “Processing sub-system includes a memory for saving/storing desired information” Par. 36 “process 200 reads the stored IDs from the memory of processing sub-system 125”); and wherein the non-volatile memories store device information associated with the measurement devices, the device information including the one or more first unique identifiers and the one or more second unique identifiers (Par. 24 “each processing sub-system 125 includes identifier (ID)” Par. 35-37 “static IDs”).
Baglino does not explicitly disclose a controller including a first port and a second port, wherein the first port and the second port are each connected to the data bus; provide first instructions to the plurality of measurement devices via the first port; and provide second instructions to the plurality of measurement devices via the second port (emphasis added).
Hunter teaches a controller including a first port and a second port, wherein the first port and the second port are each connected to the data bus (Fig. 3, 45, 47/48, Par. 44 “connects a pair of output sense/feed lines 45 (each sense/feed line 45 being connected to one electrode of the selected cell)”), and wherein the controller is configured to provide the first instructions via the first port (Par. 44 “The sense mode selects a cell that is addressed by a cell selector 51 and connects a pair of output sense/feed lines 45”) and provide the second instructions via the second port (Par. 44 “The rate of feed is controlled by a PWM signal on PWM feed line 47”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filled to have a controller including a first port and a second port, wherein the first port and the second port are each connected to the data bus, and wherein the controller is configured to provide the first instructions via the first port and provide the second instructions via the second port as taught by Hunter in Baglino in order for feeding special perturbations for testing the cell's charge status (i.e. fully charged or not) (Hunter Par. 45) thus improving the managing the battery at float.
In claim 2, Baglino further discloses determine that at least one unique identifier, identified by the first unique identifier information, is also identified by the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “mis-match” examiner notes that some of the unique IDs can match, however the differences in ID are flagged); determine that a first number of battery modules, of the plurality of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105), exceeds a second number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105) expected to be included in the battery pack (Par. 33, 37); and determine that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the first number of battery modules exceeds the second number of battery modules (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 3, Baglino further discloses determine that at least one unique identifier, identified by the first unique identifier information, is not also identified by the second unique identifier information (Par. 37 “mis-match”); determine that a first number of battery modules, of the plurality of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105), is less than a second number of battery modules (Fig. 1 120s respective to each 105) expected to be included in the battery pack (Par. 33, 37); and determine that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the first number of battery modules is less than the second number of battery modules (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 4, Baglino further discloses wherein the one or more first unique identifiers are a first plurality of unique identifiers (Par. 24 27 “unique ID”), and wherein the controller is further configured to: determine that an order of the first plurality of unique identifiers is incorrect (Par. 29, 34 “positional attributes” “are different”); and determine that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled based on determining that the order of the first plurality of unique identifiers is incorrect (Par. 34 “mis-installation”).
In claim 5, Baglino further discloses determine, based on the one or more first responses, that at least one measurement device of the plurality of measurement devices has not provided a response (Par. 36-37 “implies an expected ID”, “a discrepancy may indicate a short, an open, or other condition affecting the determined positional attribute”); and provide the second instructions based on determining that the at least one measurement device has not provided a response (Par. 37 “additional diagnostic”).
In claim 7, Baglino discloses all of claim 1. Baglino does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to receive the one or more first responses via the first port and receive the one or more second responses via the second port.
Hunter teaches wherein the controller is configured to receive the one or more first responses via the first port (Par. 44) and receive the one or more second responses via the second port (Par. 44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filled to have wherein the controller is configured to receive the one or more first responses via the first port and receive the one or more second responses via the second port as taught by Hunter in Baglino in order for feeding special perturbations for testing the cell's charge status (i.e. fully charged or not) (Hunter Par. 45) thus improving the managing the battery at float.
In claim 9, Baglino discloses all of claim 8. Baglino does not explicitly disclose wherein the data bus is connected to a first port of the controller and connected to a second port of the controller, and wherein the controller is further configured to: store the first unique identifier information in a first data structure associated with the first port; and store the second unique identifier information in a second data structure associated with the second port.
Hunter teaches wherein the data bus is connected to a first port of the controller and connected to a second port of the controller (Fig. 3, 45, 47/48, Par. 44 “connects a pair of output sense/feed lines 45 (each sense/feed line 45 being connected to one electrode of the selected cell)”), and wherein the controller is further configured to: store the first unique identifier information in a first data structure associated with the first port (Par. 42, 48 “cell data acquisition”, “data is buffered”); and store the second unique identifier information in a second data structure associated with the second port (Par. 48 “authority to enable or disable the individual messages within the group or the string nodes as shown in FIG. 5”, “data is buffered”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filled to have wherein the data bus is connected to a first port of the controller and connected to a second port of the controller, and wherein the controller is further configured to: store the first unique identifier information in a first data structure associated with the first port; and store the second unique identifier information in a second data structure associated with the second port as taught by Hunter in Baglino in order for feeding special perturbations for testing the cell's charge status (i.e. fully charged or not) (Hunter Par. 45) thus improving the managing the battery at float.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The previous 112 a rejection is withdrawn in light of the amended claims. Regarding applicant’s 101 arguments, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted above, per MPEP 2106.05(f), claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words “apply it”. As the claims and specification does not describe how “prevent damage to a component of a machine based on determining that the plurality of battery modules are improperly assembled” is performed or by what steps or means, it is equivalent to the words “apply it”. Further, examiner notes that “ports” do not make a controller non generic as they are common and routinely used and barely distinguishable from with input/output. The additional elements cited are well known as shown by the prior art of record. Regarding applicant’s 102 arguments, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Baglino’s ID’s fall within the scope of “device information associated with the measurement devices” as their measured positional attributes are literally information associated with the measurement devices positional attribute. Nothing in the claims recites “inherent associated with the measurement devices” and it is not clear what difference that would make to the scope of the claim language as neither the applicant nor the specification describes such language. Regarding applicant’s 103 arguments, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted above, Baglino discloses the cited limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20090189562 A1 Charging System For Charging Battery Pack; US 20120175953 A1, Battery System.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON J BECKER whose telephone number is (571)431-0689. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30.
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, Shelby Turner can be reached at (571) 272-6334. 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.
/B.J.B/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/SHELBY A TURNER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights