Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 20, 2026
Application No. 18/260,610

STORAGE BATTERY CONTROL DEVICE AND STORAGE BATTERY CONTROL METHOD

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Jul 06, 2023
Priority
Jan 07, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2021000356
Examiner
MARSHALL, CHRISTLE I
Art Unit
2876
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
646 granted / 808 resolved
+12.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
820
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.9%
-33.1% vs TC avg
§103
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 808 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
CTNF 18/260,610 CTNF 83734 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 § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. While the claims recite a series of steps or acts to be performed, a statutory “process” under 35 U.S.C. 101 must (1) be tied to another statutory category (such as a particular apparatus), or (2) transform underlying subject matter (such as an article or material) to a different state or thing. The instant claims neither a transforming of the underlying subject matter nor positively tying to another statutory category is accomplished in the claimed method steps, and therefore do not qualify as a statutory process. 07-30-03-h AIA CLAIM INTERPRETATION 07-30-03 AIA 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. 07-30-05 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. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “acquisition unit”, “calculation unit”, “control part”, “determination unit”, “change unit”, “detection unit”, “measurement unit”, “correction unit”, “acquiring”, “calculating”, “controlling” in claims 1-15 . Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-14 are allowed. 13-03 AIA The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the prior art of record taken alone or in combination disclose, teach, or fairly suggest at least while charging the storage battery, the charging voltage being controlled based on the calculated first predicted value of the battery capacity when the storage battery is operated under the operation conditions . Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christle I. Marshall whose telephone number is (571) 270-3086. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday 7:30AM - 4:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Paik can be reached on (571) 272-2404. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Christle I Marshall/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876 Application/Control Number: 18/260,610 Page 2 Art Unit: 2876 Application/Control Number: 18/260,610 Page 3 Art Unit: 2876 Application/Control Number: 18/260,610 Page 4 Art Unit: 2876 Application/Control Number: 18/260,610 Page 5 Art Unit: 2876 Application/Control Number: 18/260,610 Page 6 Art Unit: 2876
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 06, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12734808
SPOOL, LONG MEMBER, CONVEYING DEVICE, AND CLEANING DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12727686
UTILIZING A MULTI-FUNCTION TRANSACTION CARD TO CAPTURE ITEM DATA AND ENABLE EXPEDITED CHECKOUT FOR PURCHASED ITEMS
1y 3m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12722405
PRINTING DEVICE
1y 12m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12705605
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROCESSING TRANSACTIONS ON A VALUE DISPENSING DEVICE USING A MOBILE DEVICE
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12697826
IMAGE READING DEVICE
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+14.6%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 808 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month