DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/22/2024 is not in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. One reference, strike out, is an incorrect number. Accordingly, only some of the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/23/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-8 are 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.
With respect to claim 1, line 18, “at every specified time” lacks antecedent basis. There’s no prior introduced times and therefore it is unclear what every time the values need to be acquired.
Additionally, in lines 22-24, it is recited that “performs the partial limitation or the complete limitation of the allowable electric power while the voltage value of the allowable electric power decreases to the second voltage value and then to the first voltage value.” However prior in the claim it recites that no limitation is performed at a first voltage and the partial is performed at a second voltage higher than the first. Therefore, the quoted limitation stating partial or complete limits are performed to a first voltage and also the complete when decreasing to the second voltage is conflicting with the requirements earlier in the claim.
Claim 5 recites similar issues but merely recites in the inverse manner/discharging but still has limitations at the end of the claim that conflict with prior requirements.
Claims 2-4 and 6-8 depend from claims 1 and 5 and are rejected for the same reasons.
With respect to claim 2, lines 4-5, it states first the value decreases to a value equal to the second voltage but then conflicts and says is equal to the third voltage. As claim 1 states, the first and third voltages cannot be equal to one another and therefore this requirement is impossible to meet.
Claims 3-4 and 6-8 repeat this same issue of setting forth a condition where the value can be equal to two of the three different voltages. Note claim 3 always appears to contain a typo by including an extra parathesis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miwa [JP 5069484]*.
*Note a duplicate copy of the above cited foreign reference is not provided with this action as a copy is already provided on record with the IDS filed on 03/23/2025.
With respect to claims 1 and 5, Miwa discloses a battery control method using: a control unit that controls a battery [controller 46 and batteries 40 and/or 45]; a storage unit that stores data regarding allowable electric power for charging the battery [controller implicitly incorporate data storage]; and a measurement unit that measures a voltage value between a pair of electrode terminals of the battery [52], wherein the allowable electric power is defined as chargeable maximum electric power which is calculated based on a predetermined upper limit voltage value and a current charged state [par. 0030]; wherein the data includes: a first voltage value that is an upper limit value for which a limitation of the allowable electric power is not required [Fig 4A; lower voltage Vs]; a second voltage value which is higher than the first voltage value and for which a partial limitation of the allowable electric power is required [Fig. 4A; any voltage between Vs and Vmax, par. 0033-0035]; and a third voltage value which is higher than the second voltage value and for which a complete limitation of the allowable electric power is required [Fig. 4A; Vmax]; and wherein the control unit: acquires the voltage value from the measurement unit at every specified time and performs the complete limitation of the allowable electric power when the voltage value of the allowable electric power becomes equal to or higher than the third voltage value and performs the partial limitation or the complete limitation of the allowable electric power while the voltage value of the allowable electric power decreases to the second voltage value and then to the first voltage value [par. 0033-0035, and Fig. 4A which define the partial charging restriction when Gchg is between 0 and 1].
Note, with respect to claim 5, Miwa further inversely defines the conditions/situation of controlling discharging power in the same manner [Fig. 4B].
With respect to claims 2 and 6, Miwa further discloses wherein when the control unit performs the complete limitation of the allowable electric power while the voltage value of the allowable electric power decreases from a specified voltage value, which is equal to or higher than the second voltage value and is equal to or lower than the third voltage value, to the first voltage value, the control unit performs the partial limitation of the allowable electric power based on a specified voltage gradient represented by voltage fluctuations per unit time while the voltage value of the allowable electric power decreases from the first voltage value to a fourth voltage value which is lower than the first voltage value [par. 0010, defines the voltage thresholds for both charging and discharging are executed based on the actual voltage change rate such that the transition is in between the full limitation to no limitation based on the specified voltage gradient].
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.
Claim(s) 3-4 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miwa [JP 5069484] as applied above, and further in view of Sato et al. [US 2005/0127879].
With respect to claims 3 and 7, Miwa fails to disclose the claimed limitations. However, Sato relates to battery pack protection and teaches wherein when the voltage value acquired from the measurement unit or an arithmetic operation value obtained by arithmetic processing of the voltage value under a specified condition within a specified first time period is equal to or higher than a specified voltage) , which is higher than the first voltage value and is lower than the third voltage value, and is equal to or lower than the third voltage value, the control unit relatively decreases the first voltage value and updates the first voltage value [par. 0118, 0127, 0144; i.e. defines changing of voltage threshold ranges based on measured voltage values and time].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Miwa to define the claimed ranges as taught by Sato for the benefit of preventing hunting as stated by Sato.
With respect to claims 4 and 8, Miwa fails to disclose the claimed limitations. However, Sato relates to battery pack protection and teaches wherein when the voltage value acquired from the measurement unit or an arithmetic operation value obtained by arithmetic processing of the voltage value under a specified condition within a specified first time period is equal to or higher than a specified voltage, which is higher than the first voltage value and is lower than the third voltage value, and is not equal to or lower than the third voltage value, the control unit relatively increases the first voltage value and updates the first voltage value [par. 0118, 0127, 0144; i.e. defines changing of voltage threshold ranges based on measured voltage values and time].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Miwa to define the claimed ranges as taught by Sato for the benefit of preventing hunting as stated by Sato.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL R PELTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/NATHANIEL R PELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights