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 .
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
As to claim 1, the claim recites “A monitoring server comprising:
at least one memory configured to store one or more instructions; and
at least one processor configured to execute the one or more instructions to:
acquire measurement data regarding a power storage apparatus of a power storage system having the power storage apparatus and an output apparatus;
diagnose a state of health of the power storage apparatus based on the measurement data;
transmit a diagnosis result of the state of health of the power storage apparatus to an authentication server, which authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy, and receive an authentication result based on the diagnosis result from the authentication server; and
control output content of authentication information, which indicates whether or not the authentication server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy and is output from the output apparatus, based on the authentication result.”
Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claim is directed to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (process for claim 7, and apparatus for claims 1 and 8).
Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the bold type portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations).
In claim 1, the steps identified in bold type are mathematical concepts, therefore, they are considered to be abstract idea.
Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The claim comprises the following additional elements:
at least one memory configured to store one or more instructions; and
at least one processor configured to execute the one or more instructions to: acquire measurement data regarding a power storage apparatus of a power storage system having the power storage apparatus and an output apparatus; transmit a diagnosis result of the state of health of the power storage apparatus to an authentication server, which authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy, and receive an authentication result based on the diagnosis result from the authentication server; and indicates whether or not the authentication server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy and is output from the output apparatus.
The additional element “acquire measurement data regarding a power storage apparatus of a power storage” represents necessary data gathering and does not integrate the limitation into a practical application. The additional elements “transmit a diagnosis result of the state of health of the power storage apparatus to an authentication server, which authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy, and receive an authentication result based on the diagnosis result from the authentication server”; and “indicates whether or not the authentication server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy and is output from the output apparatus” are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they only add insignificant extra-solution activities to the judicial exception. In addition, a processor or memory is generally recited and therefore, not qualified as a particular machine.
The additional element “an authentication server” is not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it is considered a generic computer element. As recited in the MPEP, 2106.05(b), merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2359-60, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1984 (2014). See also OIP Techs. v. Amazon.com, 788 F.3d 1359, 1364, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093-94.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claims elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, do not reflect improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, do not recite a particular machine, do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claim is directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
The above claim, does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generically recited and are well-understood/conventional in a relevant art as evidenced by the prior art of record (Step 2B analysis).
For example, acquiring measurement data regarding a power storage apparatus of a power storage is considered necessary data gathering. As recited in MPEP section 2106.05(g), necessary data gathering (i.e. receiving data) is considered extra solution activity in light of Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
For example, transmitting a diagnosis result of the state of health of the power storage apparatus to an authentication server is disclosed by “Carlo US 20160259015”, FIG. 2, [0004], [0027], [0029], [0044]; and “Takahashi US 20140278166 ”, FIGs. 10 and 12, [0018], [0025], [0047], [0048], [0063], [0064].
The claim, therefore, is not patent eligible.
Independent claims 7 and 8 recite subject matter that are similar or analogous to that of claim 1, and therefore, the claims are also patent ineligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-6 provide additional features/steps which are considered part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims, and do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application.
The dependent claims are, therefore, also not patent eligible.
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 1-2, and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takechi (US 20210367277, hereinafter Takechi) in view of Carlo et al. (US 20160259015, hereinafter Carlo).
As to claims 1, and 7-8, Takechi teaches at least one memory configured to store one or more instructions (FIG. 2 discloses memory 44; [0144]); and
at least one processor configured to execute the one or more instructions (FIG. 2 discloses control unit 40; [0144]) to:
acquire measurement data regarding a power storage apparatus of a power storage system having the power storage apparatus and an output apparatus ([0091]; [0092] discloses “The module control unit 12a controls, as the control unit 121, each unit and calculates battery characteristics of each unit cell, which is a battery module 11 or a battery cell 11a, on the basis of the voltage, temperature, and current that are detected. As the battery characteristics, the module control unit 12a calculates a full charge capacity (FCC), a state of charge (SOC), a state of health (SOH), and an equivalent circuit parameter”);
diagnose a state of health of the power storage apparatus based on the measurement data ([0109] discloses “the state-of-health calculation unit 132 calculates a state of health, by comparing the full charge capacity of the unit cell calculated by the full charge capacity calculation unit 131 against the initial full charge capacity stored in the recording unit 123. The state-of-health calculation unit 132 may calculate a proportion (degree of increase) of an internal resistance value R calculated by the parameter calculation unit 130 with respect to the secondary battery 10, against an initial value RO, and may calculate a state of health on the basis of the correlation between internal resistance increase rate and discharge capacity ratio stored in the recording unit 123.”);
transmit a diagnosis result of the state of health of the power storage apparatus to an authentication server, which authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy, and receive an authentication result based on the diagnosis result from the authentication server ([0097] discloses the module control unit 12a controls transmission/reception of information to/from the battery monitoring device 4 via the input/output unit 12d, and the input/output processing unit 124 can transmit/receive information (FCC, SOC, SOH, or an equivalent circuit parameter) indicating a battery characteristic of each unit cell to/from the battery monitoring device 4.”; [0150] and [0151] disclose the control unit 30 collects the battery characteristic for each unit cell, and performs the determination on the basis of the state of health. When having determined that the replacement time has not arrived (i.e., the batter or power storage apparatus is healthy - emphasis added by Examiner) in step S304 (S304: NO), the control unit 30 ends the process);
output content of authentication information based on the authentication result is output from the output apparatus ([0134] and [0137] disclose in step S406, the control unit 40 may determine whether or not it is predicted that the replacement time will arrive in one year, and when having determined that the replacement time will arrive in one year, the control unit 40 may determine that the replacement time has arrived. Then, the control unit 50 causes the display unit 52 to display a message indicating an announcement of the replacement time (step S502), and causes the sound output unit 53 to output a warning sound (step S503) (i.e., content of authentication information based on the authentication result is outputted from the output apparatus - emphasis added by Examiner)).
Takechi does not explicitly teach control output content of authentication information, which indicates whether or not the authentication server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy and is output from the output apparatus.
Carlo teaches control output content of authentication information, which indicates whether or not the authentication server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy and is output from the output apparatus, based on the authentication result ([0004], [0027] and [0029] disclose the server 42 include the processor 58, and the processor generates the battery condition report. The report generated by the server 42 is communicated from the server 42 to the consumer 50 via any one of a number of means, including by a mailed letter, and thus, the consumer 50 may access or receive the report via phone 59 (e.g., cell phone), computer 60, or mail 62 (i.e., the battery condition report that include the health of the battery can be displayed on the consumer’s cell phone or computer, or not display but received by a mailed letter. Thus, the output content of authentication information controlled to display or not to display the report - emphasis added by Examiner); [0044] discloses the battery test report 100 provides a recommendation that no additional action is needed 62 (i.e., the server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy, and no further test is needed - emphasis added by Examiner)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Carlo into Takechi for the purpose of providing a battery tester report notification to a consumer in order to provide information related to a health of the battery. This combination would provide improved battery tester equipment, and improved reports generated by the battery tester equipment.
As to claim 2, the combination of Takechi and Carlo teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Takechi teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions ([0144]) to cause a display as the output apparatus to display an authentication mark in a case where the authentication result is content authenticating that the power storage apparatus is healthy ([0134], [0137], and [0151] disclose when having determined that the replacement time has not arrived (i.e., the power storage apparatus is healthy - emphasis added by Examiner) in step S304 (S304: NO), the control unit 30 ends the process). In step S406, when having determined that the replacement time will arrive in one year, the control unit 40 may determine that the replacement time has arrived. Then, the control unit 50 causes the display unit 52 to display a message indicating an announcement of the replacement time (step S502), and causes the sound output unit 53 to output a warning sound (step S503) (i.e.,
content of authentication information based on the authentication result is outputted from the output apparatus, and thus, the display unit or output apparatus would also display an authentication mark that the power storage apparatus is healthy (FIG. 10, S502 and S503) - emphasis added by Examiner)); and
bring the authentication mark on the display into non-display in a case where the authentication result is content not authenticating that the power storage apparatus is healthy ([0137] discloses the control unit 50 causes the display unit 52 to display a
message indicating an announcement of the replacement time (step S502) (i.e., the display unit can display a message when replacement time has arrived for the battery, however, when the control unit does not determine or authenticate whether or not the replacement time will arrive or has arrived for the battery, the display unit would be able to bring the display into non-display as whether to display or not to display involves only routine skill in the art - emphasis added by Examiner)).
As to claim 5, the combination of Takechi and Carlo teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Takechi teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions ([0144]) to wherein the acquisition unit acquire the measurement data at a timing determined in advance ([0098] and [0108] disclose the module control unit 12a functions as the voltage acquisition unit 125, the current acquisition unit 126, and the temperature acquisition unit 127 which respectively acquire a voltage, a current, and a temperature to be used in calculation of the battery characteristics; and the module control unit 12a calculates, as the full charge capacity calculation unit 131, a charge/discharge amount on the basis of a charge/discharge current acquired by the current acquisition unit 126 in a period from the first time point to the second time point (i.e., acquire the measurement data at a timing determined in advance - emphasis added by Examiner)) or in response to a request from a user,
diagnose the state of health of the power storage apparatus with the acquisition of the measurement data ([0109] discloses “the state-of-health calculation unit 132 calculates a state of health, by comparing the full charge capacity of the unit cell calculated by the full charge capacity calculation unit 131 against the initial full charge capacity stored in the recording unit 123. The state-of-health calculation unit 132 may calculate a proportion (degree of increase) of an internal resistance value R calculated by the parameter calculation unit 130 with respect to the secondary battery 10, against an initial value RO, and may calculate a state of health on the basis of the correlation between internal resistance increase rate and discharge capacity ratio stored in the recording unit 123 (i.e., diagnose the state of health of the battery with the measurement data - emphasis added by Examiner)).”),
transmit the diagnosis result and receive the authentication result with the diagnosis of the state of health of the power storage apparatus ([0097] and [0150] disclose the control unit 30 collects the battery characteristic for each unit cell, and performs the determination on the basis of the state of health; and transmit/receive information (FCC, SOC, SOH, or an equivalent circuit parameter) indicating a battery characteristic of each unit cell to/from the battery monitoring device 4), and
control the output content of the authentication information with the reception of the authentication result by the authentication result reception unit ([0134] and [0137] disclose in step S406, the control unit 40 may determine whether or not it is predicted that the replacement time will arrive in one year, and when having determined that the replacement time will arrive in one year, the control unit 40 may determine that the replacement time has arrived. Then, the control unit 50 causes the display unit 52 to display a message indicating an announcement of the replacement time (step S502), and causes the sound output unit 53 to output a warning sound (step S503) (i.e., cause the display unit to display or control the output content of the authentication information with the reception of the authentication result or the replacement time has arrived - emphasis added by Examiner)).
Takechi does not explicitly teach transmit the diagnosis result to the authentication server and receive the authentication result from the authentication server with the diagnosis of the state of health of the power storage apparatus.
Carlo teaches transmit the diagnosis result to the authentication server and receive the authentication result from the authentication server with the diagnosis of the state of health of the power storage apparatus ([0004], [0027] and [0029] disclose the server 42 include the processor 58, and the processor generates the battery condition report. The report generated by the server 42 is communicated (i.e., transmit - emphasis added by Examiner) from the server 42 to the consumer 50 via any one of a number of means, including by a mailed letter, and thus, the consumer 50 may access or receive the report via phone 59 (e.g., cell phone), computer 60, or mail 62 (i.e., the battery condition report that include the health of the battery can be displayed on the consumer’s cell phone or computer, or not display but received by a mailed letter. Thus, the output content of authentication information can be controlled to display or not to display the report - emphasis added by Examiner)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Carlo into Takechi for the purpose of providing a battery tester report notification to a consumer in order to provide information related to a health of the battery. This combination would provide improved battery tester equipment, and improved reports generated by the battery tester equipment.
As to claim 6, the combination of Takechi and Carlo teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Takechi teaches authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy ([0092] and [0151] disclose the module control unit 12a calculates a state of health (SOH) of the battery; and when having determined that the replacement time
has not arrived in step S304 (S304: NO), the control unit 30 ends the process (i.e., authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy - emphasis added by Examiner)).
Takechi does not explicitly teach an authentication server that authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy.
Carlo teaches an authentication server that authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy ([0004], [0027] and [0029] disclose the server 42 generates the battery condition report, and the server 42 communicates the report to the consumer 50 (i.e., the battery condition report includes the health of the battery, and the server authenticates the condition or health of the battery - emphasis added by Examiner); [0044] discloses the battery test report 100 provide a recommendation that no additional action is needed 62 (i.e., the server authenticates that the power storage apparatus is healthy, and no further test is needed - emphasis added by Examiner)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Carlo into Takechi for the purpose of providing a battery tester report notification to a consumer in order to provide information related to a health of the battery. This combination would provide improved battery tester equipment, and improved reports generated by the battery tester equipment.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takechi and Carlo, in view of Katori et al. (US 20210239765, hereinafter Katori).
As to claim 3, the combination of Takechi and Carlo teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Takechi teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions ([0144]) to diagnose the state of health of the power storage apparatus ([0092]).
Takechi does not explicitly teach diagnose the state of health of the power storage apparatus based on at least one of a difference between a reference value and a measured value of an open-circuit voltage, a positive electrode capacity, a negative electrode capacity, an inactivated Li content, a negative electrode utilization factor, and a negative electrode state of charge (SOC) at an upper limit SOC.
Katori teaches diagnose the state of health of the power storage apparatus based on at least one of a difference between a reference value and a measured value of an open-circuit voltage ([0093] discloses the controller 4 may measure the open circuit voltage of the battery 1 and, when the open circuit voltage is equal to or lower than the threshold level, the controller 4 may cause the output unit 7 to output an alert to notify that the battery 1 is close to the end of the battery life (i.e., the state of health of the batter is determined - emphasis added by Examiner)), a positive electrode capacity, a negative electrode capacity, an inactivated Li content, a negative electrode utilization factor, and a negative electrode state of charge (SOC) at an upper limit SOC.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Katori into Takechi in view of Carlo for the purpose of determining a deteriorated state of a battery by using a method of full capacity or nominal capacity of the battery that determines a charged amount consumed in each operation, and a periodic diagnosis internal resistance method that determines the deteriorated state of the battery. This combination would improve in accurately determining the deteriorated state of the battery using the open
circuit voltage of the battery.
As to claim 4, the combination of Takechi and Carlo teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Takechi teaches wherein the diagnosis unit the processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions ([0144]), and the plurality of cells of the power storage apparatus (FIGs. 15 and 16, [0066]).
The combination of Takechi and Carlo does not explicitly teach compute at least one item value of a difference between a reference value and a measured value of an open-circuit voltage, a positive electrode capacity, a negative electrode capacity, an inactivated Li content, a negative electrode utilization factor, and a negative electrode SOC at an upper limit SOC for each of a plurality of cells in the power storage apparatus, and diagnose the state of health of the power storage apparatus based on at least one of a comparison result of the item value in each of the plurality of cells.
Katori teaches compute at least one item value of a difference between a reference value and a measured value of an open-circuit voltage ([0093] discloses the controller 4 may measure the open circuit voltage of the battery 1 and, when the open circuit voltage is equal to or lower than the threshold level, the controller 4 may cause the output unit 7 to output an alert to notify that the battery 1 is close to the end of the battery life (i.e., the state of health of the batter is determined based on the OCV or the one item value - emphasis added by Examiner)), a positive electrode capacity, a negative electrode capacity, an inactivated Li content, a negative electrode utilization factor, and a negative electrode SOC at an upper limit SOC for each of a plurality of cells in the power storage apparatus, and
diagnose the state of health of the power storage apparatus based on at least one of a comparison result of the item value in each of the plurality of cells with a first standard value ([0003] and [0030] disclose the battery is a lithium thionyl chloride primary battery; and determine a state in which a remaining capacity of the battery is lower than a predetermined value (i.e., a lithium thionyl chloride primary battery is a type of primary cell that consists of one or more individual cells; and the state or the state of health of the battery is diagnosed based on end of the battery life or a comparison result of the remaining capacity or the item value in each of the plurality of cells of the battery - emphasis added by Examiner)); and a comparison result of variance of the item values in the plurality of cells with a second standard value ([0092] and [0093] disclose the controller 4 may set a plurality of thresholds as a plurality of threshold levels; and when the open circuit voltage is equal to or lower than the threshold level (i.e., a comparison result of variance of the item values in the plurality of cells of the lithium thionyl chloride primary battery with the second standard value- emphasis added by Examiner), the controller 4 may cause the output unit 7 to output an alert to notify that the battery 1 is close to the end of the battery life).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Katori into Takechi in view of Carlo for the purpose of determining a deteriorated state of a battery by using a method of full capacity or nominal capacity of the battery that determines a charged amount consumed in each operation, and a periodic diagnosis internal resistance method that determines the deteriorated state of the battery. This combination would improve in accurately determining the deteriorated state of the battery using the open
circuit voltage of the battery.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
“Werberg US 20210055354” teaches “A method of detecting a latent fault of at least one cell among a plurality of cells in an energy storage system, and a control unit performing the method, are provided. A method of a control unit of detecting a latent fault of at least one cell among a plurality of cells in an energy storage system is also provided. The method comprises determining State of Health Cell Capacity, SoHCC, and Open Circuit Voltage, OCV, of a selected cell; wherein the selected cell is indicated to have a latent fault if a determined value of the SoHCC of the selected cell is lower than a reference value for the SoHCC and if a determined value of the OCV of the selected cell is higher than a reference value for the OCV.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAL CE MANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday- 8:00-12:00, 1:00-5:00 EST.
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, Catherine T Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/LAL CE MANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2863