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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 8, 2021 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on December 22, 2025 amends claim 1. Claims 1-13 and 15 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on December 22, 2025, regarding the newly presented claim limitations have been fully considered and are unpersuasive as shown in the comments below and in the rejections that follow. The newly presented claim limitations in independent claim 1 are taught by Bose as explained in detail by the Examiner in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Applicant, in his remarks, argues that “Bose does not disclose that the costs for operating the power assembly in two different control scenarios are continuously calculated and compared during operation of the power assembly. On the contrary, Bose discloses in par. 0139 that the fuel cell, once turned on, remains turned on until the key is pulled out.” In response, Examiner notes that the operation of the fuel cells, as disclosed in [0139] of Bose, has nothing to do with continuously calculating two different control scenarios. Therefore, Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant, in his remarks, further argues that “Bose does not hint that it would be necessary or desirable to calculate a cost for a control scenario in which the fuel cell is turned off in any scenario in which the power assembly is operated with the fuel cell already turned on. In response, Examiner notes that Bose does calculate costs for a variety of scenarios by way of using equations 1-40 in which the total cost function Jk is minimized. Therefore, Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant characterizes Bose at [0067], [0107], and at [0139], and argues that in view of these paragraphs, “there is no teaching in Bose that would lead the person of ordinary skill in the art to consider using a method for controlling a power assembly in which costs for a control scenario in which the fuel cell is turned off is being continuously evaluated in parallel with a control scenario in which the fuel cell is turned on, during actual operation of the power assembly. The disclosure at the end of Bose, under e.g. par. 0157, does not change this, since the thermostatic strategy referred to in par. 0157 is a purely rule-based control strategy included for off-line evaluation of the "optimal control strategy" suggested by Bose. Par. 0183 discloses a comparison of energy consumption outcomes between the two control strategies as performed offline in a simulation, not during actual operation of the power assembly. As pointed out in the previous response, the comparison between the two control strategies is only made to prove that the optimal control strategy outperforms the thermostatic control strategy.” In response, Examiner notes that Applicant’s characterization of Bose does not change the fact that Bose discloses, at [0056], that “in choosing the energy sources, the fuel cell, battery, and ultra-capacitor are matched to the power and energy requirements of the vehicle. The amount of energy storage required for each power source device is determined via mathematical linear programming methods used to optimize the components based on weight, size, and cost constraints.” Bose, at [0058], further discloses that the optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation, that by implementing this technique, a set of algorithms consisting of feedforward and feedback gains is developed, that these algorithms are used to control and distribute adequate power from the available sources depending on the energy demands, and that such a controlling process will find a balance, so that not only hydrogen cost is minimized, but also all energy storage systems are kept within their individual best working capacities. Bose, at [0059], further discloses that control is achieved by solving an algorithm based on Equations 1-24 which are specific to the fuel cell/battery combination, and that preferably, control is achieved by solving an algorithm based on Equations 26-40 which are specific to the battery/super-capacitor combination. Therefore, Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive.
With respect to the amendment to claim 1, the Examiner references the published specification, at [0015], which states that: “By calculating costs for at least two control scenarios in parallel, wherein in one control scenario the fuel cell unit is turned on and in another control scenario the fuel cell unit is turned off, it is possible to select the most beneficial cost scenario in terms of costs and abilities.” Absent a specific definition or explanation of what “in parallel” means, Examiner shows a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). Bose at [0068-0072] describes equations 1 and 2. Based on equations 1 and 2, it is apparent that the fuel cell and the state of the battery is used continuously, and in parallel (i.e., together), over time as the variable k is sequentially incremented. See [0069] which discloses that xk is the state of the battery. See [0072] which discloses that uk is the fuel cell output power to the power bus. Examiner notes that both the current state of the fuel cell output and the state of the battery is used at time k to calculate the Jk as specified in equation 2. Examiner notes that the states may include control scenarios that include the fuel cell unit being off, or being on, for example.
Further, the Examiner notes that the published specification, at [0020], states that: “The method may be preferably be performed continuously, such as at a certain update frequency. Consequently, the control of the power assembly may be continuously updated according to the selected control scenario.” Examiner notes that the term “continuously” may be interpreted to mean “at a certain update frequency”. Examiner notes that Bose at [0074] discloses that performance index Jk is minimized and that Jk is incremented sequentially based on the variable k, (i.e., k is “continuously” or sequentially updated). Examiner notes that updating the cost calculation sequentially corresponds to updating the cost calculation continuously at a certain update frequency.
Based on the foregoing reasons, Examiner has shown a teaching of the amendment (i.e., “in parallel and continuously during operation of the power assembly,”) as recited in the second clause of claim 1. Examiner has shown a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language in light of what is written in the specification. Examiner maintains the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Bose in view of Koti.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bose et al. (US 2009/0309416) in view of Koti et al. (US 2023/0182585).
Regarding claim 1, Bose teaches [a computer-implemented method] for controlling a power assembly, the power assembly comprising a fuel cell unit and an electric energy storage system for storing excess electric energy produced by the fuel cell unit, the method comprising: (see Bose at the Abstract which discloses a power flow control system for determining an amount of energy storage required for power source devices and a mechanism for controlling power flow delivery between the power source devices; see Bose at [0010] which discloses that there is a need for better utilization of the existing energy sources in FCEVs (fuel cell electric vehicles) by taking advantage of the unique charging/discharging properties of each source to maximize its capacities; see Bose at [0051] which discloses that the present invention provides for a power flow control system for a fuel cell and battery combination including an integrated circuit having means for determining an amount of energy storage required for a fuel cell and battery combination and means for controlling power flow delivery between the fuel cell and battery and that the means for controlling is an algorithm including Equations 1-24; see Bose at [0058] which discloses that optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation. Examiner maps battery to an electric energy storage system for storing excess electric energy produced by the fuel cell unit.)
- calculating, in parallel and continuously during operation of the power assembly, costs associated with controlling the power assembly according to at least two different control scenarios during the prediction horizon, wherein the at least two different control scenarios include a first control scenario in which the fuel cell unit is turned off, and a second control scenario in which the fuel cell unit is turned on, wherein, for each of said control scenarios, the associated cost includes at least: a cost associated with an expected ability or non-ability of the power assembly to deliver power according to the predicted power demand, a cost associated with fuel consumption, [and a cost associated with fuel cell degradation,] (With respect to the newly presented amendment, (calculating “, in parallel and continuously during operation of the power assembly,”) the Examiner references the published specification, at [0015], which states that: “By calculating costs for at least two control scenarios in parallel, wherein in one control scenario the fuel cell unit is turned on and in another control scenario the fuel cell unit is turned off, it is possible to select the most beneficial cost scenario in terms of costs and abilities.” Absent a specific definition or explanation of what “in parallel” means, Examiner shows a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). Per Bose at [0068-0072], and based on equations 1 and 2, it is apparent that the fuel cell and the state of the battery is used continuously and in parallel sequentially over time as the variable k is sequentially incremented as described in equations 1 and 2.
See Equation (1):
See Equation (2):
PNG
media_image1.png
64
452
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
64
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Based on equations 1 and 2, it is apparent that the fuel cell and the state of the battery is used continuously, and in parallel (i.e., together), over time as the variable k is sequentially incremented. See [0069] which discloses that xk is the state of the battery. See [0072] which discloses that uk is the fuel cell output power to the power bus. Examiner notes that both the current state of the fuel cell output and the state of the battery is used at time k to calculate the Jk as specified in equation 2. Examiner notes that the calculation of cost is performed using any possible state xk, of the battery and any state uk of the fuel cell. Note that Jk is the total cost function to be minimized and that the minimization is computed with respect to both the state of the battery as well as the state of the fuel cell at time k, “continuously and in parallel”. Examiner notes that the states may include control scenarios that include the fuel cell unit being off, or being on, for example.
Further, the Examiner notes that the published specification, at [0020], states that: “The method may be preferably be performed continuously, such as at a certain update frequency. Consequently, the control of the power assembly may be continuously updated according to the selected control scenario.” Examiner notes that the term “continuously” may be interpreted to mean “at a certain update frequency”. Examiner notes that Bose at [0074] discloses that performance index Jk is minimized and that Jk is incremented sequentially based on the variable k, (i.e., k is “continuously” or sequentially updated) which corresponds to updating the computation or calculation continuously at a certain update frequency.
Also see Bose at [0056], for example, which discloses that in choosing the energy sources, the fuel cell, battery and ultra-capacitor are matched to the power and energy requirements of the vehicle and that the amount of energy storage required for each power source device is determined via mathematical linear programming methods used to optimize the components based on weight, size, and cost constraints; see Bose at [0058], for example, which discloses that the optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation, that these algorithms are used to control and distribute adequate power from the available sources depending on the energy demands and that such a controlling process will find a balance, so that not only hydrogen cost is minimized, but also all energy storage systems are kept within their individual best working capacities. Examiner notes that minimizing hydrogen cost corresponds to cost associated with fuel consumption. Also, see Bose at [0139] which discloses that for fuel cells, its turn-on sequence follows the optimal control law described by Equations 1-24, and that re-starting the fuel cell takes some time; see Bose at [0147] which discloses that the model calculates the fuel consumption of the vehicle over the course of the drive; see Bose at [0157] and [0163], for example which discloses the fuel cell is then turned off again and that a frequent turn on and off sequence wastes energy. Examiner notes that Bose teaches the at least two different control scenarios which include a first control scenario in which the fuel cell unit is turned off, and a second control scenario in which the fuel cell unit is turned on. Examiner notes that the use of Bose’s linear programming methods with cost constraints and Bose’s use of algorithms correspond to calculating costs associated with controlling the power assembly according to at least two different control scenarios during a prediction horizon, such as a course of a drive for example. Examiner notes that Bose’s cost constraints that are used while employing mathematical linear programming methods include a cost associated with an expected ability (e.g., a certainty) to provide power or energy to the vehicle so as to determine the optimized sizes and weights of the power delivery components an at time and is performed sequentially by way of indexing variable k over time.)
Bose does not expressly disclose a computer-implemented method and a cost associated with fuel cell degradation which in a related art, Koti teaches (see Koti at [0045] which discloses that the controller implements a strategy or a combination of strategies that balance life of the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126, life of the battery stack 162, and fuel consumption as part of the total cost of operating the system 100; see Koti at [0058] which discloses that aging, degradation, and/or deterioration often reduce or prevent fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 and battery packs 162 from providing optimal power and that aging, degradation, and/or deterioration often reduce or prevent fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 and battery packs 162 from efficiently operating over their respective lifetime or lifespan. Based on the foregoing, the Examiner notes that cost of the operating system is associated with fuel cell degradation. Koti at [102] further discloses that computing device 802 may be embodied as any type of computation or computer device capable of performing the functions described herein, including, but not limited to, a server (e.g., stand-alone, rack-mounted, blade, etc.), a network appliance (e.g., physical or virtual), a high-performance computing device, a web appliance, a distributed computing system, a computer, a processor based system, a multiprocessor system, a smartphone, a tablet computer, a laptop computer, a notebook computer, and a mobile computing device.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bose to include a computer-implemented method and a cost associated with fuel cell degradation as taught by Koti.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to implement a strategy or a combination of strategies that balance life of the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126, life of the battery stack 162, and fuel consumption as part of the total cost of operating the system 100, and to provide a computer device capable of performing the functions or methods described herein, as suggested by Koti at [0045] and at [0102].
The modified Bose further teaches the following claimed language:
- predicting a power demand for power delivery from the power assembly over a prediction horizon, (see Bose at [0058] which discloses that optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation and that by implementing this technique, a set of algorithms consisting of feedforward and feedback gains is developed, and that these algorithms are used to control and distribute adequate power from the available sources depending on the energy demands. See Bose at [0067] which discloses power requirements and demands and that Bose at [0067] further discloses that the difference between the power demanded by the vehicle and the power supplied by the fuel cell is made up for by an optimized weighting between the battery and super capacitor; see Bose at [0147-0149] which discloses that model inputs are a driving cycle composed of time and speed and that the driving cycle is a matrix fed into the driving cycle block which calculates the total distance traveled by the vehicle based on using equations (41) and (42). Examiner may map the driving cycle to the prediction horizon. Further, see Koti at [0091], which discloses that the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125, 127 may communicate with the processor 192 to estimate energy consumption (e.g., a first energy threshold for the duration of the time period defined by first threshold time). Alternatively, Koti may be used to map duration of the time period to the prediction horizon. In addition to Bose’s teachings of energy demands and power demanded by a vehicle, Koti’s estimate of energy consumption may be mapped to the recited power demand.)
- comparing the calculated costs of the respective at least two control scenarios to obtain a comparison result, (see Bose at [0051] which discloses that the means for controlling power flow delivery between a fuel cell and a battery is an algorithm including Equations 1-24; see Bose at [0056] which discloses that in choosing the energy sources, the fuel cell, battery, and ultra-capacitor are matched to the power and energy requirements of the vehicle, that the amount of energy storage required for each power source device is determined via mathematical linear programming methods used to optimize the components based on weight, size, and cost constraints; see Bose at [0058], for example, which discloses optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation; see Bose at [0139] which discloses that for fuel cells, its turn-on sequence follows the optimal control law described by Equations 1-24, and that re-starting the fuel cell takes some time; see Bose at [0147] which discloses that the model calculates the fuel consumption of the vehicle over the course of the drive; see Bose at [0157] and [0163], for example which discloses the fuel cell is then turned off again and that a frequent turn on and off sequence wastes energy. Alternatively, see Koti at [0045] which discloses that controller 190 implements a strategy or a combination of strategies that balance life of the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126, life of the battery stack 162, and fuel consumption as part of the total cost of operating the system 100; see Koti at [0065], for example, which discloses that a moderate strategy or algorithm may comprise one or more of the inputs or the control elements 202, such as slow transient limits, a high minimum power limit, limited time at peak power, throughput energy and/or may regulate the start/stop of the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126, and that in other embodiments, a nominal or minimal strategy or algorithm may allow for nominally set transient operation, and may switch to a lower minimum power during regeneration, may comprise no limit for peak power operation, and/or may not regulate the start/stop of the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126. Examiner notes that a comparison is performed by way of applying algorithms by way of optimization equations to determine strategies in light of the total cost of the operating system regarding the sequence and/or frequency of turning the fuel cells on or off. Examiner notes that the algorithm and associated equations, based on cost constraints, may be used in the optimization of power delivery for a multitude of different scenarios, such as for example, over two different control scenarios – i.e., a fuel cell turned on scenario or a fuel cell turned off scenario.)
- selecting one of the at least two control scenarios based on the comparison result, and (see Bose at [0054] which discloses that the control system consists of two parts; 1) means for determining the amount of energy storage required for each of the devices and 2) means for controlling power flow delivery between the devices and that when the size of the energy storage systems is decided, a new method of controlling the power flow is proposed based upon optimal control techniques. Examiner notes that the control system determines or decides the appropriate system to use which corresponds to selecting one of at least two control scenarios based on the result of various comparisons. Also, alternatively, see Koti at [0046] for example which discloses that a bang-bang operation may be equivalent to the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 operating at a single predefined power level, that in other embodiments, when the charge in the battery pack 162 is high (e.g., above about 80%), the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 may turn off such that the battery pack 162 is solely responsible for powering the vehicle and/or powertrain; Examiner notes that the scenario that is chosen, in this instance, may correspond to the fuel cell stacks being turned off, for example.)
- controlling the power assembly according to the selected control scenario (see Bose at [0064] which discloses that an optimal control algorithm uses the performance index to determine the required power command from the fuel cell and that the feedback gain is used to feedback information about the battery state to the power command for the fuel cell and that the feedforward gain is used to include information from an optimal control sequence into the fuel cell power command; also see Bose at [0067] which discloses that the invention uses optimal control theory to determine the power flow in the various components. Examiner notes that utilizing an optimal control algorithm, for example, corresponds to controlling the power assembly according to the selected control scenario. Alternatively, see Koti, at the Abstract and at [0006], which discloses that the method may include receiving an input into a processor of the fuel cell powertrain system, determining an output by the processor, communicating the output by the processor to a system controller, and determining a power split by the system controller and that the power split may include implementing a power split between a first power associated with the first power source and a second power source, wherein the first power source includes a fuel cell system and the second power source is selected from a battery system or an engine; see Koti at [0011] which discloses that the input into the system may include accessory demand, traction capability, or driver demand on the fuel cell powertrain system. Examiner notes that determining a power split corresponds to controlling the power assembly. Examiner notes that an appropriate power split may be implemented between a fuel cell system and a battery system according to the selected control scenario based on the input or control scenario. Furthermore, see Koti at [0046], for example, which discloses that a bang-bang operation may be equivalent to the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 operating at a single predefined power level, that in other embodiments, when the charge in the battery pack 162 is high (e.g., above about 80%), the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 may turn off such that the battery pack 162 is solely responsible for powering the vehicle and/or powertrain; Examiner notes that the selected control scenario in this instance, may correspond to the fuel cell stacks being turned off when the battery pack is high.)
Regarding claim 2, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein, in the second control scenario, a ratio between power provided by the electric energy storage system and power provided by the fuel cell unit is allowed to vary over the prediction horizon (see Koti at [0036] which discloses that the methods, processes, strategies, or algorithms may determine, optimize, and/or improve a power split or power allocation between the fuel cell stack 122, 124, 126 and the battery pack 162; Examiner notes that optimizing and/or improving a power split or power allocation between the fuel cell stack and the battery pack corresponds to varying a ratio between the power provided by the electric energy storage system and the fuel cell unit. Examiner maps power split to ratio. Examiner maps the battery pack to the electric energy storage system and the fuel cell stack to the fuel cell unit.)
Regarding claim 3, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the power assembly comprises at least two fuel cell units, each one of the at least two fuel cell units being independently controllable to an on-state in which the fuel cell unit is turned on and to an off-state in which the fuel cell unit is turned off, wherein the at least two control scenarios comprise a plurality of control scenarios, each one of the control scenarios being associated with a unique combination of on-state(s) and off-state(s) of the at least two fuel cell units (see Koti at [0088], for example, which discloses that if total power demand is higher than two times (2x) the second threshold 604, the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125 may split power between the two fuel cells stacks 122, 124 equally, and that alternatively, the system controller 190 or the one or more
fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125 may split power between the two fuel cells stacks 122, 124 unequally. Examiner notes that splitting power between the two fuel stacks equally and unequally corresponds to wherein the at least two control scenarios comprise a plurality of control scenarios, each one of the control scenarios being associated with a unique combination of on-state(s) and off-state(s) of the at least two fuel cell units. Examiner has shown a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language.)
Regarding claim 6, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the expected ability or non-ability of the power assembly to deliver power according to the predicted power demand in at least the first control scenario is determined by obtaining a system state of the electric energy storage system and based thereon calculating said ability or non-ability (see Koti at [0050] which discloses that in another embodiment, when the state-of-charge (SoC) of the battery pack 308 is below a SoC threshold (e.g., about 25%) from the nominal state-of-charge (SoC), the system controller 190 of the fuel cell powertrain system 100 or the fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controller 123 may implement a strategy or algorithm that operates the fuel cell system or fuel cell stack 122 in a fixed power level operation in a load-following manner. Examiner maps state-of-charge (SoC) of the battery pack to state of the electric energy storage system.)
Regarding claim 7, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the cost associated with each one of the at least two control scenarios further comprises a cost associated with an expected electric energy storage system degradation (see Koti at [0045] which discloses that the controller implements a strategy or a combination of strategies that balance life of the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126, life of the battery stack 162, and fuel consumption as part of the total cost of operating the system 100; see Koti at [0058] which discloses that aging, degradation, and/or deterioration often reduce or prevent fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 and battery packs 162 from providing optimal power and that aging, degradation, and/or deterioration often reduce or prevent fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 and battery packs 162 from efficiently operating over their respective lifetime or lifespan. Based on the foregoing, the Examiner notes that cost of the operating system is associated with battery pack degradation. Examiner maps battery packs or battery stack to electric energy storage system.)
Regarding claim 8, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises determining whether at least one predetermined condition is fulfilled, wherein the calculation of the costs for the at least two different control scenarios is only performed in response to the at least one predetermined condition being fulfilled (see Bose at [0051] which discloses that the means for controlling power flow delivery between a fuel cell and a battery is an algorithm including Equations 1-24; see Bose at [0056] which discloses that in choosing the energy sources, the fuel cell, battery, and ultra-capacitor are matched to the power and energy requirements of the vehicle, that the amount of energy storage required for each power source device is determined via mathematical linear programming methods used to optimize the components based on weight, size, and cost constraints; see Koti, at [0090-0091] in conjunction with Fig. 7, which discloses algorithm 700 comprising steps 702-722, and that the system controller 190 may initiate the strategy or the algorithm 700 in step 702, that in step 704, the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125, 127 may communicate with the processor 192 to identify low power demand conditions and that in some embodiments, the lower power demand conditions may comprise conditions when the average current draw from the one or more power sources is less than a first threshold 602 current and/or when the time of power draw is greater than a first threshold 602 time period. Examiner maps initiating a strategy or algorithm 700 comprising steps 702-724, based on cost constraints, as a result of identifying low power demand conditions to determining whether at least one predetermined condition is fulfilled.)
Regarding claim 9, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein: when the power assembly is being operated with the fuel cell unit turned on, the at least one predetermined condition is considered fulfilled when a state-of-charge of the electric energy storage system is above a first threshold level, and/or when the power assembly is being operated with the fuel cell unit turned off, the at least one predetermined condition is considered fulfilled when a state-of-charge of the electric energy storage system is below a second threshold level (see Koti at [0092] which discloses that in step 708 of FIG. 7, the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125, 127 may communicate with the processor 192 to determine if the energy of the battery pack (kWh) at the current state-of-charge (SoC) is greater than the first energy threshold estimated in step 706; see Koti at [0093] which discloses that in step 710, the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125, 127 may calculate the efficiency penalty for shutting down one fuel cell system or fuel cell stack 122, 124, 126. Examiner notes that with the fuel cell system on and the low power demand condition being satisfied, shutting down the fuel cell system or a fuel cell stack is considered when the SoC of the battery pack is above or greater than a first energy threshold. Examiner notes that Applicant has used the phrase “and/or” in the instant claim. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has held that use of the phrase “and/or” within a claim is not indefinite. According to the PTAB, “and/or” is not wrong, but it’s not preferred verbiage (see Ex Parte Gross, Appeal No. 2011-004811). Nevertheless, during patent examination, the pending claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) consistent with the specification (see MPEP § 2111; Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005)). Based upon this guidance from the MPEP and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the Examiner interprets the phrase “and/or” under its broadest reasonable interpretation of “or” for purposes of examination of the instant Application.)
Regarding claim 10, the modified Bose teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the power assembly is adapted to deliver power contributing to the propulsion of a vehicle, and wherein predicting the power demand comprises:
- receiving vehicle related information comprising at least one of traffic information for an expected travelling route of the vehicle during the prediction horizon, terrain information for the expected travelling route, topographic information for the expected travelling route during the prediction horizon, weather information for the expected travelling route during the prediction horizon, and vehicle gross weight information, and
- using said received vehicle related information for predicting the power demand over the prediction horizon (see Koti at [0009], for example, which discloses that the fuel cell powertrain system may be part of and configured to move a vehicle and that the fuel cell powertrain system may comprise a traction system configured to receive the first power and the second power; see Koti at [0099], for example, which discloses that in one embodiment, the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125, 127 of the fuel cell powertrain system 100 may additionally implement strategies or algorithms based on additional sensors/signals to determine operation of the fuel cell systems 122, 124, 126, and that in some embodiments, a real time vehicle mass estimator strategy may be utilized to determine if the vehicle with the fuel cell powertrain system 100 is operating close to curb weight (e.g., the weight of the vehicle with all standard equipment without payload) or is operating as a bobtail (e.g., a truck without the trailer) in real time; furthermore, Koti at [0099] discloses that the system controller 190 or the one or more fuel cell system or fuel cell stack controllers 123, 125, 127 may also operate a minimum number of fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 to sustain drive cycles at this curb weight and that in some embodiments, the fuel cell stacks 122, 124, 126 and battery pack 162 may be typically sized to support a vehicle at its respective gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) through drive cycles. Also, see Bose at [0056] which discloses that the amount of energy storage required for each power source device is determined via mathematical linear programming methods used to optimize the components based on weight, size, and cost constraints. Bose at [0058] discloses that optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation, and that by implementing this technique, a set of algorithms consisting of feedforward and feedback gains is developed, and that these algorithms are used to control and distribute adequate power from the available sources depending on the energy demands. Examiner maps curb weight or respective gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) to vehicle gross weight information.)
Regarding claim 11, the modified Bose teaches a control unit for controlling a power assembly, the control unit being configured to perform the method according to claim 1 (see Koti, at the Abstract, for example, which discloses a system controller for implementing and determining a power split between first power source which includes a fuel cell system and a second power source which includes a battery system. Examiner maps system controller to control unit. Examiner directs the Applicant to the detailed rejection of claim 1 for additional details.)
Regarding claim 12, the modified Bose teaches a power assembly comprising one or more fuel cell units and an electric energy storage system for storing excess electric energy produced by the one or more fuel cell units, the power assembly further comprising the control unit according to claim 11 (see Bose at [0051] which discloses that the present invention provides for a power flow control system for a fuel cell and battery combination including an integrated circuit having means for determining an amount of energy storage required for a fuel cell and battery combination and means for controlling power flow delivery between the fuel cell and battery; see Bose at [0058] which discloses that optimization of power flow uses the battery's current state of charge, desired battery state of charge at the end of the cycle, and average power flow as optimization parameters in the cost equation; see Bose at [0167] which discloses recharging discharged batteries; see Koti, at [0006], for example, which discloses that in one aspect, described herein is a method of implementing power from first and second power sources in a fuel cell powertrain system. Further, see Koti, at [0027], which discloses that the fuel cell system component 120 may comprise more than one fuel cell stacks, that in some embodiments, the fuel cell system component 120 may comprise 2-10 or more fuel cell systems or fuel cell stacks, including any specific number or range comprised therein, and that in one illustrative embodiment, the fuel cell system component 120 may comprise three fuel cell stacks or modules ("stacks") 122, 124, 126. Also, see Koti, at [0030], which discloses that the fuel cell powertrain system 100 may further comprise one or more of a hydrogen storage system 110 and/or a system controller 190. Examiner maps fuel cell powertrain system to power assembly. Examiner directs the Applicant to the detailed rejection of claim 1 for additional details.)
Regarding claim 13, the modified Bose teaches a vehicle comprising a power assembly according to claim 12, wherein the power assembly is adapted to deliver power contributing to the propulsion of the vehicle (see Bose at [0013] which discloses that the present invention provides for an efficient hybrid vehicle, including the power flow control system as above integrated in the hybrid vehicle, and more than one power source device in electrical connection with the power flow control system and operatively connected to the hybrid vehicle; also, see Koti at [0009], for example, which discloses that the fuel cell powertrain system may be part of and configured to move a vehicle and that the fuel cell powertrain system may comprise a traction system configured to receive the first power and the second power. Examiner directs the Applicant to the detailed rejection of claim 1 for additional details.)
Regarding claim 15, the modified Bose teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium carrying a computer program comprising program code for performing the method according to claim 1 when the program code is run on a computer (see Koti at [0103-0110], for example, which discloses a computing device comprising a memory 806, a processor 192, and a data storage device 810, and that in operation, the memory 806, 826 may store various data and software used during operation of the computing device 802 and/or system controller 190 such as operating systems, applications, programs, libraries, and drivers, and that the memory 806 is communicatively coupled to the processor 192 via the I/O subsystem 804, which may be embodied as circuitry and/or components to facilitate input/output operations with the processor 192, the memory 806, and other components of the computing device 802. Examiner maps memory and/or data storage device to non-transitory computer readable medium. Examiner directs the Applicant to the detailed rejection of claim 1 for additional details.)
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bose et al. (US 2009/0309416) in view of Koti et al. (US 2023/0182585) and further in view of Tanaka et al. (US 2006/0051633).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Bose does not expressly disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein, when the power assembly is operated with the fuel cell unit turned off, calculating the cost associated with controlling the power assembly according to the second control scenario comprises calculating a cost associated with start-up of the fuel cell unit which in a related art, Tanaka teaches (see Tanaka at [0073] which discloses that the third calculating means 22 calculates a cost necessary to start-up the fuel cell system including the fuel cell 13, the fuel generator 11, etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bose to include wherein, when the power assembly is operated with the fuel cell unit turned off, calculating the cost associated with controlling the power assembly according to the second control scenario comprises calculating a cost associated with start-up of the fuel cell unit as taught by Tanaka.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to predict a load value which is going to be generated, based on the history of the load value, and to store the predicted load value as load value data, and to schedule a start-up time of a fuel cell (13) based on the load value data, as suggested by Tanaka at the Abstract.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Bose does not expressly disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein, when the power assembly is operated with the fuel cell unit turned on, calculating the cost associated with controlling the power assembly according to the first control scenario comprises calculating a cost associated with shutdown of the fuel cell unit which in a related art, Tanaka teaches (see Tanaka at [0004] which discloses that in the above described conventional fuel cell system, an energy required for start-up has not been taken into account, and difference between an actual cost and a calculated cost becomes large if the start-up and stop take place frequently; Examiner notes that a calculation of cost associated with stopping the fuel cell frequently corresponds to calculating a cost associated with shutdown of the fuel cell unit.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bose to include wherein, when the power assembly is operated with the fuel cell unit turned on, calculating the cost associated with controlling the power assembly according to the second control scenario comprises calculating a cost associated with shutdown of the fuel cell unit as taught by Tanaka.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to predict a load value which is going to be generated, based on the history of the load value, and to store the predicted load value as load value data, and to schedule a start-up time of a fuel cell (13) based on the load value data, as suggested by Tanaka at the Abstract.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROY RHEE whose telephone number is 313-446-6593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am to 5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant may contact the Examiner via telephone or 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, Kito Robinson, can be reached on 571-270-3921. 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, one may visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. In addition, more information about Patent Center may be found at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROY RHEE/Examiner, Art Unit 3664