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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species II (claims 1-9 and new claim 21) in the reply filed on 11/13/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 1-9 and 21 do not belong to a species distinct and mutually exclusive from claims 10-18 and 20. When claim 21, depending on claim 2 and ultimately depending on claim 1, is searched and examined, claim 10 can also be searched and examined without serious burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because a vehicle comprising a powernet domain controller, wherein the load includes a compressor and a heater of an air conditioner which corresponds to Species I (claims 10-20), in which the inventions are independent from Species II (claims 1-9) which is directed to a powernet domain controller and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden on the examiner if restriction is not required.
Newly submitted claim 21 is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: the association among a vehicle, a first load, a second load, a temperature controller, and a powernet domain controller corresponds to the non-elected Species I (claims 10-20).
Accordingly, claim 21 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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)(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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by Ferchau et al. (US 2024/0051430 A1 and Ferchau hereinafter).
As to Claim 1, Ferchau in its teachings as shown in Fig.1-9 disclose a powernet domain controller (see [Abstract]), comprising:
a communicator (54) configured to communicate with a battery management system (BMS) managing a state of charge (SOC) value of a battery (56) (See [0031]- [0032];
a processor (52) electrically connected to the communicator (54) and configured to determine whether to activate a power saving mode (132) based on the SoC value (126, 128) received through the communicator, and based on the power saving mode being activated (132),to control an output of a high-voltage load to decrease (137,138) and an output of a low-voltage load (136, 130) to increase (see the flow chart of Fig.5 and [0053] – [0060]).
As to Claim 2, Ferchau disclose the powernet domain controller of claim 1,
wherein the high-voltage load comprises a first load to which a voltage greater than or equal to a first voltage is applied, wherein the low-voltage load comprises a second load to which a voltage less than or equal to a second voltage is applied, and wherein the second voltage is less than the first voltage (based on presently set threshold to at leasat three tiers – see [0046] – [0048]).
As to Claim 3, Ferchau disclose the powernet domain controller of wherein the communicator is further configured to communicate with an inputter receiving a user input, and wherein the processor is further configured to: identify a target internal temperature received through the inputter, identify an operation rate of the high-voltage load corresponding to the identified target internal temperature, control the high-voltage load to operate at an operation rate lower than the identified operation rate of the high-voltage load, identify a target level of the low-voltage load received through the inputter, and control the low-voltage load to operate at an operation rate higher than the identified target level (Each battery bank 83 includes an integrated battery management system (BMS) to monitor state of charge and battery health. Included either as part of the BMS or separately integrated into each bank 83 are voltage, temperature and current sensors to monitor each bank 83 and report to the integrated BMS. Data links 91 from each battery bank BMS communicate battery state, temperature, current and voltage to SP system controller 52 – see [0031] – [0032] and [0045]).
As to Claim 7, Ferchau disclose the powernet domain controller of The powernet domain controller of wherein the communicator is further configured to communicate with an inputter receiving a user input, and wherein the processor is further configured to control to enter the power saving mode, based on the SoC value being less than or equal to a first reference SOC value, an economical mode being received through the inputter, a heating mode being received through the inputter, and a target internal temperature received through the inputter being greater than or equal to a first reference internal temperature (a user may be prompted to input or will input via U/I 54 theoretical or maximum capacity of each battery bank 83 and SP system controller 52 will determine SOC and energy capacity. If, as in the example above, one of the banks 83 is determined to be faulty and disconnected, controller 52 will automatically adjust the capacity for SOC determination moving forward and take into account the diminished capacity in run time determinations and future SOC predictions- see [0032]- [0033] and see also the flowcharts of Fig.4-Fig.7 and [0046] – [0052]).
As to Claim 8, Ferchau disclose the powernet domain controller of The powernet domain controller of wherein the communicator is further configured to communicate with an inputter receiving a user input, and wherein the processor is further configured to control to enter the power saving mode, based on the SoC value being less than or equal to a first reference SOC value, an eco mode being received through the inputter, a cooling mode being received through the inputter, and a target internal temperature received through the inputter being less than or equal to a second reference internal temperature (see [0031] – [0032] and [0045]).
As to Claim 9, Ferchau disclose the powernet domain controller of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: in the power saving mode, control the output of the high-voltage load to decrease, and control the output of the low-voltage load to increase during a first time period, and based on the first time period having elapsed, control the output of the high-voltage load and the output of the low-voltage load to be returned during a second time period (see [0043] – [0052] and [0061] – [0064]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
In view of the limitations the closest prior art including the prior works of the assignee/inventor does not explicitly describe or reasonably suggest or render obvious in combination with all the given limitations a memory configured to store information related to a control temperature corresponding to each of target internal temperatures, wherein the communicator is further configured to communicate with an inputter and an internal temperature sensor, and wherein in the power saving mode, the processor is further configured to: identify a control temperature corresponding to a target internal temperature received through the inputter based on information stored in the memory, obtain an operation rate of the high-voltage load based on the identified control temperature and an internal temperature detected by the internal temperature sensor, and control the high-voltage load based on the obtained operation rate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (US 2020/0180468 A1: The power management device may calculate an estimated SoC of the battery based on the output current of the battery, calculate an actual SoC based on the output of a battery model corresponding to an input of the output voltage and the output current, and based on an error between the actual SoC and the estimated SoC, activate a power generation control, which controls a generator based on the SoC of the battery, and an idle stop & go (ISG), which turns off an engine during stopping of the vehicle – see [Abstract]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL T AGARED whose telephone number is (571)270-1981. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 (Mon- Thur).
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 5712722060. 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.
/GABRIEL AGARED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
Prosecution Insights