CTFR 18/193,156 CTFR 89726 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-4, 7-12, 16-20, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tinnemeyer (US 20050218915 A1) in view of LOPEZ et al. (WO 2015177389 A1; cited previously; machine translation provided previously; hereinafter “LOPEZ”) Regarding claim 1 , Tinnemeyer teaches an apparatus (i.e., “methods and apparatus for testing electrochemical storage batteries by electrochemical impedance spectrum analysis”; see [0001]) , comprising: a measurement circuit (i.e., “ ammeter 16… amplifier AMP1”; “amplifier AMP2”) configured to receive an electrical signal (i.e., “current flowing through battery 20… voltage across battery 20”) of a device under test (DUT) that includes a battery (i.e., “battery 20”) , and generate a measurement signal representing the electrical signal (i.e., output of AMP1 or AMP2; see [0028] and FIG. 2) ; an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) configured to convert the measurement signal into digital samples (i.e., ADC1 or ADC2; see [0028] and FIG. 2) ; a high-pass filter circuit configured to perform a high-pass filtering operation on the digital samples to generate a filtered measurement signal (i.e., “Any suitable filter may be used to remove frequencies which are not of interest”; see [0046] and FIGs. 2 and 4) ; and a processing circuit (i.e., “performed in controller 22”) configured to generate a measurement spectrum of the DUT based on the filtered measurement signal (i.e., “electrochemical impedance spectrum analysis”; see [0001]; “Such methods excite a battery under test with waveforms having various frequencies and monitor a response of the battery to the excitation waveforms”; see [0003]) . Tinnemeyer does not explicitly disclose (see only the underlined ): a high-pass filter circuit configured to perform a high-pass filtering operation on the digital samples to generate a filtered measurement signal; and But LOPEZ teaches: removing frequencies not of interest by performing a high-pass filtering operation (i.e., “a high-pass filter to eliminate the continuous component of at least the measured voltage signal”; see translation p. 3, upper section) . Note that Tinnemeyer also teaches using a bandpass filter, which implies a high-pass filtering function (see [0045]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ, by incorporating a high-pass filter circuit configured to perform a high-pass filtering operation on the digital samples to generate a filtered measurement signal , as claimed. The rationale would be to facilitate the removal of frequencies not of interest. Regarding claim 2 , as a result of modification applied to claim 1 above, Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ further teaches: wherein the high-pass filter circuit is configured to attenuate a first component of the electrical signal or a second component of the measurement signal caused by charging or discharging of the battery (i.e., “the means for conditioning said measured voltage and current signals to conditioned voltage and current signals, Vbat_acond, lbat_acond comprise a high-pass filter to eliminate the continuous component of at least the measured voltage signal”; see LOPEZ, translation p. 3, upper section; note that the “the continuous component” is the DC, or near-DC, component caused by charging or discharging the battery) . Regarding claim 3 , as a result of modification applied to claim 1 above, Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ further teaches: an excitation circuit configured to provide an excitation signal having an excitation frequency to the DUT (i.e., “an excitation waveform generator 12 connected to apply an excitation waveform 14 to a battery 20 being tested”; see Tinnemeyer, [0027]) ; wherein the electrical signal represents a response of the DUT to the excitation signal (i.e., “generating a response”; see Tinnemeyer, [0008]) ; and wherein a frequency response of the high-pass filter circuit is based on the excitation frequency (i.e., “This range of interest defines the cutoff frequency of the high pass filter”; see LOPEZ, translation p. 3, middle section; “wherein the cut-off frequency of said high-pass filters (C23, R24; C23 ', R24') depends on the frequency spectrum of the current stimulus i (f)”; see LOPEZ, translation p. 10, claim 5) . Regarding claim 4 , as a result of modification applied to claim 2 above, Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ further teaches: an amplitude compensation circuit including the high-pass filter circuit (i.e., AMP1, AMP2 in Tinnemeyer, and high-pass filters in LOPEZ; see discussion of the high-pass filter in claim 1 above) . Regarding claim 7 , Tinnemeyer further teaches: wherein the electrical signal includes at least one of a voltage signal or a current signal (i.e., ““current flowing through battery 20… voltage across battery 20””; see [0028] and FIG. 2) . Regarding claim 8 , as a result of modification applied to claim 1 above, Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ further teaches: wherein the electrical signal is a first electrical signal representing a voltage signal of the DUT, the measurement signal is a first measurement signal (i.e., “ a digital voltage signal 19 representative of a voltage across battery 20”; see Tinnemeyer, [0028]) , the high-pass filtering operation is a first high-pass filtering operation (see discussion of the high-pass filters in claim 1 above) , and the filtered measurement signal is a first filtered measurement signal (i.e., filtered digital voltage signal; see discussion of the high-pass filters in claim 1 above) ; wherein the measurement circuit is configured to receive a second electrical signal representing a current signal of the DUT and generate a second measurement signal representing the current signal (i.e., “a digital current signal 18 representative of the current flowing through battery 20”; see Tinnemeyer, [0028]) ; wherein the high-pass filter circuit is configured to perform a second high-pass filtering operation on the second measurement signal to generate a second filtered measurement signal (i.e. filtered digital current signal; see discussion of the high-pass filters in claim 1 above) ; and wherein the processing circuit is configured to generate the measurement spectrum including an impedance spectrum based on the first and second filtered measurement signals (i.e., “electrochemical impedance spectrum analysis”; see Tinnemeyer, [0001]; “Such methods excite a battery under test with waveforms having various frequencies and monitor a response of the battery to the excitation waveforms”; see Tinnemeyer, [0003]) . Regarding claim 9 , Tinnemeyer further teaches: a windowing circuit configured to apply a window function to the filtered measurement signal (i.e., “Signals 18 and 19 may, for example, be filtered using a Hanning filter”; see [0041]) . Regarding claim 10 , the claim recites the same substantive limitations as claim 1 in terms of the method involved, and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 11 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 2 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 12 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 3 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 16 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 7 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 17 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 8 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 18 , the claim recites the same substantive limitations as claim 1 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 19 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 2 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 20 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 3 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 23 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 8 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 24 , Tinnemeyer further teaches: wherein the high-pass filter circuit includes an infinite impulse response (IIR) digital high-pass filter (i.e., “The digital filters may be, for example, multipole finite impulse response ("FIR") filters or infinite impetus response ("IIR") filters”; see [0045]) . Regarding claim 25 , Tinnemeyer further teaches: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to determine a state of the DUT (i.e., “Electrochemical impedance spectrum analysis methods may be used to test electrochemical batteries. Such methods excite a battery under test with waveforms having various frequencies and monitor a response of the battery to the excitation waveforms. Information about the condition of the battery can be derived from relationships between the exciting waveform(s) and the response(s)”; see [0003]; “determination of the state of charge or state of health of secondary batteries”; see [0004]; “use the complex impedance as a basis for evaluating the SoH of battery 20”; see [0034]) . Regarding claim 25 , Tinnemeyer further teaches: wherein the state of the DUT includes at least one a state of charge of the battery or a state of health of the battery (i.e., “Electrochemical impedance spectrum analysis methods may be used to test electrochemical batteries. Such methods excite a battery under test with waveforms having various frequencies and monitor a response of the battery to the excitation waveforms. Information about the condition of the battery can be derived from relationships between the exciting waveform(s) and the response(s)”; see [0003]; “determination of the state of charge or state of health of secondary batteries”; see [0004]; “use the complex impedance as a basis for evaluating the SoH of battery 20”; see [0034]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5, 14, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ and Feeney et al. (US 20030130838 A1; cited previously; hereinafter “Feeney”) . Regarding claim 5 , the prior art applied to the preceding linking claim(s) teaches the features of the linking claim(s). Tinnemeyer does not explicitly disclose: wherein the amplitude compensation circuit is configured to initialize a feedback value of the high-pass filter circuit to an average value of the measurement signal. But Feeney (in the same endeavor of high-pass filtering) teaches: initializing a feedback value of a high-pass filter circuit to an average value of the measurement signal (i.e., “the high pass filter depends in part on its previous input and output values, also called filter initialization values or filter initial conditions. The estimate of direct current bias influence on the audio signal is used to determine filter initialization values 251. The high pass filter is initialized using the average sample value and at least one sample value from the first frame of audio data”; see [0018]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tinnemeyer in view of LOPEZ, further in view of Feeney, such that the amplitude compensation circuit is configured to initialize a feedback value of the high-pass filter circuit to an average value of the measurement signal , as claimed. The rationale would be to facilitate the initialization of the digital filter. Regarding claim 14 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 5 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Regarding claim 22 , the claim recites the same substantive further limitations as claim 5 and is rejected by applying the same teachings. Response to Arguments Regarding the issue under 35 USC 101, Applicant’s arguments (see pp. 7-9 of the Remarks filed 05/05/2026) are persuasive. The rejections under 35 USC 101 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments regarding 35 USC 102 and 103 have been considered but are moot because a new ground of rejections has been found in response to the amendments. See the rejections above. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN C KUAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7066. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-5:30PM. 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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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. /JOHN C KUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 2 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 3 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 4 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 5 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 6 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 7 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 8 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 9 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 10 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/193,156 Page 11 Art Unit: 2857
Prosecution Insights