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 .
Receipt is acknowledged of the preliminary amendment, filed on April 28, 2023, which has been entered. Claims 1-15 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 28, 2023 has been considered by the examiner.
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement (see page 7 of the specification filed on April 28, 2023). 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 2 of the specification, line 1 of paragraph [008] “EP20798148A2” should be replaced with --EP2079148A2--, since the first occurrence of “8” is an extra digit and appears to be a typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1:
Line 23, “said voltage” should be replaced with --said first DC voltage--, in order to be consistent with lines 4 and 10.
Line 23, “it” should be replaced with --the selected battery-- (or similar language), in order to clarify that the selected battery is being connected to the DC power supply bus.
In claim 7:
Lines 4 and 5, “the voltage” should be replaced with --the first DC voltage--, in order to be consistent with claim 1 that specifies the first and second battery provide the first voltage.
Line 6, “the voltage” should be replaced with --the second DC voltage--, in order to be consistent with claim 1 that specifies the first and second battery provide the first voltage.
Line 7, “the current” should be replaced with --a current--, in order to avoid a lack of proper antecedent basis.
Line 9, “the current” and “the second branch” should be replaced with --a current-- and --a second branch--, respectively, in order to avoid a lack of proper antecedent basis.
Line 12, “the voltage” should be replaced with --the first DC voltage-- or --a voltage--, in order to avoid a lack of proper antecedent basis.
Claim 8:
Lines 3-4, “the state of charge” should be replaced with --a state of charge--, in order to avoid a lack of proper antecedent basis.
Line 5, “the values of the quantities monitored” lacks proper antecedent basis (note that “quantities” has been deleted from claim 7, line 3).
Claim 11:
Line 5, “said voltage” should be replaced with --said first DC voltage--, in order to be consistent with lines 4 and 10.
Line 5, “it” should be replaced with --the selected battery-- (or similar language), in order to clarify that the selected battery is being connected to the DC power supply bus.
Claims 2-6, 9, 10 and 12-15 inherit the objections of the claims they depend from.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 1-15 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.
The claim limitations “first switching means” (claim 1, line 15; claim 2, line 2); “second switching means” (claim 1, line 17; claim 3, line 2); “third switching means” (claim 1, line 19); “means for monitoring” (claim 7, line 2); “means for determining” (claim 8, line 2); “means for controlling” (claim 9, line 2); and “switching means” (claim 10, line 4) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. In this case, the specification simply includes the same, or very similar, language used in the claims and does not specify any particular structure for the claimed means. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Dependent claims not mentioned above are included in the rejection since they inherit the deficiency of the claim they depend from.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Allowable Subject Matter
It appears that claims 1-15 would be allowable over the prior art of record, if the objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above were overcome.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach an electric power system including a first and second battery connected to a DC power supply bus in parallel, where the first and second battery both provide a first DC voltage, an auxiliary battery configured to deliver a second DC voltage that is distinct from the first DC voltage, and a control unit configured to select at least one battery from among the first battery and the second battery in order to set said first DC voltage on the DC power supply bus by connecting the selected battery to the DC power supply bus, and order the unselected battery to be connected to the DC power supply bus, and said auxiliary battery to be charged by placing the auxiliary battery in series with the unselected battery and by switching the cells of said unselected battery in order to control a charge current for said auxiliary battery; in combination with the other limitations as recited in independent claim 1.
It is noted that the international search report (ISR) dated February 24, 2022 shows a “X” reference for EP 2019148 A2 and a “Y” reference for US 2018/0043789 A1. However, the corresponding written opinion dated February 24, 2022 indicates that claims 1-15 meet the novelty requirement, but lack the inventive step requirement. The written opinion has been reviewed and the examiner agrees that EP 2109148 A2 does not teach the control unit being configured to order the unselected battery to be connected to the DC power supply bus, and said auxiliary battery to be charged by placing the auxiliary battery in series with the unselected battery and by switching the cells of said unselected battery in order to control a charge current for said auxiliary battery.
The Goetz (US 2018/0043789 A1) reference teaches (Fig. 5a) an electric power supply that includes multiple strings of series connected battery modules (5101-5104; 5105-5108; and 5109-5112), where each string is connected to a respective phase (u, v, w) of a multiphase machine (5113). An auxiliary power supply bus (5114), which may include a battery, is connected in parallel to a single battery (5104; 5108; 5112) of each series string. An alternate embodiment is shown in Fig. 6, where auxiliary batteries (6014a and 6014b) are respectively connected in parallel to a single battery of one of the series strings.
EP 2061116 A1 teaches charging cells of an ultra-capacitor by selectively connecting the cells to a 12.5 V electrochemical battery of a vehicle (see paragraphs 0032-0035 of the translation).
Without the benefit of applicant’s teachings, one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would not have been motivated to combine the various teachings of the prior art in a manner so as to create the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Eun (US 10,286,805 B2) teaches a hybrid energy storage module system including a hybrid vehicle (Fig. 1) using an energy storage module (20, Fig. 3) having first (11-1) and second (11-2) lithium battery modules and first (12-1) and second (12-2) lead battery storage modules. The energy storage module (20) includes switches (14-1 through 14-12) that can be opened and closed in order to provide various parallel and series combinations of the battery modules (see Figs. 3-6), where Fig. 3 shows that the lithium battery modules (11-1 and 11-2) are connected in parallel and the lead battery modules (12-1 and 12-2) are connected in parallel and placed in series with the lithium battery modules (see col. 5, line 28 – col. 6, line 33). However, Eun teaches that the voltage of each of the lithium battery modules and the lead battery modules is the same, for example 36 volts (see column 6, lines 25-27).
Cheng et al (US 9,461,482 B2) teaches a multi-chemistry battery pack system that includes lead-acid batteries and lithium ion-based batteries (see Figs. 1 & 3). The system includes a battery management system (112) that controls various switches to control charging and discharging of the batteries (see col. 4, lines 15-23).
Shinichi (WO 2013002120 A1) teaches a power supply apparatus that includes multiple secondary batteries (11 & 12) and switches (13-16) used to control the order of series connection of the secondary batteries based on the state of the secondary batteries.
Weidenheimer et al (US 7,075,194 B2) teaches an electronically reconfigurable battery (see Figs. 2-6) for hybrid electric vehicles, including multiple battery modules selectively interconnected by a number of electronic switches to place the battery modules in series or parallel configurations in order to provide voltage levels compatible with various loads (see the abstract).
Please see the additional references cited on the attached PTO-892, which are generally directed to energy storage systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jared Fureman whose telephone number is (571)272-2391. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/JARED FUREMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859