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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/6/2023 and 9/15/2023 is /are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed limitation “a setting unit” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites the limitation “ a possible range ” in line 2 , which is a relative term , and renders the claim indefinite. The term “ possible ” is not defined by the claim, since there is no clear metes and bounds for what “possible range ” is interpreted /understood . A potential amended to the claim would be to remove the term “ possible ” to overcome the rejection. Claim 4 is rejected for the same reason as above, and also for depending from claim 3. Allowable Subject Matter Claim s 1, 2 and 5-7 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The thorough search found 3 closest references: US- 20180226824 discloses “ the first allowable current value calculated on the assumption that a polarization as at the present time is in a non-polarization state is corrected with the allowable current value correction value ΔI calculated based on the polarization voltage Vp 0 at the present point in time, and a current during charge and discharge is controlled by using the corrected second allowable current value Imax 2 . Since the second allowable current value Imax 2 is calculated according to the polarization state of a battery, it is possible to further precisely calculate the largest current (that is, the allowable current value) at which a CCV does not reach the upper and lower limit voltages even if a current continues to flow for a predetermined time .” (see [0048]) US- 20160351976 suggests “ a discharging operation such as charging of a battery of auxiliary equipment or discharging that supplies power to an apparatus connected to the interior/exterior of a vehicle may be performed during the charging period or, during the discharging period, a charging operation such as charging by regeneration may be performed. However, as with another embodiment, in this fourth embodiment, the charging operation is dominant during the charging period while the discharging operation is dominant during the discharging period, whereby a second SOC error is thought to occur in a positive direction during the charging period and in a negative direction during the discharging period. Note that it is desired to detect an SOCv from a CCV at a timing when the discharging operation is not performed during the charging period and when the charging operation is not performed during the discharging period, more suitably at a timing when a charge current equals a predetermined threshold or lower during the charging period and when a discharge current equals a predetermined threshold or lower during the discharging period. Note that even when the discharge current flows during the charging period or when the charge current flows during the discharging period, allowed processing can be applied as long as the current falls within a predetermined threshold. ” (see [0126]) US- 20200108733 teaches “ when the charging current increases excessively, deterioration of the batteries B 1 and B 2 is accelerated. Therefore, the upper limits for the ranges of use of the closed-circuit voltage of the batteries B 1 and B 2 are set based on the states of the batteries B 1 and B 2 such that the batteries B 1 and B 2 do not deteriorate. Hereinafter, the upper limits for the ranges of use of the closed-circuit voltage of the batteries B 1 and B 2 will also be referred to as deterioration upper limit voltages … when the discharging current increases excessively, deterioration of the batteries B 1 and B 2 is accelerated. Therefore, the lower limits for the ranges of use of the closed-circuit voltage of the batteries B 1 and B 2 are set based on the states of the batteries B 1 and B 2 such that the batteries B 1 and B 2 do not deteriorate. Hereinafter, the lower limits for the ranges of use of the closed-circuit voltage of the batteries B 1 and B 2 will also be referred to as deterioration lower limit voltages. ” (see [0036]-[0037]) However, the combination or each of the cited references above does not disclose nor fairly suggest each and every claimed limitation of the independent claim 1 (specifically limitations “ converts the closed circuit voltage into a digital signal within the acquisition range set by the setting unit, wherein: the setting unit changes the acquisition range when the closed circuit voltage is one of an upper limit value and a lower limit value of the acquisition range ” , therefore claims 1 , 2 and 5-7 are allowed. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Interview Examiner invites the applicant for an interview to clarify/resolve all the issues and discuss the potential allowable subject matter to place the case in condition for allowance. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT HUY Q PHAN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7924 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 9am-5pm . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kiesha Bryant can be reached at (571)272-3606. 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. /HUY Q PHAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858