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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/10/2026, with respect to the objection of Claim 14 have been fully considered. The objection of Claim 14 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/10/2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-17 under 35 U.S.C 101 have been fully considered. The rejection of Claims 1-17 under 35 U.S.C 101 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/10/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-17 under 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C 103.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4-9, and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan et al. (US 20190359066 A1) in view of Machida et al. (US 20190229382 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Duan teaches a method for charging a traction battery, comprising:
obtaining an actual charging current of the traction battery during a charging process of the traction battery (¶[20] “At step 210, the BECM monitors the charging current and charging voltage supplied to the battery”) performed by the charging device based on the battery charging specification; and
determining, based on a degree of the actual charging current exceeding a requested charging current (¶[20] “At step 220, the BECM checks whether the charging current of the battery is out of the allowed range and/or a malfunction of the HV system power electronics has exposed the battery to a higher charge voltage and/or a higher charge current”), whether to control the traction battery to be discharged (Y or N after step 220, discharge in step 280; “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”); and
controlling, or refraining from controlling the traction battery to be discharged based on the determination (step 280 in Fig. 3, ¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Duan does not explicitly teach transmitting, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
Machida teaches transmitting, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current (¶[46] “Examples of the main control to be executed by ECU 100 include “external charging” for charging on-vehicle battery 150 with the electric power supplied from charging station 2. The external charging is carried out by mutual exchange of signals, instructions, and information between ECU 100 of vehicle 1 and controller 200 of charging station 2 via charging cable 3” see also ¶[53] “By offsetting allowable current Ilim in the discharging direction by offset current Ioff, a target current Itag is set (Ilim+Ioff=Itag)”);
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan to incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide transmitting, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
in order to provide a margin to prevent the current from exceeding the allowable limit and therefore prevent the chances of lithium plating occurring, as suggested by Machida (¶[53]).
Regarding Claim 4, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1.
Duan as modified does not teach in response to determining to control the traction battery to be discharged, sending charging request information to the charging device, the charging request information being used to request that a charging current be 0;
and in response to the actual charging current of the traction battery being less than or equal to a threshold, controlling the traction battery to be discharged.
Machida teaches in response to determining to control the traction battery to be discharged (when target current Itag reaches first threshold value TH1, see Fig. 4), sending charging request information to the charging device (¶[46] “Examples of the main control to be executed by ECU 100 include “external charging” for charging on-vehicle battery 150 with the electric power supplied from charging station 2. The external charging is carried out by mutual exchange of signals, instructions, and information between ECU 100 of vehicle 1 and controller 200 of charging station 2 via charging cable 3”), the charging request information being used to request that a charging current be 0 (¶[71]) “Specifically, allowable charging power Iwin is forcibly set to 0 … When charging of battery 150 is stopped (i.e., when IB=0 is set)”;
and in response to the actual charging current of the traction battery being less than or equal to a threshold, controlling the traction battery to be discharged (¶[72] “During the period from time t21 to time t22 during which allowable charging power Iwin is set to 0, charging of battery 150 is prohibited while discharging of battery 150 is permitted. Therefore, battery 150 is discharged”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan to further incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide in response to determining to control the traction battery to be discharged, sending charging request information to the charging device, the charging request information being used to request that a charging current be 0;
and in response to the actual charging current of the traction battery being less than or equal to a threshold, controlling the traction battery to be discharged;
in order to perform the discharge operation and prevent battery deterioration while connected to an external charger, and improve the convenience of the user while maintaining the health of the vehicle battery by making the process compatible with external chargers.
Regarding Claim 5, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 4.
Duan further teaches in response to a duration elapsed after the charging request information is sent being greater than or equal to a preset time interval, controlling the traction battery to stop being discharged (¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Regarding Claim 6, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 5,
Duan as modified does not teach wherein the charging request information is first charging request information;
the method further comprising:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged,
sending second charging request information to the charging device based on a charging matching table,
the second charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery.
Machida further teaches wherein the charging request information is first charging request information (see ¶[72] quoted above);
the method further comprising:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged (at t22 in Fig. 4, ¶[74] “when the magnitude of allowable current Ilim exceeds second threshold value TH2 at time t22, the restriction on allowable charging power Iwin is relaxed (specifically, canceled)”),
sending second charging request information to the charging device (see ¶[46] quoted above) based on a charging matching table (¶[82-83] “As shown in FIG. 6, map MP defines offset current Ioff for each SOC and each temperature TB of battery 150. Preferably, the lower the temperature TB is, the greater the magnitude of offset current Ioff is. By referring to this map MP, offset current Ioff can be calculated from the SOC and temperature TB of battery 150 . Further, ECU 100 calculates target current Itag by adding offset current Ioff to allowable current Ilim (S6)”),
the second charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery (from t22 onwards in Fig. 4).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to further incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide wherein the charging request information is first charging request information;
the method further comprising:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged,
sending second charging request information to the charging device based on a charging matching table,
the second charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery;
in order to continue charging the battery after the discharge period.
Regarding Claim 7, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1.
Duan further teaches in response to a duration for controlling the traction battery to be discharged being greater than or equal to a preset time interval, controlling the traction battery to stop being discharged (¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Regarding Claim 8, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 7.
Duan does not teach in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged,
sending charging request information to a charging device based on a charging matching table, the charging request information being used to request the charging pile to charge the traction battery.
Machida teaches in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged (at t22 in Fig. 4, ¶[74] “when the magnitude of allowable current Ilim exceeds second threshold value TH2 at time t22, the restriction on allowable charging power Iwin is relaxed (specifically, canceled)”),
sending charging request information to a charging device (see ¶[46] quoted above) based on a charging matching table (¶[82-83] “As shown in FIG. 6, map MP defines offset current Ioff for each SOC and each temperature TB of battery 150. Preferably, the lower the temperature TB is, the greater the magnitude of offset current Ioff is. By referring to this map MP, offset current Ioff can be calculated from the SOC and temperature TB of battery 150 . Further, ECU 100 calculates target current Itag by adding offset current Ioff to allowable current Ilim (S6)”),
the charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery (from t22 onwards in Fig. 4).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to further incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged,
sending charging request information to a charging device based on a charging matching table, the charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery;
in order to continue charging the battery after the discharge period.
Regarding Claim 9, Duan teaches a battery management system, comprising:
an obtaining module (BECM) configured to obtain an actual charging current of the traction battery during a charging process of the traction battery (¶[20] “At step 210, the BECM monitors the charging current and charging voltage supplied to the battery”) performed by the charging device based on the battery charging specification; and
a determining module (BECM) configured to determine, based on a degree of the actual charging current exceeding a requested charging current (¶[20] “At step 220, the BECM checks whether the charging current of the battery is out of the allowed range and/or a malfunction of the HV system power electronics has exposed the battery to a higher charge voltage and/or a higher charge current”), whether to control the traction battery to be discharged (Y or N after step 220, discharge in step 280; “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”); and
a control module (BECM) configured to control, or refrain from controlling, the traction battery to be discharged based on the determination (step 280 in Fig. 3, ¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Duan does not explicitly teach a communication module configured to transmit, to a charging device configured to charge a traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
Machida teaches a communication module (ECU, ¶[76]) configured to transmit, to a charging device configured to charge a traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current (¶[46] “Examples of the main control to be executed by ECU 100 include “external charging” for charging on-vehicle battery 150 with the electric power supplied from charging station 2. The external charging is carried out by mutual exchange of signals, instructions, and information between ECU 100 of vehicle 1 and controller 200 of charging station 2 via charging cable 3” see also ¶[53] “By offsetting allowable current Ilim in the discharging direction by offset current Ioff, a target current Itag is set (Ilim+Ioff=Itag)”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan to incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide a communication module configured to transmit, to a charging device configured to charge a traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
in order to provide a margin to prevent the current from exceeding the allowable limit and therefore prevent the chances of lithium plating occurring, as suggested by Machida (¶[53]).
Regarding Claim 12, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 9.
Duan as modified does not teach wherein the communication module is further configured to:
in response to determining to control the traction battery to be discharged, send charging request information to the charging device, the charging request information being used to request that a charging current be 0;
and the control module is further configured to:
in response to the actual charging current of the traction battery being less than or equal to a threshold, control the traction battery to be discharged.
Machida teaches wherein the communication module (ECU, ¶[76] “The steps, however, may be implemented by dedicated hardware (electric circuit) provided in ECU 100”) is further configured to:
in response to determining to control the traction battery to be discharged (when target current Itag reaches first threshold value TH1, see Fig. 4), sending charging request information to the charging device (¶[46] “Examples of the main control to be executed by ECU 100 include “external charging” for charging on-vehicle battery 150 with the electric power supplied from charging station 2. The external charging is carried out by mutual exchange of signals, instructions, and information between ECU 100 of vehicle 1 and controller 200 of charging station 2 via charging cable 3”), the charging request information being used to request that a charging current be 0 (¶[71]) “Specifically, allowable charging power Iwin is forcibly set to 0 … When charging of battery 150 is stopped (i.e., when IB=0 is set)”;
and the control module (ECU) is further configured to:
in response to the actual charging current of the traction battery being less than or equal to a threshold, controlling the traction battery to be discharged (¶[72] “During the period from time t21 to time t22 during which allowable charging power Iwin is set to 0, charging of battery 150 is prohibited while discharging of battery 150 is permitted. Therefore, battery 150 is discharged”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan to further incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide wherein the communication module is further configured to:
in response to determining to control the traction battery to be discharged, send charging request information to the charging device, the charging request information being used to request that a charging current be 0;
and a control module configured to:
in response to the actual charging current of the traction battery being less than or equal to a threshold, control the traction battery to be discharged.
in order to perform the discharge operation and prevent battery deterioration while connected to an external charger, and improve the convenience of the user while maintaining the health of the vehicle battery by making the process compatible with external chargers.
Regarding Claim 13, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 12.
Duan further teaches wherein the control module is further configured to:
in response to a duration elapsed after the charging request information is sent being greater than or equal to a preset time interval, control the traction battery to stop being discharged (¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Regarding Claim 14, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 13.
Duan as modified does not teach wherein the charging request information is first charging request information;
the communication module is further configured to:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged, send second charging request information to the charging device based on a charging matching table,
the second charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery.
Machida further teaches wherein the charging request information is first charging request information (see Machida ¶[72] quoted above);
and the communication module (ECU) is further configured to:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged (at t22 in Fig. 4, ¶[74] “when the magnitude of allowable current Ilim exceeds second threshold value TH2 at time t22, the restriction on allowable charging power Iwin is relaxed (specifically, canceled)”),
sending second charging request information to the charging device (see ¶[46] quoted above) based on a charging matching table (¶[82-83] “As shown in FIG. 6, map MP defines offset current Ioff for each SOC and each temperature TB of battery 150. Preferably, the lower the temperature TB is, the greater the magnitude of offset current Ioff is. By referring to this map MP, offset current Ioff can be calculated from the SOC and temperature TB of battery 150 . Further, ECU 100 calculates target current Itag by adding offset current Ioff to allowable current Ilim (S6)”),
the second charging request information being used to request the charging pile to charge the traction battery (from t22 onwards in Fig. 4).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to further incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide wherein the charging request information is first charging request information;
the battery management system further comprising: a communication module configured to:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged, send second charging request information to the charging device based on a charging matching table,
the second charging request information being used to request the charging device to charge the traction battery;
in order to continue charging the battery after the discharge period.
Regarding Claim 15, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 9.
Duan further teaches wherein the control module (BECM) is further configured to:
in response to a duration for controlling the traction battery to be discharged being greater than or equal to a preset time interval, control the traction battery to stop being discharged (¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Regarding Claim 16, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 15.
Duan as modified does not teach wherein the communication module is further configured to:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged, send charging request information to a charging pile based on a charging matching table,
the charging request information being used to request the charging pile to charge the traction battery.
Machida teaches communication module (ECU, ¶[76] “The steps, however, may be implemented by dedicated hardware (electric circuit) provided in ECU 100”) configured to:
in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged (at t22 in Fig. 4, ¶[74] “when the magnitude of allowable current Ilim exceeds second threshold value TH2 at time t22, the restriction on allowable charging power Iwin is relaxed (specifically, canceled)”),
sending charging request information to a charging pile (see Machida ¶[46] quoted above) based on a charging matching table (¶[82-83] “As shown in FIG. 6, map MP defines offset current Ioff for each SOC and each temperature TB of battery 150. Preferably, the lower the temperature TB is, the greater the magnitude of offset current Ioff is. By referring to this map MP, offset current Ioff can be calculated from the SOC and temperature TB of battery 150 . Further, ECU 100 calculates target current Itag by adding offset current Ioff to allowable current Ilim (S6)”),
the charging request information being used to request the charging pile to charge the traction battery (from t22 onwards in Fig. 4).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to further incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide in response to the traction battery being controlled to stop being discharged,
sending charging request information to a charging pile based on a charging matching table, the charging request information being used to request the charging pile to charge the traction battery;
in order to continue charging the battery after the discharge period.
Regarding Claim 17, Duan teaches a battery management system (Fig. 1), comprising:
a memory storing instructions (instructions shown in the flow chart of Fig. 2);
a processor configured to execute the instructions (BECM 130, ¶[3] “A battery management system may include one or more controllers, such as a Battery Energy Control Module (BECM)”) to:
transmit, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
obtain an actual charging current of the traction battery during a charging process of the traction battery (¶[20] “At step 210, the BECM monitors the charging current and charging voltage supplied to the battery”) performed by the charging device based on the battery charging specification; and
determine, based on a degree of the actual charging current exceeding a requested charging current, whether to control the traction battery to be discharged (Y or N after step 220, discharge in step 280; “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”); and
control, or refrain from controlling, the traction battery to be discharged based on the determination (step 280 in Fig. 3, ¶[22] “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Duan does not explicitly teach a processor configured to: transmit, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
Machida teaches a processor (ECU, ¶[76]) configured to: transmit, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current (¶[46] “Examples of the main control to be executed by ECU 100 include “external charging” for charging on-vehicle battery 150 with the electric power supplied from charging station 2. The external charging is carried out by mutual exchange of signals, instructions, and information between ECU 100 of vehicle 1 and controller 200 of charging station 2 via charging cable 3” see also ¶[53] “By offsetting allowable current Ilim in the discharging direction by offset current Ioff, a target current Itag is set (Ilim+Ioff=Itag)”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan to incorporate the teachings of Machida to provide a processor configured to:
transmit, to a charging device configured to charge the traction battery, a battery charging specification comprising an indication of a requested charging current;
in order to provide a margin to prevent the current from exceeding the allowable limit and therefore prevent the chances of lithium plating occurring, as suggested by Machida (¶[53]).
Claim(s) 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan et al. (US 20190359066 A1) in view of Machida et al. (US 20190229382 A1) further in view of Keskula et al. (US 20020051899 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1.
Duan further teaches wherein determining, based on the degree of the actual charging current exceeding the requested charging current, whether to control the traction battery to be discharged comprises:
in response to a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to being greater than a threshold, (¶[20] “At step 220, the BECM checks whether the charging current of the battery is out of the allowed range and/or a malfunction of the HV system power electronics has exposed the battery to a higher charge voltage and/or a higher charge current”),
determining to control the traction battery to be discharged (Y or N after step 220, discharge in step 280; “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Duan as modified does not teach a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a threshold.
Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value (¶[61] “The predicted voltage Vp is summed in step 142 as a negative value with the magnitude of the measured voltage Vm. The difference between Vp and Vm is divided in step 144 by the magnitude of the predicted voltage Vp output” … ¶[62] “The result of the division is a value representing the percent error between the measured voltage Vm and the predicted voltage Vp”)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to incorporate the teachings of Keskula to provide a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value in order to express the error as a percentage.
The combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a threshold.
Regarding Claim 10, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 9.
Duan further teaches wherein the determining module is further configured to:
in response to a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to being greater than a threshold, (¶[20] “At step 220, the BECM checks whether the charging current of the battery is out of the allowed range and/or a malfunction of the HV system power electronics has exposed the battery to a higher charge voltage and/or a higher charge current”),
determine to control the traction battery to be discharged (Y or N after step 220, discharge in step 280; “at step 280, the BECM will command the battery to discharge the current for the calculated time based on the predesigned function to remove lithium plating”).
Duan in view of Machida does not teach a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a threshold.
Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value (¶[61] “The predicted voltage Vp is summed in step 142 as a negative value with the magnitude of the measured voltage Vm. The difference between Vp and Vm is divided in step 144 by the magnitude of the predicted voltage Vp output” … ¶[62] “The result of the division is a value representing the percent error between the measured voltage Vm and the predicted voltage Vp”)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to incorporate the teachings of Keskula to provide a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value in order to express the error as a percentage.
The combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a threshold.
Claim(s) 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan et al. (US 20190359066 A1) in view of Machida et al. (US 20190229382 A1), further in view of Keskula et al. (US 20020051899 A1) and further in view of Kaneyasu et al. (US 20140197790 A1)
Regarding Claim 3, Duan in view of Machida teaches the method according to claim 1.
Duan as modified does not explicitly teach wherein determining, based on the degree of the actual charging current exceeding the requested charging current, whether to control the traction battery to be discharged comprises:
in response to a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a first threshold,
determining an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current;
and in response to the ampere-hour integral is greater than a second threshold, determining to control the traction battery to be discharged.
Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value (¶[61] “The predicted voltage Vp is summed in step 142 as a negative value with the magnitude of the measured voltage Vm. The difference between Vp and Vm is divided in step 144 by the magnitude of the predicted voltage Vp output” … ¶[62] “The result of the division is a value representing the percent error between the measured voltage Vm and the predicted voltage Vp”)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to incorporate the teachings of Keskula to provide a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value in order to express the error as a percentage.
The combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a threshold.
The combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula does not teach determining an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current;
and in response to the ampere-hour integral is greater than a second threshold, determining to control the traction battery to be discharged.
Kaneyasu teaches determining an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current (¶[15] “if the rated output electric current of the vehicle battery charger 1 is 15 A, and the actual charging current is 16 A, 1 A corresponding to the difference therebetween is integrated”);
and in response to the ampere-hour integral being greater than a second threshold (¶[107] “the self-diagnosis is executed by the control unit 20 using the elapsed time timer value T and the integrated value W for the charging current as the history information on the operating condition of the vehicle battery charger 1, and if these index values are greater than or equal to the predetermined thresholds SH.sub.0 and SH.sub.1, respectively”),
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula to incorporate the teachings of Kaneyasu to provide determining an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current;
and in response to the ampere-hour integral being greater than a second threshold, in order to determine if the difference in charging current persists for a significant amount of time.
Regarding Claim 11, Duan in view of Machida teaches the battery management system according to claim 9.
Duan as modified does not explicitly teach wherein the determining module is further configured to:
in response to a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a first threshold,
determine an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current;
and in response to the ampere-hour integral being greater than a second threshold, determine to control the traction battery to be discharged.
Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value (¶[61] “The predicted voltage Vp is summed in step 142 as a negative value with the magnitude of the measured voltage Vm. The difference between Vp and Vm is divided in step 144 by the magnitude of the predicted voltage Vp output” … ¶[62] “The result of the division is a value representing the percent error between the measured voltage Vm and the predicted voltage Vp”)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Duan in view of Machida to incorporate the teachings of Keskula to provide a ratio of a difference between the actual value and the requested value to the requested value in order to express the error as a percentage.
The combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula teaches a ratio of a difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current to the requested charging current being greater than a threshold.
The combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula does not teach to determine an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current;
and in response to the ampere-hour integral being greater than a second threshold, determine to control the traction battery to be discharged.
Kaneyasu teaches to determine an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current (¶[15] “if the rated output electric current of the vehicle battery charger 1 is 15 A, and the actual charging current is 16 A, 1 A corresponding to the difference therebetween is integrated”);
and in response to the ampere-hour integral being greater than a second threshold (¶[107] “the self-diagnosis is executed by the control unit 20 using the elapsed time timer value T and the integrated value W for the charging current as the history information on the operating condition of the vehicle battery charger 1, and if these index values are greater than or equal to the predetermined thresholds SH.sub.0 and SH.sub.1, respectively”),
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Duan, Machida and Keskula to incorporate the teachings of Kaneyasu to provide to determine an ampere-hour integral of the difference between the actual charging current and the requested charging current;
and in response to the ampere-hour integral being greater than a second threshold, in order to determine if the difference in charging current persists for a significant amount of time.
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 AIMAN BICKIYA whose telephone number is (571)270-0555. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 6 PM 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, 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.
/A.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights