CTNF 18/332,732 CTNF 89726 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In p. 3, line 22, “ noble type” should be --novel type-- to correct a typo . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1-8 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1 , line 3, “BMSs” should be --Battery Management Systems (BMSs)-- to defined the acronym. In claim 1 , line 19, “MCU” should be --Microcontroller Unit (MCU)- to define the acronym. In claim 1 , lines 29-30, “ the received differential phase shift modulation signal” should be --a received differential phase shift modulation signal-- to avoid the issue of lack of antecedent basis. In claim 4 , line 3, “ each direct BMS” should be --each of the direct BMSs-- to avoid being too broad without clear boundaries. In claim 4 , line 7, “ each direct BMS” should be --each of the direct BMSs-- to avoid being too broad without clear boundaries. In claim 4 , line 10, “the data received by the downlink frame” should be --the data received through the downlink frame-- to be consistent with its antecedent basis in line 2. In claim 5 , lines 6-7, “ each direct BMS” should be --each of the direct BMSs-- to avoid being too broad without clear boundaries. In claim 5 , line 8, “ each direct BMS” should be --each of the direct BMSs-- to avoid being too broad without clear boundaries. In claim 8 , line 11, “ the battery cell connection unit” should be --a battery cell connection unit-- to avoid the issue of lack of antecedent basis. In claim 8 , lines 12-13, “ a battery cell connection unit” should be --the battery cell connection unit-- to refer to its antecedent basis. In claim 8 , line 22, “MCU” should be --Microcontroller Unit (MCU)- to define the acronym. In claim 8 , lines 29-30, “ the received differential phase shift modulation signal” should be --a received differential phase shift modulation signal-- to avoid the issue of lack of antecedent basis. The other claim(s) not discussed above, or depending on the above claim(s), are objected to for inheriting the issue(s) from their linking claim(s) . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1 , it recites “the direct BMS” in line 8. It is unclear which direct BMS is referred to. For examination purpose, --each of the direct BMSs-- is assumed. Further regarding claim 1 , it recites “the battery cells” in line 11. However, there are two antecedent bases (lines 1 and 4) for the limitation. It is unclear which is referred to. For examination purpose, “battery cells” in line 1 assumed to be -- a plurality of battery cells--, and “a plurality of battery cells” in line 4 is assumed to be -- the plurality of battery cells--, such that there is only one antecedent basis (line 1) for the limitation at issue. Further regarding claim 1 , it recites “each battery cell” in line 14. It is too broad without clear boundaries. For examination purpose, --one of the battery cells-- is assumed. As a result, “the battery cell” in line 17 is assumed to be --the one of the battery cells--. Regarding claim 2 , it recites “the battery cell” in line 2. It is unclear which is referred to. For examination purpose, --the one of the battery cells-- is assumed. Further regarding claim 2 , it recites “each battery cell” in line 6. It is too broad without clear boundaries. For examination purpose, --the one of the battery cells-- is assumed. Regarding claim 5 , it recites “preset rules after the downlink frame” in lines 3-4. It is unclear what “after the downlink frame” means. For examination purpose, --preset rules after the downlink frame is broadcasted --. Regarding claim 7 it recites “the communication frame” in lines 1-2. There is no antecedent basis for the limitation. For examination purpose, the claim is assumed to depend on claim 3 , which can provide the antecedent basis. Further regarding claim 7 , it recites “the direct BMS” in line 3. It is unclear which direct BMS is referred to. For examination purpose, --the direct BMSs-- is assumed. Regarding claim 8 , it recites “the battery cells” in line 12. There are two antecedent basis for the limitation (lines 1 and 5-6). It is unclear which is referred to. For examination purpose, “battery cells” in line 1 is assumed to be --a plurality of battery cells--, and “a plurality of battery cells” in lines 5-6 is assumed to be --the plurality of battery cells--, such that there is only one antecedent basis (line 1) for the limitation at issue. Further regarding claim 8 , it recites “the direct BMS” in line 13. It is unclear which direct BMS is referred to. For examination purpose, --each of the direct BMSs-- is assumed. Similarly, “the direct BMS” in line 17 is assumed to be --each of the direct BMSs--; “the direct BMS” in line 19 is assumed to be --each of the direct BMSs--; and “the direct BMS” in line 22 is assumed to be --each of the direct BMSs--. Further regarding claim 8 , it recites “each battery cell” in line 14. It is too broad without clear boundaries. For examination purpose, “one of the battery cells-- is assumed. As a result, “the battery cell” in line 16 is assumed to be --the one of the battery cells--. The other claim(s) not discussed above, or depending on the above claim(s), are rejected for inheriting the issue(s) from their linking claim(s). Notes Claims 1 and 8 distinguish over the closest prior art of record as discussed below. Regarding claims 1 and 8 , the closest prior art of record fails to teach the features of claim 1 (as the representative): “the first wireless communication unit, upon transmitting data, modulates binarized data received from the MCU into a phase shift modulation signal and modulates the phase shift modulation signal into a differential phase shift modulation signal, thereby transmitting the modulated differential phase shift modulation signal to an outside, and upon receiving data, demodulates the received differential phase shift modulation signal into a phase shift modulation signal and demodulates the demodulated phase shift modulation signal into binarized data, thereby transmitting the demodulated binarized data to the MCU ,” in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant. The features at issue represent cascading of Phase Shift Keying (PSK) modulation and differential PSK (DPSK) modulation. The demodulation is in a reverse order of the modulation. YAMAZOE et al. (US 20170351561 A1) teaches a plurality of direct BMSs and a master BMS, each of the direct BMSs includes a voltage measurement unit, a current measurement unit, an MCU, and a wireless communication unit for modulating and demodulating data for wireless communications. YAMAZOE fails to teach or suggest the above indicated features as claimed. YAMAZOE et al. (US 20160301112 A1) teaches a battery system with wireless communications using PSK or DPSK modulation. It does not teach or suggest the cascaded modulations of PSK and DPSK as claimed. SURESH et al. ("Implementation of Digital Modulation Scheme using LabVIEW" IEEE International Conference on Power, Control, Signals and Instrumentation Engineering (ICPCSI-2017)) teaches digital modulation including modulating and demodulation using DPSK, involving performing XOR on an input binary data for the differential PSK modulating. The DPSK needs not performing PSK modulation first and then modulating the PSK into DPSK signal. Instead, it states that DPSK is easier to implement then PSK because there is no need for the demodulator to have a copy of the reference signal to determine the exact phase of the received signal. Accordingly, there is no motivation to perform the cascaded modulations of PSK and DPSK, because DPSK alone is easier to implement. Daoura et al. (US 12412465 B1) teaches modulation of a binary signal by PSK or DPSK. It does not teach or suggest the cascaded modulations of PSK and DPSK as claimed. Alpman et al. (US 20200091608 A1) teaches wireless signal modulation by a binary PSK (BPSK) modulator or a DPSK modulator. It does not teach or suggest the cascaded modulations of PSK and DPSK as claimed. AGRAWAL et al. (US 20220200642 A1) teaches wireless communications using PSK modulation or DPSK. It does not teach or suggest the cascaded modulations of PSK and DPSK as claimed. Prior Art 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Samanta et al. ("A Survey of Wireless Battery Management System: Topology, Emerging Trends, and Challenges" Electronics 2021, 10, 2193) provides a review of wireless battery management system. HAN et al. (US 20210281988 A1) teaches a wireless battery management system, involving master and slave BMSs where the master BMS broadcasts a downlink signal, followed by a plurality of salve BMSs transmitting uplink payload data in a time division manner . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN C KUAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7066. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-5:30PM. 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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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. /JOHN C KUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 2 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 3 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 4 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 5 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 6 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 7 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 8 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 9 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/332,732 Page 10 Art Unit: 2857