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 .
Status of the Claims
In the communication filed on 05/06/2025 claims 1-12 are pending. Claims 1, 6, and 11-12 are amended to correct antecedent basis issues. Claims 1 and 6 are independent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues in pages 9-13 of the Remarks dated 05/06/2026 that Kim’s controller is configured to perform only the operations as cited by the applicant and thus Kim would not be appropriate. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's argument, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In response to applicant's argument that Kim’s controller is associated to the temperature to which it is to be controlled, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Further, it would have been obvious to reverse the functions of the power storage and the batteries, with the power storage serving as the traction battery and the batteries serving as the charging apparatus, because it is well known that a battery may operate as either a power source or a load. Selecting an appropriate controller to implement the resulting functionality would have been an obvious matter of design choice.
The remaining arguments are moot as the applicant’s arguments for the remaining claims were based on dependency of the independent claims.
The claim objections are withdrawn due to the amendments.
The drawing objection remains. The amendments made for Fig. 2 would be acceptable however these are blurred and thus the drawing objection remain. Resubmit the drawings however account for the grayscale so that the amendments are clear.
This Office Action is made Final.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Fig. 2 the applicant illustrates a plot without titles and labeling for the y-axis and waveforms. These alone do not facilitate understanding of the drawings. To overcome this objection, the applicant should add more details in the drawings (e.g., clear symbols, text in the boxes, arrows with text coming off, or a legend in the drawings).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (USPGPN 20180093583; identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) dated 08/22/2024 and cited in the Extended European Search Report dated 05/27/2024).
With respect to independent claims 1 and 6, Kim teaches, considering MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Reversal of Parts below, a charging method for a traction battery (Figs. 2-3; power storage 240), performed by a charging apparatus, wherein the charging apparatus comprises N energy storage units connected in parallel, each energy storage unit comprises an energy storage battery and a first DC/DC converter connected to the energy storage battery (Figs. 2-3; batteries 220/320, 221/321, 222/322, and 223/323 each with a corresponding converter 230/330, 231/331/, 232/332, and 233/333 connected to it. Each battery and converter pair corresponds to an energy storage unit with each energy storage unit connected in parallel and all in total work as a charging apparatus, see annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
416
384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches each charging period of the charging apparatus comprises a charge stage in which the traction battery is charged and a discharge stage in which the traction battery discharges to the N energy storage units, N being a positive integer greater than 1 (Fig. 1, step 150; ¶[57]; a charging process in which the power storage 240 is charged and a discharging process in which the power storage 240 discharges to the energy storage units (i.e., 4 energy storage units thus N > 1)).
Kim teaches a control module (Figs. 2-3; battery management apparatus 210/310).
Kim teaches wherein the charging method comprises obtaining a first parameter of each energy storage unit in the discharge stage (Fig. 1, step 130; ¶[52]; the SOC (i.e., first parameter) of each battery is obtained to be used in the discharge process in step 150).
Kim teaches determining, based on the first parameter, a first current output by the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit, wherein the first current output by the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit is inversely proportional to the first parameter of the energy storage unit (Fig. 1, steps 140-150; ¶[53, 57]; in step 140 a P--target of each battery is calculated based on the SOC parameter of each battery and during the power storage discharge process in step 150, a current is outputted by the corresponding DC/DC converter towards it’s respective battery. In this case, it is understood by one of ordinary skill that the relationship of the respective battery SOC to the received current is inversely proportional since a lower SOC battery can receive a higher current).
Kim teaches sending a first control signal to the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit, wherein the first control signal is used to control the first DC/DC converter to output the first current, so as to cause the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit to receive, at the first current, electrical energy released by the traction battery (Figs. 2-3; the battery management apparatus 210/310 controls the respective DC/DC converter (i.e., by a first control signal) so that the current received by DC/DC converter from the power storage is outputted by the DC/DC converter towards the respective battery).
While Kim teaches that batteries 220/320, 221/321, 222/322, and 223/323 correspond to the traction battery of the electric vehicle and that power storage 240/340 corresponds to an auxiliary battery, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have applied the teachings of Kim in reverse utilizing the batteries 220/320, 221/321, 222/322, and 223/323 as part of a charging apparatus and power storage 240/340 corresponding to the traction battery, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art.
MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Reversal of Parts
In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955) (Prior art disclosed a clock fixed to the stationary steering wheel column of an automobile while the gear for winding the clock moves with steering wheel; mere reversal of such movement, so the clock moves with wheel, was held to be an obvious modification.).
With respect to dependent claims 2 and 7, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 6, respectively. Further, Kim teaches obtaining the first parameter of each energy storage unit in the charge stage (Fig. 1, step 130; ¶[52]; the SOC (i.e., first parameter) of each battery is obtained to be used in the charge process in step 150).
Kim teaches determining, based on the first parameter, a second current output by the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit, wherein the second current output by the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit is proportional to the first parameter of the energy storage unit (Fig. 1, steps 140-150; ¶[53, 57]; in step 140 a P--target of each battery is calculated based on the SOC parameter of each battery and during the power storage charge process in step 150, a current is outputted by the corresponding DC/DC converter towards the power storage. In this case, it is understood by one of ordinary skill that the relationship of the respective battery SOC to the current being discharged towards the power storage is proportional since a higher SOC battery will output a higher current).
Kim teaches sending a second control signal to the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit, wherein the second control signal is used to control the first DC/DC converter to output the second current, so as to cause the first DC/DC converter in each energy storage unit to charge the traction battery at the second current (Figs. 2-3; the battery management apparatus 210/310 controls the respective DC/DC converters (i.e., by a second control signal) so that the current received by DC/DC converter from the respective battery is outputted by that DC/DC converter towards the power storage).
With respect to dependent claims 3 and 8, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 6, respectively. Further, Kim teaches wherein the first parameter of each energy storage unit comprises at least one of the following parameters: current state of charge (SOC) of the energy storage battery in each energy storage unit (Fig. 1, step 130; ¶[52]; the SOC (i.e., first parameter) of each battery is obtained).
With respect to dependent claim 11, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Kim teaches an energy management system (EMS), comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to perform the charging method (Fig. 6; ¶[131-133]; a battery management apparatus 600 comprising a processing apparatus configured to perform the charging method).
With respect to dependent claim 12, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 6. Further, Kim teaches, considering MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Reversal of Parts below, a charging system comprising the traction battery (Figs. 2-3; power storage 240).
Kim teaches the charging apparatus (See annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
416
384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches wherein the charging apparatus is configured to charge the traction battery, and each charging period comprises the charge stage in which the traction battery is charged and the discharge stage in which the traction battery discharges (Fig. 1, step 150; ¶[57]; a charging process in which the power storage 240 is charged and a discharging process in which the power storage 240 discharges to the energy storage units).
While Kim teaches that batteries 220/320, 221/321, 222/322, and 223/323 correspond to the traction battery of the electric vehicle and that power storage 240/340 corresponds to an auxiliary battery, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have applied the teachings of Kim in reverse utilizing the batteries 220/320, 221/321, 222/322, and 223/323 as part of a charging apparatus and power storage 240/340 corresponding to the traction battery, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art.
MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Reversal of Parts
In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955) (Prior art disclosed a clock fixed to the stationary steering wheel column of an automobile while the gear for winding the clock moves with steering wheel; mere reversal of such movement, so the clock moves with wheel, was held to be an obvious modification.).
Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and further in view of Barker et al. (USPGPN 20160344286).
With respect to dependent claims 4 and 9, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 6, respectively. However, Kim fails to explicitly teach the limitations of claims 4 and 9.
Barker teaches wherein the charging apparatus further comprises a separating unit, and the separating unit comprises M second DC/DC converters and a switch module connected between the M second DC/DC converters, M being a positive integer greater than or equal to 2 (Fig. 3; a converter 300 comprises clusters 302 with switches 304 connected between the clusters 302. The clusters 302 are greater than or equal to 2).
Barker teaches controlling the switch module to make the M second DC/DC converters connected in series, so that voltage output by the separating unit to the traction battery is M times voltage output by the N energy storage units (Fig. 5A; the switches are arranged in series to that the voltage outputted is M times greater).
Barker teaches controlling the switch module to make the M second DC/DC converters connected in parallel, so that current output by the separating unit to the traction battery is M times current output by the N energy storage units (Fig. 5B; the switches are arranged in parallel so that the current outputted is M times greater).
Kim discloses the claimed invention except for the separating unit is connected between the N energy storage units and the traction battery. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Barker’s converter and switching circuit into Kim’s charging apparatus between the power storage and the batteries in order to have an ability to convert the voltage and current during the charge and discharge process. The advantage to adapting such a converter and switching circuit being that design and manufacturing requirements are improved by utilizing a readily scalable design in which the clusters of the converter may be selected given the functional environment of the circuit (see ¶[18] of Barker).
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and further in view of Gohla-Neudecker et al. (USPGPN 20200001730; identified by the applicant in the IDS dated 06/16/2025).
With respect to dependent claims 5 and 10, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 6, respectively. However, Kim fails to explicitly teach the limitations of claims 5 and 10.
Gohla-Neudecker teaches wherein the charging apparatus further comprises an AC/DC converter, the AC/DC converter is connected between the traction battery and an alternating current power supply, so as to cause the alternating current power supply to charge the traction battery via the AC/DC converter (Fig. 3; an AC-DC converter 17 connected between the traction battery 32 and the supply grid 10, so as to cause the supply grid 10 to charge the traction battery 32 via the AC-DC converter 17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Gohla-Neudecker’s AC-DC converter and power grid to traction battery charging method into Kim’s charging system. The advantage to this being the network stability in an electrical supply network is ensured even during charging or discharging of electrically operable motor vehicle (see ¶[12] of Gohla-Neudecker).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The additional prior art identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) were considered by the examiner, however, for examination purposes were not relied upon for citation purposes.
Neligan et al. (USPGPN 20230045735) describes a high-power charging station for electric vehicles and other mobile devices. The station uses DC/DC power conversion to charge a vehicle battery through a cable.
Shen et al. (USPGPN 20210336439) describes a distributed power supply system made up of multiple energy modules, multiple power conversion modules.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Frank A Silva whose telephone number is (703)756-1698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 09:30 am -06:30 pm ET.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/FRANK ALEXIS SILVA/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights