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 .
Status of the Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ filing on 10/14/2025. Claims 1-5 were previously pending, of which claims 1, 4, and 5 have been amended, claim 3 has been cancelled, and no claims have been newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-2 and 4-5 are currently pending and are being examined below.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant's remarks, see pages 5-10, filed 10/14/2025; Applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
With respect to the claim objections, the amendments have rendered the objections moot. Therefore, the objections to the claims are withdrawn.
With respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a)/(b), the amendment renders this rejection moot, the amended claims are no longer rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a)/(b).
With respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103, applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Further consideration of the prior art of record determined that, as previously mapped, Hirata discloses the reduction of a virtual section of the battery due to degradation of capacity. Although Hirata does not explicitly disclose the remaining reduction due to degradation being taken from the second section of the battery. Falk does appear to disclose the reduction of both user capacities, as amended in claim 1. Due to the nature of the applicant’s amendments, the scope of the applicant’s invention has changed. New application of prior art addresses the amended language, as mapped below. Therefore, the amended claims are still rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and have been updated in the final office action below.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al. (US 2003/0094321), hereinafter Hirata, in view of Falk et al. (US 2013/0033230), hereinafter Falk.
With respect to claims 1 and 5, Hirata discloses a battery management system comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to: ([0050] “battery controller 1 preferably includes a microcomputer”)
estimate an amount of deterioration decrease that is the amount of decrease in the chargeable capacity of the battery due to deterioration; ([0058] “The degradation degree calculating section 140 calculates the present degradation degree of the battery 7”)
and in a case in which the amount of deterioration decrease is lower than or equal to a first specified amount, reduce a chargeable capacity of the second region by the amount of deterioration decrease, ([0058] “When the second prescribed capacity includes a capacity targeted for correction, e.g., a capacity adjustment region, and a capacity necessary for vehicle travel, it is acceptable to calculate the capacity intended to be corrected, e.g., the capacity adjustment region, by subtracting the capacity necessary for vehicle travel from the second prescribed capacity.” [0047] “The second prescribed capacity is acceptable so long as it includes at least a prescribed capacity that is corrected in accordance with the degree of degradation of the battery.”)
Hirata discloses diving of the battery into different segmented capacities and the subtracting a capacity of the second section in accordance with the degree of degradation of the battery, but does not explicitly disclose those segments being allocated for different users or controlling the charging/discharging of the capacities for each segment.
However, Falk teaches a battery management system communicating with a vehicle management system via a communication network ([0041] “With one possible embodiment the energy management module 8 of the vehicle 1 is connected to a mobile radio module 18 of the vehicle 1 via a lead 17. This mobile radio module 18 can communicate…with the server 5 of the power provider.”)
when a first user who is a user of a mobile object starts to use the mobile object, receive, from the vehicle management system, ratio instruction information to set a ratio of a battery mounted on the mobile object, the ratio being set by the vehicle management system according to an application for use of the battery by a second user different from the first user, ([0034] “For example, 80% of the physical storage capacity C of the vehicle battery 11 can be allocated to the first user storage capacity 11A… The attribution or allocation of physical storage capacity C to different user storage capacities of different users can be effected, for example, via the user interface 16. With one possible embodiment, this configuration is carried out by a technician in a vehicle garage or at the vehicle manufacturer.”)
virtually divide a chargeable capacity of the battery into a first region and a second region based on the ratio instruction information received, ([0034] “The attribution or allocation of physical storage capacity C to different user storage capacities of different users can be effected, for example… at the vehicle manufacturer.””)
allocate the first region to the first user and allocate the second region to the second user, to enable the first user to use the first region in the battery and the second user to use the second region in the battery; ([0031] “The vehicle battery 11 of the vehicle exhibits a specific storage capacity for the storage of electrical energy or the storage of an electrical charge respectively. With the storage device, the storage capacity of the vehicle battery 11 is partitioned for different users. With the example represented in the FIGURE, the storage capacity of the vehicle battery 11 is partitioned to a first storage capacity 11A and a second storage capacity 11B.”)
control charging and discharging of the second region by a charge/discharge circuit according to the chargeable capacity which is reduced by the amount of deterioration decrease; ([0033] “Each user storage capacity 11-i of the vehicle battery 11 is in this situation capable of being charged and discharged independently of other user storage capacities of the same vehicle battery 11 via the charging interface 6, 7.” [0051] “The partitioning and the charging and discharging processes for the respectively partitioned storage capacities of the vehicle battery 11 can take place under the control… of the energy management module 8.” Note: The capacity is due to deterioration is set in Hirata. It is understood that the combination would result Falk charging the battery based on the most recently updated capacity information.)
in a case in which the amount of deterioration decrease has exceeded the first specified amount, reduce a chargeable capacity of the first region by part or all of an excess of the amount of deterioration decrease over the first specified amount and reduce the chargeable capacity of the second region by the remainder of the amount of deterioration decrease. (see at least [0032] “in the event of the failure of individual energy storage cells of the vehicle battery 11, the user storage capacity of the vehicle battery 11 allocated to the vehicle keeper can be kept constant by reconfiguration or remapping of the cell arrangement.” [0034] “the different partitioned user storage capacities 11A, 11 B of the vehicle battery 11 exhibit configurable and adjustable storage capacities. For example, 80%… allocated to the first user storage capacity 11A and 20%... allocated to the second user storage capacity 11B.” Note: The keeper allocation remaining constant when capacity reduces due to failure of cells would be interpreted that the percentages would be maintained. So a percentage of the decrease would be removed from the keeper/first user to maintain 80% and the remaining percentage of the decrease would be removed from the second user.)
As both are in the same field of endeavor, 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 degradation monitoring and capacity reassignment of Hirata to include the assigned user capacities and control of charge and discharge of the battery as disclosed in Falk, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been in the event of the failure of individual energy storage cells of the vehicle battery, the user storage capacity of the vehicle battery allocated to the vehicle keeper can be kept constant, see Falk [0032].
With respect to claim 2, Hirata discloses the processor is further configured to
display a chargeable capacity of the first region on a display unit provided in the mobile object. ([0028] “Instead, the first prescribed capacity varies over time as electric power is consumed and is displayed to the user as the residual capacity of the battery or the consumed capacity of the battery 7 with respect to the total capacity… The present battery capacity is indicated to the user using the sections other than the capacity adjustment section.”)
With respect to claim 4, Hirata discloses the processor is further configured to, in a case in which the amount of deterioration decrease has exceeded a second specified amount, notify at least one of the first user or the second user. ([0046] “Instead, only fourteen of the segments S will illuminate in accordance with the capacity that exists when the battery 7 has been fully recharged. Thus, when the degradation of the battery 7 exceeds that scheduled, the user can be informed of the battery degradation by using regular capacity indication.”)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLEY MARIE OSTERHOUT whose telephone number is (703)756-1595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached on (571) 272-7691. 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.
/S.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669