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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant' s amendment and response filed 11/12/2025 has been entered and made record. This application contains 20 pending claims.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8, 12, 15-16, and 19 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/12/2025 regarding claims rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 in claim 1-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues on page 11 of the remark filed on 11/12/2025 that “… First, amended claim 1 is not directed to an abstract idea. The Examiner's characterization of claim 1 as being directed to "collecting, analyzing, and displaying information" is misplaced. The claimed invention is not a generic data-processing routine but rather a specific and concrete technological improvement in battery module control” … “The claimed features therefore represent a practical application of control logic that improves how battery modules self-diagnose, respond to repurposing commands, and physically implement repurposing actions, rather than an abstract idea performed on a generic computer.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees applicant’s argument. The step of indicate, a repurposing level of the battery module by providing an indication of the one or more values of the one or more parameters is a mental process, therefore, it is considered to be an abstract idea. A human mind can observe and evaluate the one or more values of the one or more parameters, and make judgment and have opinion about an indication of repurposing level of the battery module. Thus, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The applicant argues on pages 11-12 of the remark filed that “… Second, even if amended claim 1 somehow recites an abstract idea, it nonetheless integrates any alleged practical application into a specific practical application. The claimed module controller not only collects data but uses it to generate a meaningful control output a "repurposing level" and further to receive and perform a physical action associated with the repurposing of the battery module. These features govern physical operations of the energy storage system. The indication of the repurposing level and subsequent performance of the repurposing action enable automated system behaviors, such as isolating, disabling, or reassigning the module for secondary use, thereby improving safety, efficiency, and lifecycle management. … Accordingly, the claim applies any alleged abstract idea in a meaningful way that integrates it into a real-world technological environment, satisfying Step 2A, Prong Two of the USPTO's 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees applicant’s argument. Practical application can be demonstrated by additional elements that are sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The additional element of “obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells” is considered necessary data gathering and thus, not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As recited in MPEP section 2106.05(g), necessary data gathering (i.e., obtaining the parameters of battery cells) 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).
Additional elements “wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module”; “store, in the one or more programmable memories, the one or more values of the one or more parameters”; “receive, based on indicating the repurposing level, an indication to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module”: and “perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module” are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they only add insignificant extra-solution activities to the judicial exception. Therefore, the current claims do not recite additional elements that are indicative of integration of an abstract idea into a practical application.
The applicant argues on pages 12-13 of the remark filed that “Third, the combined limitations of amended claim 1 recites significantly more than any abstract idea itself. The module controller is not a generic processor executing conventional steps; it is a specialized control unit configured to perform the claimed per-cell evaluations, storage, diagnostic signaling, and physical control operations associated with repurposing that improve the functionality of the battery module itself. Conventional battery systems merely monitor voltage and temperature for balancing or protection purposes; they do not determine per- cell unsuitability for continued use, nor do they output a quantified "repurposing level" for diagnostic devices. The claimed operations therefore improve the operation of the battery module as a whole by enabling autonomous, hardware-level determination of health, execution of repurposing control actions, and lifecycle readiness. Accordingly, amended claim 1 recites a statutory machine that performs specific, technical control functions integrated into the physical structure and operation of a battery module. The claim is therefore not directed to an abstract idea and, even if considered to involve one, provides significantly more than any judicial exception by reciting an inventive concept rooted in battery technology.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees applicant’s argument. Significantly more can be demonstrated by additional elements that are not well-understood and conventional that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. However, the claims do not recite them. The limitations of “wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module”; “store, in the one or more programmable memories, the one or more values of the one or more parameters”; “receive, based on indicating the repurposing level, an indication to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module”: and “perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module” are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they only add insignificant extra-solution activities to the judicial exception. Regarding the alleged significant improvement of the operation of the battery module as a whole by enabling autonomous, hardware-level determination of health, execution of repurposing control actions, and lifecycle readiness is routine in monitoring and repurposing battery modules, and relates to improvement to the abstract idea itself. Therefore, the claims 1, 8, and 15 do not contain additional elements that are not well-understood and conventional that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Hence, the Examiner submits that the rejections of Claims 1-20 are proper.
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/12/2025 regarding claims rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 in claim 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claims 1 and 8 have been amended, and the amended claims limitation necessitate a new ground of rejection. Thus, a newly discovered prior art, “Beyer US 20220037892”, will be used in combination with prior arts cited in the previous office action to reject the amended claims limitations.
Claim 15 also has been amended but the amended claim limitations are rejected using prior arts cited in the previous office action.
The applicant argues on pages 15-18 of the remark filed on 11/12/2025 that “WANG does not disclose one or more features recited in amended claim 8. For example, WANG does not disclose at least "obtaining one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of one or more battery cells included in the battery module, wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module," as recited in claim 8, as amended. … The reference does not disclose or suggest that such local controller is configured to obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each battery cell within a module, much less that the parameters indicate that individual cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the module. …”. The applicant continue to argue on pages 17-18 that “Applicant respectfully submits that WANG and ZHANG do not disclose each and every feature recited in amended claim 1. For example, WANG and ZHANG do not disclose at least a module controller configured to "obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells, … as recited in claim 1, as amended.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees applicant’s argument. Wang teaches that
each BBU 104 may include an assembly of battery cells, and local controller 106 and memory 108 monitor and maintain records of each BBU's output capacity, impedance, voltage, current, temperature, etc., (Wang, Col. 3, Lines 4-11). The local controller monitors current, energy stored by or discharged from battery cells, (Wang, Col. 3, Lines 15-17). The local controller monitor current, energy stored by or discharged from each of the battery cell, and maintain records of each BBU's output capacity, impedance, voltage, current, temperature. Thus, the local controller would be able to obtain parameter values from each of the battery cell, as the controller. Wang further teaches that each local controller 506b, 506c, 506d can monitor BBU performance of its associated set of battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d, (Wang, Col. 6, Lines 61-62), and the
local controller can detect the remaining capacity of the battery cells 510a of the BBU 504a, (Wang, Col. 6, Lines 15-19). Each local controller 506b, 506c, 506d monitor performance of its associated set of battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d, and the local controller can detect the remaining capacity of a particular battery cell, and thus, Each local controller would be able to obtain values of parameters particular to each of the battery cell such as a battery cell 510b, a battery cell 510c, a battery cell 510d. Therefore, the combination of Wang and Zhang teaches obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells.
The applicant further argue on pages 17-18 of the remark filed that “WANG neither describes nor implies any controller or memory that … distinguishes between cells within a module, or performs a determination that individual cells are unsuitable for continued use by the module. …”. The applicant continue to argue that “WANG and ZHANG do not disclose at least a module controller configured to … herein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module" as recited in claim 1, as amended.
The Examiner agrees with applicant’s argument. However, a newly discovered prior art, “Beyer US 20220037892”, is used in combination with prior arts cited in the previous office action to reject this amended claim limitations, as shown in below rejections.
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 1-20 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 battery module, comprising:
one or more battery cells; and
a module controller that includes one or more programmable memories, configured to:
obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells, wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module;
store, in the one or more programmable memories, the one or more values of the one or more parameters associated with the one or more battery cells; and
indicate, to a diagnostic device and based on the one or more values, a repurposing level of the battery module,
receive, based on indicating the repurposing level, an indication to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module: and
perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module.”
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 (apparatus for claim 1).
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 mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions).
In claim 1, the step identified in bold type is a mental process, therefore, it is 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:
one or more battery cells; and a module controller that includes one or more programmable memories, configured to: obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells, wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module; store, in the one or more programmable memories, the one or more values of the one or more parameters; receive, based on indicating the repurposing level, an indication to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module: and perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module.
The additional element “obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells” represents necessary data gathering and does not integrate the limitation into a practical application. The additional elements “wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module”; “store, in the one or more programmable memories, the one or more values of the one or more parameters”; “receive, based on indicating the repurposing level, an indication to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module”: and “perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module” 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, generic programmable memories or memories are generally recited and therefore, not qualified as a particular machine.
The additional elements “a module controller”; “a diagnostic device”; and “the battery module” are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are 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, obtain one or more values of one or more parameters particular to each of the one or more battery cells 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, store, the one or more values of the one or more parameters is disclosed by “Wang US 11360531 B1”, FIG. 6, step 612; Col. 3, Lines 6-18; Col. 3, Lines 56-60; Col. 6, Lines 50-51; Col. 7, Lines 4-24; and “Burchardt US 20220149451”, [0003], [0046], [0047].
The claim, therefore, is not patent eligible.
Independent claims 8 and 15 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 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 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 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 1-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 11360531 B1, hereinafter Wang) in view of Zhang (US 20230070151, hereinafter Zhang), and further in view of Beyer et al. (US 20220037892, hereinafter Beyer).
As to claims 1 and 8, Wang teaches one or more battery cells (FIG. 3, battery cell 310a and 310b); and
a module controller that includes one or more programmable memories FIG. 3, BBU 304, module controllers 306a and 306b, memories 308a and 308b; Col. 11, Lines 30-45), configured to:
obtain one or more values of one or more parameters of the one or more battery cells (Col. 3, Lines 4-11 discloses each BBU 104 may include an assembly of battery cells, and local controller 106 and memory 108 monitor and maintain records of each BBU's output capacity, impedance, voltage, current, temperature, etc.,; Col. 6, Lines 61-62 discloses each local controller 506b, 506c, 506d can monitor BBU performance of its associated set of battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d (i.e., each local controller 506b, 506c, 506d monitor performance of its associated set of battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d, and thus, would record or obtain values of parameters particular to each of the battery cell such as a battery cell 510b, a battery cell 510c, a battery cell 510d - emphasis added by Examiner)),
store, in the one or more programmable memories, the one or more values of the one or more parameters (Col. 3, Lines 6-11 discloses local controller 106 and memory 108 maintain records (i.e., stored - emphasis added by Examiner) of each BBU's output capacity, impedance, voltage, current, temperature, etc.; Col. 11, Lines 30-40); and
indicate, to a diagnostic device (FIG. 1, controller 170, Col. 3, Lines 9-12),
and based on the one or more values (Col. 3, Lines 67 to Col. 4, Lines 1-3 disclose the second performing BBU 212 decreases in maximum output capacity over time, resulting in a much reduced differential 218 over the threshold minimum output 208 at end-of-life), a repurposing of the battery module (Col. 4, Lines 5-9 discloses the standard curve and longevity of performance of the BBU indicate that the second BBU is also a candidate for repurposing (i.e., an indication of the value of the parameter - emphasis added by Examiner));
receive an indication to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module (Col. 4, Lines 10-13 discloses “In the third case, the low-performing third BBU 214 decreases in maximum output capacity and fails to match the threshold minimum output 208 (i.e., third BBU 214 decreases in maximum output capacity and fails to match the threshold minimum output is an indication that is received to perform an action associated with a repurposing of the battery module - emphasis added by Examiner)) prior to the end of the projected operational lifetime.”): and
perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module (Col. 4, Lines 54-86 discloses “In a second configuration 300b, a modified energy storage unit 302b can be assembled using a modified BBU 304b containing redeployed battery cells 310b
perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module (i.e., perform the action associated with repurposing the battery module - emphasis added by Examiner) prior to the end of the projected operational lifetime.”) originating from battery cells 310a of the original BBU 304a.”).
Wang does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module.
Beyer teaches wherein the one or more parameters indicate that each of the one or more battery cells are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module ([0026] and [0033] disclose FIG. 2 shows that a plurality of individual battery cells 26
initially combined into cell groups 28, and the cell groups are assembled into a battery module 30. The temperature data 56 is indicative of a runaway event which is an uncontrolled increase in temperature in a battery system, and affecting individual cell groups 28. During a thermal runaway event, the generation of heat within a battery system or a battery cell exceeds the dissipation of heat, thus leading to a further increase in temperature (i.e., the temperature that is indicative of a thermal run away indicates that each of the one or more battery cells in the individual cell group are no longer suitable for continued use by the battery module due to the increase in temperature and heat - 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 Beyer into Wang for the purpose of providing diagnostics and performance prognostics of a multi-cell electrical energy storage system in order to diagnose a short circuit within the cell and or exposure of the cell to extreme external temperatures. This combination would improve in preventing improper cell use, physical abuse, and manufacturing defects of the energy storage system.
Wang does not explicitly teach indicate a repurposing level of the battery module.
Zhang teaches by indicate a repurposing level of the battery module by providing an indication of the one or more values of the one or more parameters ([0019] and [0020] disclose a residual available capacity of a second-life battery decreases with increases in charge and discharge cycle numbers during use, and the capacity retention rate of the second-life battery declines with the charge and discharge cycle numbers in accordance with a power function. The capacity retention rate of the second-life battery can be calculated (i.e., the capacity retention rate indicate a repurposing level of the battery module, and residual available capacity provides indication of the value of a parameter - 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 Zhang into Wang in view of Beyer for the purpose of establishing a residual life decay model of the second-life battery based on a residual available capacity, a residual charge and discharge cycle number, and a capacity retention rate of the second-life battery so that battery costs can be effectively reduced, and the service life of the battery can be extended. This combination would improve in effectively maximizing the remaining value of second-life batteries.
As to claim 2, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Wang teaches wherein the battery module is included in a battery pack that includes a plurality of battery modules (FIG. 5 shows a battery pack 502b includes battery modules 504b, 504c, 504d), and
wherein the module controller is further configured to: provide, to a battery pack
controller of the battery pack, an indication of the one or more values of the one or more parameters (Col. 3, Lines 6-11; Col. 4, Lines 33-40 discloses the system controller 370 can access the local controller 306a of the BBU 304a and/or local memory 308a, and detects perform information of the BBU such as the remaining capacity of the battery cells 310a of the BBU).
As to claim 3, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more parameters include a state of health parameter of the battery module (Col. 7, Lines 53-55 discloses the power output capacity can be tracked over time, and an associated controller accessed to determine the health of the battery).
As to claim 4, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Wang does not explicitly teach teaches wherein the repurposing level indicates a condition of the battery module.
Zhang teaches wherein the repurposing level indicates a condition of the battery module ([0019] and [0020] disclose a residual available capacity of a second-life battery decreases with increases in charge and discharge cycle numbers during use, and the capacity retention rate of the second-life battery declines with the charge and discharge cycle numbers in accordance with a power function. The capacity retention rate of the second-life battery can be calculated (i.e., the capacity retention rate indicate a repurposing level of the battery module, and residual available capacity provides indication of the value of a parameter - emphasis added by Examiner); [0079] discloses “A cell capacity of the second-life battery is defined as Arate (mAh).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Zhang into Wang in view of Beyer for the purpose of establishing a residual life decay model of the second-life battery based on a residual available capacity, a residual charge and discharge cycle number, and a capacity retention rate of the second-life battery so that battery costs can be effectively reduced, and the service life of the battery can be extended. This combination would improve in effectively maximizing the remaining value of second-life batteries.
As to claim 5, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Wang teaches wherein the battery module is included in a battery pack that includes a plurality of battery modules (FIG. 5 shows a battery pack 502b includes battery modules 504b, 504c, 504d), and
wherein the module controller, to obtain the one or more values of the one or more parameters (FIG. 3, modules 310a and 310b), is configured to:
obtain one or more measurement values of the one or more battery cells (Col. 3, Lines 6-11; Col. 4, Lines 33-40 discloses the system controller 370 can access the local controller 306a of the BBU 304a and/or local memory 308a, and detects perform information of the BBU such as the remaining capacity of the battery cells 310a of the BBU);
provide, to a battery pack controller of the battery pack, an indication of the one or more measurement values (FIG. 3; Col. 4, Lines 33-40); and
obtain, from the battery pack controller, an indication of the one or more values of the one or more parameters based on providing the indication of the one or more measurement values (Col. 3, Lines 6-11; Col. 3, Lines 6-11; Col. 4, Lines 33-40 discloses the system controller 370 can access the local controller 306a of the BBU 304a and/or local memory 308a, and detects perform information of the BBU such as the remaining capacity of the battery cells 310a of the BBU).
As to claim 6, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 5.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more measurement values are associated with at least one of:
a cell voltage (Col. 3, Lines 4-13), or
a temperature of the battery module (Col. 3, Lines 4-13), or
wherein the one or more parameters include a state of health parameter of the battery module (Col. 7, Lines 53-55),
a change in a cell internal resistance; an energy throughput of the battery module, and a quantity of charge-discharge cycles of the battery module.
As to claim 7, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more parameters include at least one of:
a state of health (Col. 7, Lines 53-55),
a cell voltage (Col. 3, Lines 4-13),
a temperature (Col. 3, Lines 4-13),
an energy throughput, a quantity of charge-discharge cycles, a change in a cell internal resistance, a cell chemistry type, one or more battery misuse flags, or
a battery module configuration type.
As to claim 9, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 8.
Wang teaches measuring one or more properties of the one or more battery cells to obtain the one or more values of the one or more parameters (Col. 3, Lines 6-11 discloses local controller 106 and memory 108 maintain records of each BBU's output capacity, impedance, voltage, current, temperature, etc., (i.e., parameters values such as output capacity, voltage, current are obtained, stored and maintained as records of these parameter values - emphasis added by Examiner); Col. 4, Lines 36-38).
As to claim 10, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 8.
Wang teaches obtaining, from the controller of the battery pack, information associated with at least one of the one or more parameters (Col. 4, Lines 33-40 discloses the system controller 370 can access the local controller 306a of the BBU 304a and/or local memory 308a, and detects perform information of the BBU such as the remaining capacity of the battery cells 310a of the BBU).
As to claim 11, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 8.
Wang teaches providing, to a diagnostic device (FIG. 1, controller 170, Col. 3, Lines 9-12), an indication of the one or more values of the one or more parameters to indicate a repurposing of the battery module (Col. 4, Lines 7-9 discloses the amounts of the output capacity differentials 216, 218 at end-of-life can be used (i.e., an indication of the value of the parameter - emphasis added by Examiner) when re-rating each BBU for redeployment).
Wang does not explicitly teach indicate a repurposing level of the battery module.
Zhang teaches providing an indication of the one or more values of the one or more parameters to indicate a repurposing level of the battery module ([0019] and [0020] disclose a residual available capacity of a second-life battery decreases with increases in charge and discharge cycle numbers during use, and the capacity retention rate of the second-life battery declines with the charge and discharge cycle numbers in accordance with a power function. The capacity retention rate of the second-life battery can be calculated (i.e., the capacity retention rate indicate a repurposing level of the battery module, and residual available capacity provides indication of the value of a parameter - 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 Zhang into Wang in view of Beyer for the purpose of establishing a residual life decay model of the second-life battery based on a residual available capacity, a residual charge and discharge cycle number, and a capacity retention rate of the second-life battery so that battery costs can be effectively reduced, and the service life of the battery can be extended. This combination would improve in effectively maximizing the remaining value of second-life batteries.
As to claim 12, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 8.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more parameters include a repurposing that indicates a condition of the battery module based on the one or more values of the one or more parameters (Col. 3, Lines 4-7 disclose each BBU 104 includes an assembly of battery cells 110; Col. 7, Lines 39-44 discloses if the system detects that the capacity is within a pre-defined range, which may be a range indicative of normal operation of the battery, (Act 606), the battery can be redeployed. If the system detects that the capacity is insufficient, it can generate an instruction to discard the battery. (Act 608)).
Wang does not explicitly teach a repurposing level that indicates a condition of the battery module.
Zhang teaches a repurposing level that indicates a condition of the battery module based on the one or more values of the one or more parameters ([0019], [0020], and [0079] disclose a residual available cell capacity of a second-life battery decreases with increases in charge and discharge cycle numbers during use, and the cell capacity retention rate of the second-life battery declines with the charge and discharge cycle numbers in accordance with a power function. The capacity retention rate of the second-life battery can be calculated (i.e., the capacity retention rate indicate a repurposing level of the battery module, and residual available cell capacity provides indication of the value of a parameter - 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 Zhang into Wang in view of Beyer for the purpose of establishing a residual life decay model of the second-life battery based on a residual available capacity, a residual charge and discharge cycle number, and a capacity retention rate of the second-life battery so that battery costs can be effectively reduced, and the service life of the battery can be extended. This combination would improve in effectively maximizing the remaining value of second-life batteries.
As to claim 14, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 8.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more measurement parameters include at least one of:
a state of health of the battery module (Col. 7, Lines 53-55),
a cell voltage (Col. 3, Lines 4-13), or
a temperature (Col. 3, Lines 4-13).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, Zhang, and Beyer, in view of Sastinsky (US 20200055421, hereinafter Sastinsky).
As to claim 13, the combination of Wang, Zhang, and Beyer teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 8.
Wang does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more module configuration parameters include at least one of: a chemistry type of the one or more battery cells, a cell connection type, or a temperature sensor placement.
Sastinsky teaches wherein the one or more module configuration parameters include at least one of: a chemistry type of the one or more battery cells ([0013] discloses “For each power cell, these initial battery data can comprise information corresponding to the chemistry parameters of the power cell, the entity name of the producer, the type of battery cell chemistry”; [0027] discloses power cell comprises any combination of battery cells, battery packs, and battery modules), a cell connection type, or a temperature sensor placement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Sastinsky into Wang in view of Zhang and Beyer for the purpose of monitoring inefficiencies in each of primary life battery, primary battery life usage, end-of-life prediction, and the selection of second-life batteries for battery packs as well as the unreliability of battery information for used batteries and battery products so that a battery performance can be enhanced, and a recommendation to repurpose or replace a power cell or power cell package of the battery packs can be provided. This combination would improve in maximizing approximate battery end of life (ABEL) for batteries, and reuse of battery packs or energy storage systems.
Claims 15-16, and 18-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, in view of Beaston (US 20160141894, hereinafter Beaston).
As to claim 15, Wang teaches a plurality of battery modules associated with respective module controllers and respective memories (FIG. 3, BBU 304a, BBU 304b, module controllers 306a and 306b, memories 308a and 308b; Col. 11, Lines 30-45), each battery module including a plurality of battery cells (FIG. 3, battery cell 310a and 310b); and
a battery pack controller (FIG. 3, local controller 306, the system controller 370), configured to:
obtain, from a module controller of the respective module controllers (module controllers 306a and 306b), an indication of one or more module parameters associated with a battery module, of the plurality of battery modules, that is associated with the module controller (Col. 3, Lines 4-11 discloses each BBU 104 include an assembly of battery cells, and local controller 106 and memory 108 monitor and maintain records of each BBU's output capacity, impedance, voltage, current, temperature, etc.,; Col. 6, Lines 61-62 discloses each local controller 506b, 506c, 506d can monitor BBU performance of its associated set of battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d (i.e., each local controller 506b, 506c, 506d monitor performance of its associated set of battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d, and thus, would record or obtain values of parameters particular to each of the battery cell such as battery cells 510b, 510c, 510d - emphasis added by Examiner)),
determine, based on the one or more module parameters, one or more values of one or more parameters associated with the battery module (Col. 3, Lines 48-51 discloses “FIG. 2 is a graph showing output capacity (i.e., parameter associated with the battery module - emphasis added by Examiner) in the form of an energy storage unit's maximum discharge energy 204 as a function of the storage unit's operational time 202.”).
Wang does not explicitly teach determine, based on the one or more values, whether a software package being executed by the battery pack controller for controlling operations of the battery pack is compatible with the one or more parameters, and perform an action based on whether the software package is compatible with the one or more parameters.
Beaston teaches determine, based on the one or more values, whether a software package being executed by the battery pack controller for controlling operations of the battery pack is compatible with the one or more parameters ([0173] discloses If battery pack controller 414 contains an incompatible or outdated software version, embedded CPU 802 provides the battery pack controller with a correct or updated application program (i.e., determine whether a software package is compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters - emphasis added by Examiner), and the battery pack controller reboots in order to start executing the new software (i.e., perform an action based on determining whether the software package is compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters - emphasis added by Examiner); [0174] discloses CPU 802 determines if the battery pack controller is operating with the correct hardware and software with the correct configuration data, and once embedded CPU 802 verifies that battery pack controller 414 is operating with the correct configuration data, battery pack controller 414 executes its application software (i.e., determine, based on the configuration data or one or more values, whether a software package being executed by the battery pack controller for controlling operations of the battery pack - emphasis added by Examiner); until it shuts down), and
perform an action based on whether the software package is compatible with the one or more parameters ([0173] and [0174] disclose if battery pack controller 414 contains an incompatible or outdated Software version, embedded CPU 802 provides the battery pack controller with a correct or updated application program. CPU 802 determines if the battery pack controller is operating with the correct hardware and software with the correct configuration data, and once embedded CPU 802 verifies that battery pack controller 414 is operating with the correct configuration data, battery pack controller 414 executes its application software until it shuts down)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Beaston into Wang for the purpose of monitoring, balancing, and controlling parameters of battery cells of battery pack so that warnings and/or alarms, as well as taking other appropriate actions can be generated in order to prevent over-charging or over-discharging the battery cells of battery pack. This combination would improve in determining whether it is safe to let the system continue operating or to initiate a system shutdown and restart.
As to claim 16, the combination of Wang and Beaston teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 15.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more module parameters include one or more module configuration parameters associated with the battery module (Col. 3, Lines 40-14 discloses “Each BBU 104 may include an assembly of battery cells 110 and one or more local controllers or processors, e.g. local controller 106 and memory 108, which can be used to monitor aspects of the function of each BBU during use (i.e., the function of each BBU during use is module configuration parameters associated with the battery module- emphasis added by Examiner). Local controllers 106 and memory 108 can, for example, maintain records of each BBU's usage time, frequency of charge and discharge, rate of charge and discharge, output capacity, impedance, voltage, current temperature, etc., in order to measure the change in BBU capacity over the service lifetime of the BBU, and to predict the end of that service life.”).
As to claim 18, the combination of Wang, and Beaston teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 16.
Wang does not explicitly teach wherein the action includes at least one of: causing an operation of the battery pack to stop based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters, switching the software package to a different software package based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters, or providing, to another device or a display device of the battery pack, an indication, for display, that the software package is not compatible based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters.
Beaston teaches wherein the action includes at least one of: causing an operation of the battery pack to stop based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters, switching the software package to a different software package based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters ([0173] discloses If battery pack controller 414 contains an incompatible or outdated software version embedded CPU 802 provides the battery pack controller with a correct or updated application program (i.e., switching the software package to a correct application program or different software package based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters - emphasis added by Examiner), and the battery pack controller reboots in order to start executing the new software (i.e., the action includes causing an operation of the battery pack to stop, reboot, and start executing the new software, which is different software package, based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters - emphasis added by Examiner)), or
providing, to another device or a display device of the battery pack, an indication, for display, that the software package is not compatible based on determining that the software package is not compatible with the one or more module configuration parameters.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Beaston into Wang for the purpose of monitoring, balancing, and controlling parameters of battery cells of battery pack so that warnings and/or alarms, as well as taking other appropriate actions can be generated in order to prevent over-charging or over-discharging the battery cells of battery pack. This combination would improve in determining whether it is safe to let the system continue operating or to initiate a system shutdown and restart.
As to claim 19, the combination of Wang and Beaston teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 15.
Wang teaches identifying repurposing categories associated with respective battery modules, of the plurality of battery modules, based on values, of the one or more parameters, associated with the respective battery modules (Col. 3, Lines 60-62, and Col. 4, Lines 1-9 disclose as shown in FIG. 2, the first BBU 210 retains a high differential 216 above the threshold minimum output 208 at the end of its operational lifetime, thus, the first BBU 210 is a candidate for repurposing. The second BBU 212 has less remaining capacity than the first BBU 210, however, the standard curve and longevity of performance of the BBU indicate that the second BBU is also a candidate for repurposing. The amounts of the output capacity differentials 216, 218 at end-of-life can be used when re-rating each BBU for redeployment (i.e., the amounts of the output capacity differentials 216 and 218 are identified as repurposing categories associated with respective battery modules - emphasis added by Examiner); and
providing, to the respective module controllers, an indication of the repurposing categories (Col. 3, Lines 19-23 discloses a separate controller 170 can be used to monitor performance of the energy storage unit 102 either independently or in conjunction with local processing and memory described above (i.e., the controller 170 monitors performance of the battery, thus, an indication of the repurposing categories would have been provided - emphasis added by Examiner)).
As to claim 20, the combination of Wang and Beaston teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 15.
Wang teaches wherein the one or more parameters include a state of health parameter of the battery module (Col. 7, Lines 53-55 discloses the power output capacity can be tracked over time, and an associated controller accessed to determine the health of the battery).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Beaston, in view of Sastinsky (US 20200055421, hereinafter Sastinsky).
As to claim 17, the combination of Wang and Beaston teaches the claimed limitations as discussed in claim 16.
The combination of Wang and Beaston does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more module configuration parameters include a cell chemistry type of battery cells included in the battery module.
Sastinsky teaches wherein the one or more module configuration parameters include a cell chemistry type of battery cells included in the battery module ([0002]; [0013] discloses “For each power cell, these initial battery data can comprise information corresponding to the chemistry parameters of the power cell, the entity name of the producer, the type of battery cell chemistry”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Sastinsky into Wang in view of Beaston for the purpose of monitoring inefficiencies in each of primary life battery, primary battery life usage, end-of-life prediction, and the selection of second-life batteries for battery packs as well as the unreliability of battery information for used batteries and battery products so that a battery performance can be enhanced, and a recommendation to repurpose or replace a power cell or power cell package of the battery packs can be provided. This combination would improve in maximizing approximate battery end of life (ABEL) for batteries, and reuse of battery packs or energy storage systems.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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- 8:30-12:00, 1:00-5:30 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 2857
Prosecution Insights