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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The following NON-FINAL Office Action is in response to application 18/261,220
and the preliminary amendment filed 07/12/2023. This communication is the first action
on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/12/2023, 07/11/2024, and 08/02/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 07/12/2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. A subject matter eligibility analysis is set forth below. See MPEP 2106.
Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites:
A storage battery management device comprising a hardware processor connected to a memory, the hardware processor being configured to function as:
an acquisition unit to acquire charge/discharge power, a charge/discharge
capacity, and a State of Charge (SOC) of the storage battery system, as current operation state data of a storage battery system including a plurality of storage batteries;
a deterioration prediction unit to predict deterioration of the storage battery
system on the basis of the charge/discharge power, the charge/discharge capacity, and the SOC;
a calculation unit to
perform calculation relating to deterioration by multiple patterns with respect to at least one or more of parameters including the charge/discharge power, a C rate indicating a charging/discharging speed, SOC upper and lower limit values, a standby SOC value indicating an SOC value during standby, and frequency upper and lower limit values, the calculation being performed on the basis of a digital model and the deterioration of the storage battery system predicted by the deterioration prediction unit, the digital model being capable of reproducing operation of the storage battery system in a simulative manner, and
specify a pattern whose life extension effect is relatively high; and
a display control unit to cause a display device to display the one or more parameters of the pattern, whose life extension effect is relatively high, specified by the calculation unit.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.”
Similar limitations are recited in claim 10, and claim 11, which mirrors the steps of claim 1 by comprising the same abstract idea.
Under Step 1 of the analysis, claim 1 belongs to a statutory category, namely it is a device claim. Likewise, claim 10 is a method claim and claim 11 is a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium claim.
Under Step 2A, prong 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
In the instant case, claim 1 is found to recite at least one judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea), that being a Mental Process and a Mathematical Concept. This can be seen in the claim limitations of “predict deterioration of the storage battery system”, and “perform calculation relating to deterioration by multiple patterns with respect to at least one or more of parameters including the charge/discharge power, a C rate indicating a charging/discharging speed, SOC upper and lower limit values, a standby SOC value indicating an SOC value during standby, and frequency upper and lower limit values” and “specify a pattern whose life extension effect is relatively high” which is the judicial exception of a mental process because these limitations are merely data observations, evaluations, and/or judgements in order to calculate and predict deterioration of the storage battery system and is capable of being performed mentally and/or with the aid of pen and paper. Additionally, the aforementioned limitations recite mathematical calculations such as these sections in the specifications that recite using formulas: [0036], and [0037].
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 10, and 11.
Step 2A, prong 2 of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception(s) into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by (a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (b) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in claim 1, the claimed device recites additional elements including “an acquisition unit to acquire charge/discharge power, a charge/discharge capacity, and a State of Charge (SOC) of the storage battery system, as current operation state data of a storage battery system including a plurality of storage batteries“, and “ a display control unit to cause a display device to display the one or more parameters of the pattern, whose life extension effect is relatively high, specified by the calculation unit” however these elements are found to be data gathering and output steps, which are recited at a high level of generality, and thus merely amount to “insignificant extra-solution” activity(ies). See MPEP 2106.05(g) “Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity,”. Furthermore, the claim recites “a storage battery management device comprising a hardware processor connected to a memory, the hardware processor being configured to function”, “calculating” performed by a “calculation unit”, and “predicting” performed by a “deterioration prediction unit” however this is found to be equivalent to adding the words “apply it” and mere instructions to apply a judicial exception on a general purpose computer does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
The generic data gathering, processing, and output steps, are recited at such a high level of generality (e.g. using “display control unit” and “calculation unit”, “deterioration prediction unit”) that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exceptions on a computer. It can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exceptions to the technological environment of a computer. Noting MPEP 2106.04(d)(I): “It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) ("The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point")”.
Thus, under Step 2A, prong 2 of the analysis, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. No specific practical application is associated with the claimed system. For instance, nothing is done with the result of predicting deterioration of the storage battery system or performing the calculations relating to deterioration by multiple patterns, the claim merely calculates the values, makes predictions, and displays the results, which amount to insignificant extra-solution activity.
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2, merely amount to a general purpose computer system that attempts to apply the abstract idea in a technological environment, limiting the abstract idea to a particular field of use, and/or merely performs insignificant extra-solution activit(ies) (claims 1, 10 and 11). Such insignificant extra-solution activity, e.g. data gathering and output, when re-evaluated under Step 2B is further found to be well-understood, routine, and conventional as evidenced by MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) (describing conventional activities that include transmitting and receiving data over a network, electronic recordkeeping, storing and retrieving information from memory, and electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document).
Therefore, similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that claim 1, as well as claim 10, and 11, amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-9, merely further expand upon the algorithm/abstract idea and do not set forth further additional elements that integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Therefore, these claims are found ineligible for the reasons described for parent claims 1, 10 and 11 Specifically:
With respect to dependent claim 2-5 specifically, the claims further recite the calculation unit performs the calculation using a given constraint condition, a function capable of prioritizing revenue from the battery system, and setting constraint to cause no deterioration in performance of the battery system, or a function capable of minimizing the cost. However, these limitations simply identify different mathematical parameters and goals for performing the same type of calculation. Specifying specific inputs or desired outputs of a mathematical operation does not improve the function of the computer or the battery system, the following can be carried out mentally or with aid of a pen and paper. Therefore, these claims fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(h): “For instance, a data gathering step that is limited to a particular data source (such as the Internet) or a particular type of data (such as power grid data or XML tags) could be considered to be both insignificant extra-solution activity and a field of use limitation.”
With respect to dependent claim 6 specifically, the claim further recites that the calculation unit is a functional object provide in a cloud computing system. This limitation merely describes implementing the abstract calculations in a conventional computing environment, which represents nothing more than a generic computer implementation. As such, claim 6 also fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(f)
With respect to dependent claim 7 specifically, the claim further recites determining whether deterioration of the storage battery system progresses faster than a given speed and displaying an alarm of that information. This limitation amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity, as it merely compares data and presents the results of the calculations. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
With respect to dependent claim 8 specifically, the claim further recites periodically estimating a deterioration state of the storage battery system based on temperature data and displaying the information once a threshold is reached. However, these steps amount to nothing more than data gathering and presentation of the results, which are well understood and conventional activities. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
With respect to dependent claim 9 specifically, the claim further recites that the calculation unit learns weighting for parameters by using artificial intelligence before processing within the model. However, while this limitation involves the use of artificial intelligence, but it is described only at a high level and does not provide any specific technically details or improvement to the functioning of the storage battery system. Instead, it merely amounts to adjusting numerical values to a mathematical model using an AI approach, which within itself is an abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d)(f).
Accordingly, for the reasons above and those discussed in relation to the independent claims 1, 10 and 11, and the dependent claims are insufficient to integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more.
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10222427 B2, Wenzel et al. (hereinafter Wenzel) in view of US 20190033395 A1, Don et al. (hereinafter Don).
Regarding Claims 1, 10, 11, Wenzel teaches a storage battery management device comprising (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Line 15-20] the controller is configured to generate optimal values for the battery power setpoints as a function of both an estimated amount of battery degradation and an estimated amount of frequency response revenue that will result from the battery power setpoints):
an acquisition unit to acquire charge/discharge power (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Line 11-15] the system includes a battery configured to store and discharge electric power to an energy grid, a power inverter configured to use battery power setpoints to control an amount of the electric power stored or discharged from the battery, and a controller), a charge/discharge capacity (Wenzel, [Col. 8 Line 57-61] system 100 may maintain a reserve capacity of stored energy (e.g., in battery 108) that can be provided to energy grid 104. System 100 may also maintain the capacity to draw energy from energy grid 104 and store the energy in battery 108), and a State of Charge (SOC) of the storage battery system (Wenzel, [Col. 63 Line 62-63] the battery management unit 1310 may provide data relating to a state of charge (SOC) of the batteries 108), as current operation state data of a storage battery system including a plurality of storage batteries (Wenzel, [Col. 63 Lines 64-65] The battery management unit 1310 may further provide data relating to other parameters of the batteries 108);
a deterioration prediction unit to predict deterioration of the storage battery system on the basis of the charge/discharge power (Wenzel, [Col. 5 Lines 57-60] a battery life model to predict the battery degradation that will result from various control actions (e.g., charging or discharging the battery)), the charge/discharge capacity (Wenzel, [Col. 5 Line 60-53] the battery life model may estimate battery capacity loss as a function of variables that can be controlled (e.g., by a battery controller) while performing ramp rate control and/or frequency regulation), and the SOC (Wenzel, [Col. 63 Line 62-64] the battery management unit 1310 may provide data relating to a state of charge (SOC) of the batteries 108);
a calculation unit to
perform calculation relating to deterioration by multiple patterns with respect to at least one or more of parameters including the charge/discharge power (Wenzel, [Col. 29 Line 19-22] battery life model generator 428 may define the depth of discharge DOD as the maximum state-of-charge minus the minimum state-of-charge of battery 108 over the frequency response period), a C rate indicating a charging/discharging speed (Wenzel, [Col. 56 Line 63-66] ramp rate controller 1214 may be configured to determine an amount of power to charge or discharge from battery 806 for ramp rate control), SOC upper and lower limit values (Wenzel, [Col. 29 Line 19-22] Battery life model generator 428 may define the depth of discharge DOD as the maximum state-of-charge minus the minimum state-of-charge of battery 108 over the frequency response period), a standby SOC value indicating an SOC value during standby, and frequency upper and lower limit values (Wenzel, [Col. 11 Line 42-48] High level controller 312 may select midpoint b to maintain a constant state-of-charge in battery 108 (i.e., the same state-of-charge at the beginning and end of each frequency response period) or to vary the state-of-charge in order to optimize the overall value of operating system 100 (e.g., frequency response revenue minus energy costs and battery degradation costs))… the deterioration of the storage battery system predicted by the deterioration prediction unit (Wenzel, [Col. 27 Line 33-39] battery degradation estimator 418 uses a battery life model to predict a loss in battery capacity that will result from a set of midpoints b, power outputs, and/or other variables that can be manipulated by controller 112).
Wenzel does not disclose the calculation being performed on the basis of a digital model…, the digital model being capable of reproducing operation of the storage battery system in a simulative manner, and
specify a pattern whose life extension effect is relatively high; and
a display control unit to cause a display device to display the one or more
parameters of the pattern, whose life extension effect is relatively high, specified by the
calculation unit.
However, Don teaches the calculation being performed (Don, [0112] Various databases used herein may include: temperature data, time data, voltage data, battery location data, battery identifier data, and/or like data useful in the operation of the system) on the basis of a digital model (Don, [0112] a display device coupled to the processor and memory for displaying information derived from digital data processed by the processor; and a plurality of databases)…, the digital model being capable of reproducing operation (Don, [0134] the battery-specific and/or application-specific information may be accessed by any system performing the analysis described herein, including a battery monitoring software application on a mobile device 600, system 400, and/or any components comprised therein) of the storage battery system (Don, [0096] system 400 (and/or components thereof) may be in communication with an external battery management system (BMS) coupled one or more batteries 100/200, for example over a common network such as the Internet) in a simulative manner (Don, [0097] historical voltage and temperature data is used to assess the condition of the monoblocs or batteries and/or make predictions about and comparisons of the future condition of the monobloc or battery), and
specify a pattern whose life extension effect is relatively high (Don, [0072] the processor may determine the crank health, reserve time, state of health, state of charge, discharge health, remaining life of a battery, or the like, through analysis of the battery information obtained from circuit monitor 120/220 or received through other channels); and
a display control unit to cause a display device to display the one or more
parameters of the pattern (Don, [0133] information relating to battery 100/200 may be displayed to a user through a battery monitoring software application on the display screen of computer 424, on a mobile device, or the like), whose life extension effect is relatively high, specified by the
calculation unit (Don, [0138] In response to receiving the application-specific information, battery-specific information, and/or voltage and/or temperature information, and/or determining an aspect of the health and/or performance of a battery (e.g., reserve time, state of charge, state of health, discharge health, crank health, and/or remaining life) resulting from the information analysis, system 400 may display the information and/or results of analysis).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wenzel with Don because Wenzel provides a battery management system with monitoring and deterioration functions while Don teaches performing calculations using a digital model and displaying data to a user. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to integrate Don’s digital modeling and user display functionality with Wenzel’s battery management system in order to improve accuracy and provide information to the user, resulting to a better overall system.
Regarding Claim 2, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit performs the calculation by further using a given constraint condition set by a user (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Line 63- Col. 3 Line 3] the controller is configured to generate the optimal values for the battery power setpoints by identifying constraints on a state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery, determining a relationship between the SOC of the battery and the battery power setpoints, and generating the optimal values of the battery power setpoints such that a predicted SOC of the battery during an optimization period does not violate the constraints on the SOC of the battery).
Regarding Claim 3, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit performs the calculation by further using a given objective function defined to prioritize revenue (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Lines 45-52] the controller is configured to estimate a monetary cost of the battery degradation that will result from the battery power setpoints and generate the optimal values for the battery power setpoints by optimizing an objective function) from the storage battery system over the life extension effect of the storage battery system (Wenzel, [Col. 5 Line 57-Col. 6 Line 2] the systems and methods described herein use a battery life model to predict the battery degradation that will result from various control actions (e.g., charging or discharging the battery). The battery life model may estimate battery capacity loss as a function of variables that can be controlled (e.g., by a battery controller) while performing ramp rate control and/or frequency regulation. Losses in battery capacity can be converted into revenue losses and compared with the potential revenue gains resulting from battery usage (e.g., frequency response revenue). This allows the controller to make an informed decision regarding battery usage by considering the tradeoff between revenue generation potential and battery degradation).
Regarding Claim 4, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 2.
Wenzel teaches wherein the given constraint condition (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Line 63-66] the controller is configured to generate the optimal values for the battery power setpoints by identifying constraints on a state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery) is a constraint condition for causing no deterioration (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Line 67- Col. 3 Line 3] determining a relationship between the SOC of the battery and the battery power setpoints, and generating the optimal values of the battery power setpoints such that a predicted SOC of the battery during an optimization period does not violate the constraints on the SOC of the battery) in performance of the storage battery system (Wenzel, [Col. 2 Line 60-63] the estimated amount of battery degradation comprises an estimated loss in battery capacity that will result from the battery power setpoints).
Regarding Claim 5, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit performs the calculation by further using an objective function (Wenzel, [Col. 9 Lines 45-55] controller 112 uses a battery life model to quantify and monetize battery degradation as a function of the power setpoints provided to power inverter 106) the storage battery being selected to minimize a total cost in which each cost is calculated by converting deterioration of each of the storage batteries into cost (Wenzel, [Col. 9 Line 45 – 55] controller 112 uses a battery life model to quantify and monetize battery degradation as a function of the power setpoints provided to power inverter 106. Advantageously, the battery life model allows controller 112 to perform an optimization that weighs the revenue generation potential of participating in the frequency response program against the cost of battery degradation and other costs of participation).
Wenzel does not disclose the calculation unit performs the calculation by further using an objective function defined to select a storage battery to be used.
However, Don teaches the calculation unit performs the calculation by further using an objective function defined to select a storage battery (Don, [0097] in the exemplary embodiment, historical voltage and temperature data is used to assess the condition of the monoblocs or batteries and/or make predictions about and comparisons of the future condition of the monobloc or battery) to be used (Don, [0096] system 400 (and/or components thereof) may be in communication with an external battery management system (BMS) coupled one or more batteries 100/200, for example over a common network such as the Internet).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wenzel with Don, since Wenzel provides a foundation using an objective function to optimize and balance cost versus degradation of batteries however Wenzel fails to disclose that the objective function is defined to select a storage battery to be used. However, Don teaches evaluating and predicting condition and health of multiple batteries and a BMS system to communicate and control the batteries. Don emphasize the use of one or more batteries for the battery management system or for gathering data. One of ordinary skill would have incorporated Don’s teaching of have the ability to communicate with any of the one or more batteries into Wenzel’s optimization system to improve efficiency, balancing revenue and long term battery reliability.
Regarding Claim 6, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit is a functional object (Wenzel, [Col. 69 Line 25-27] the present disclosure contemplates methods, systems and program products on any machine-readable media for accomplishing various operations) provided in a cloud computing system (Wenzel, [Col. 12 Line 36 – Col. 12 Line 39] processor 306 may be configured to execute computer code or instructions stored in memory 308 or received from other computer readable media (e.g., CDROM, network storage, a remote server, etc.)).
Regarding Claim 7, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit determines whether deterioration of the storage battery system progresses (Wenzel, [Col. 39 Line 67 – Col. 40 Line 7] The optimization may be subject to optimization constraints. For example, step 706 may include implementing optimization constraints that keep the state-of-charge of the battery between threshold values (e.g., between 0 and 1) and/or constraints that prevent sum of the midpoint b and the campus power P.sub.campus from exceeding the power inverter rating P.sub.limit, as described with respect to optimization constraints module 414.) faster than a given speed when the current operation of the storage battery system is continued (Wenzel, [Col. 26 Line 17-20] optimization constraints module 414 may impose constraints on the SOC of battery 108 to ensure that the probability of ruin P within N time steps does not exceed a threshold value).
Wenzel does not disclose the display control unit causes the display device to display alarm information in response to determination that the deterioration of the storage battery system progresses faster than the given speed.
However, Don teaches the display control unit causes the display device to display alarm information in response to determination that the deterioration of the storage battery system progresses faster than the given speed (Don, [0083] This outlier data may be used to identify failing batteries or to identify local conditions (high load, or the like) and to provide alerts or notices for maintaining and securing such batteries).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wenzel with Don, since Wenzel teaches ramp rate monitoring to detect change in power output, while Don teaches providing a user display for alerts in response to abnormal conditions. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Don’s alarm display feature into Wenzel’s system in order to provide real time notifications to users to insure system safety of the system.
Regarding Claim 8, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit (Wenzel, [Col. 67 Lines 3-5] the high level controller performs calculation to generate optimization data for the battery optimization system 1300) periodically estimates a deterioration state of the storage battery on the basis of data including a temperature during operation of the storage battery (Wenzel, [Col. 66 Line 51-55] by combining battery data such as temperature and voltage, along with external data such as weather forecasts, remaining battery life may be more accurately determined by the battery degradation estimator 418)
Wenzel does not disclose when the deterioration state reaches a given deterioration state threshold, the display control unit causes the display device to display information for making notification of the deterioration of the storage battery.
However, Don teaches when the deterioration state reaches a given deterioration state threshold, the display control unit causes the display device to display information (Don, [0151] alerts sent by system 400 to a user can include: notifying a battery owner that the battery should be placed on a charger when a motive power battery has been left in a discharged state for an extended period of time, notifying if the usage trends are jeopardizing the life, health, or warranty of the battery (e.g. high or low temperature, high or low charging voltage), sending a notification when the battery is outside a geo-fence, as well as historic data and significant events for any of these parameters, through use of the operational history matrix) for making notification of the deterioration of the storage battery ((Don, [0149] If the vehicle is parked, the system can also determine if it is being properly charged, properly stored, and, for example, alert a user if it is sitting discharged or otherwise under conditions causing a deterioration of battery health).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wenzel with Don, since Wenzel teaches estimations of battery deterioration state using parameters like temperature and voltage while Don teaches generating and displaying alarms when thresholds are reached. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to integrate Don’s threshold-based alerts into Wenzel’s system to provide users with warnings about degradation events and improving the battery monitoring system as a whole.
Regarding Claim 9, Wenzel in view of Don teaches the device of claim 1.
Wenzel teaches the calculation unit (Wenzel, [Col. 67 Lines 3-5] the high level controller performs calculation to generate optimization data for the battery optimization system 1300) learns weighting for each of the parameters (Wenzel, [Col. 32 Lines 8-10] the performance score PS is a composite weighting of an accuracy score, a delay score, and a precision score. [Col. 32 Lines 15-19] each term in the precision score is assigned an equal weighting (e.g., ⅓). In other embodiments, some terms may be weighted higher than others)
Wenzel does not disclose the calculation unit learns weighting for each of the parameters.
Don teaches using artificial intelligence (Al) before processing using the digital model (Don, [0113] the operations may be machine operations, or any of the operations may be conducted or enhanced by artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning. Useful machines for performing certain algorithms of various embodiments include general purpose digital computers or similar devices).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Wenzel with Don, since Wenzel teaches generating optimization data and performance weighting for battery parameters, while Don teaches enhancing such processing using artificial intelligence and machine learning. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that incorporating Don’s artificial intelligence techniques into Wenzel’s optimization framework would predictably improve the accuracy and adaptability of the parameter weighting, leading to more reliable optimization of battery system performance.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclose:
-US 20240140263 A1, describing systems and approaches for minimizing degradation of battery modules in an electric vehicle battery pack, including acquiring operational state information, selecting, or deselecting modules based on thresholds, and employing artificial intelligence models to predict deterioration.
-US 20220390524 A1, describing a storage battery state estimation device and method that performs deterioration diagnosis of storage battery, including estimation of baseline and peak functions from voltage data, and machine learning model functions, and error detection to improve accuracy.
-US 20190392320 A1, describing a battery control method that employs an artificial neural network to learn characteristic data inside a battery, update parameters based on user input and operational data, and perform predictive analysis for battery charging and discharging control to improve efficiency and lifespan.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIM NAGI SHOHATEE whose telephone number is (571)272-6612. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at 5712721945. 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.
/IBRAHIM NAGI SHOHATEE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/SHELBY A TURNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857