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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claim 5 recites a method…which is a process.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 5 recites an abstract idea as follows:
Claim 5 recites a judicial exception, a mathematical concept (see limitations “determining an alternate current internal resistant of the target battery cell based on the measured voltage; determining a direct current internal resistance…during a time period after a predetermined time elapses from a time when the switching element is turned on”).
Step 2A, Prong 2: the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. There is no particular machine recited, and no real-world transformation takes place.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim recites the steps such as “determining a direct current internal resistance of the target battery cell based on an amount in charge of the voltage of the target battery cell during a time period after a predetermined time elapses from a time when the switching element is turned on…wherein ….wherein in determining the alternating current internal resistance, the internal resistances of the plurality of target battery cells are determined based on simultaneously measured voltages” when viewed as a whole does not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, any particular machine, nor does it affect a real-world transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. Instead, the claim appears to monopolize the abstract idea itself for any purpose or in any practical application where it might conceivably be used. It can cover anything that could be done in the field of battery measurement.
The claim does not recite applying the abstract idea with, or by use of, any particular machine nor does the claim affect a real-world transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
The limitations “determining a direct current internal resistance of the target battery cell based on an amount in charge of the voltage of the target battery cell during a time period after a predetermined time elapses from a time when the switching element is turned on…wherein ….wherein in determining the alternating current internal resistance, the internal resistances of the plurality of target battery cells are determined based on simultaneously measured voltages’ are merely data gathering and is simply insignificant data and the use is unlimited.
The “determined direct current internal resistance of the target battery cell…” is insignificant data and the use is unlimited.
The recited “passive balancing circuit”, “target battery cell”, and “switching element” as recited are not particular machine but are field of use.
Further, the step “measuring…after the target switching element is turned on” and the step “wherein in the turning on of the….is performed at the same time” can be considered as additional elements. However, when viewed as a whole, the limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
At Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, for reasons that are analogous to the discussion of additional elements at Prong 2.
Claim 1 recites a battery management device which does not offer a meaningful limitation beyond generally linking the system to a particular technological environment, that is, implementation via balancing circuits and a control unit. In other words, the system claim, the processor claim, and the product claim are no different from the method claim 1 in substance; the method claim recites the abstract idea while the system, the processor claim and the product claim recite generic computer components configured to implement the same abstract idea. The claim does not amount to significantly more than the underlying abstract idea.
The control circuit and the balancing circuits are not particular device and they are field of use devices. They are the tool that are used to determine a direct current internal resistance of the target battery and determine an alternating current internal resistance of the target battery cell. The control unit are recited so generically (no details whatsoever are provided other than that it is a “control unit”) that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exceptions. It can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exceptions to the technological environment of a battery management device.
Dependent claims 2-4 add limitations that which is data merely extending the abstract idea without adding any additional elements. The limitations “measured voltage of the target battery cell…and determined alternating current internal resistance…(claim 2)”, “determined alternating current internal resistance by the control unit (claim 3), and “determined alternating current internal resistance of the second battery cells” are insignificant data and the use is unlimited. The data represent extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abdel-Monem et al. (hereinafter “Abdel-Monem”) (USPAP. 2019/0288520) and Van-Long Pham et al., “A Low Cost and Fast Cell-to-Cell Balancing Circuit for Lithium-Ion Battery Strings”, Electronics. 2020, 9, 248, pp. 1-13 (hereinafter “Pham”) (References submitted by Applicants).
Regarding claim 1 and similar claim 5, Abdel-Monem discloses a battery management device (Fig. 1 and management circuit shown in Fig. 2) comprising:
one or more passive balancing circuits (Abdel-Monem’s balancing circuit 1) provided for each of one or more battery cells (Cell-1, …, Cell-N) (Abdel-Monem: battery cells B1-B4), wherein each passive balancing circuit includes a balancing resistor (BR-1, …, BR-N) (see Abdel-Monem’s balancing resistors shown in Figs. 1 and 2) and a switching element (SW-1, …, SW-N) (see Abdel-Monem’s switching elements shown in Figs. 1 and 2, switches S1-S18; see Pars. 113-116) for selectively discharging each battery cell (Cell-1, …, Cell-N) through the balancing resistor (BR-1, …, BR-N) (Abdel-Monem: Pars. 113-116);
and a control unit (control unit 9) configured to:
determine an alternating current internal resistance of a target battery cell that is subject to cell balancing based on a voltage of the target battery cell before and after a target switching element that is the switching element corresponding to the target battery cell is turned on (Abdel-Monem: Par. 158 and 159: SoH mode is provided for a system or method or device with the same configuration (e.g. bidirectional and unidirectional switches optionally connected to a single ohmic device such as a resistor) that is used for balancing. A diagnostic parameter of a cell or pack of cells of battery cells is estimated, e.g. SoH. The SoH of a rechargeable energy storage cell can be estimated from the results of applying an Alternating Current AC impedance testing mode. Par. 182 discloses activating switches to select any one of powered cell balancing and internally diagnostic test. Also see Pars.158-179 for control unit controls target switching element of the battery stack and the target battery cell simultaneously operates and through this, the internal resistance is simultaneously measured, see short circuit);
wherein the control unit (control circuit 9) controls a plurality of target switching elements (see Abdel-Monem’s switching elements shown in Figs. 1 and 2, switches S1-S18; see Pars. 113-116) corresponding to a plurality of target battery cells which are selected from among the battery cells (Cell-1, … , Cell-N) included in a battery stack together (Abdel-Monem’s battery cells B1-B4) so that cell balancing for the plurality of target battery cells is performed simultaneously and determines internal resistances of the plurality of target battery cells based on simultaneously measured voltages for the plurality of target battery cells (Par. 182 discloses activating switches to select any one of powered cell balancing and internally diagnostic test. Also see Pars. 132-136 for relationships of control unit 9 and battery cells and switches).
However, Abdel-Monem does not explicitly disclose “determine a direct current internal resistance of the target battery cell based on an amount of change in the voltage of the target battery cell during a time period after a predetermined time elapses from a time point when the target switching element is turned on”.
Pham teaches “determine a direct current internal resistance of the target battery cell based on an amount of change in the voltage of the target battery cell during a time period after a predetermined time elapses from a time point when the target switching element is turned on” (Pham: teaches at section 2.1 structure of the Proposed Cell-to-Cell Balancing Circuit. Pham teaches that the balancing circuit includes three blocks which are switch network, push-pull converter, and a control circuit. Pham teaches that the switch network is for connecting a battery cell to each terminal of the converter for the charge transfer, the push-pull converter is for transferring the charge from a high-voltage cell to a low-voltage cell and the control circuit which is composed of a monitoring IC for updating the cell voltage and a digital processor to control the converter and the switch network operation. Please also see Fig. 1 for the balancing circuit. Please also see Page 5, Formulae 1-3 and Figs. 2 and 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filling the Application to modify Abdel-Monem's invention using Pham's invention to arrive at the claimed invention specified in claim 1 to achieve fast balancing with low cost and improve accuracy (Please see Pham: Abstract).
Regarding claim 3, Abdel-Monem and Pham disclose everything as applied above. In addition, Pham teaches wherein the control unit determines the alternating current internal resistance based on a ratio in which the voltage of the target battery cell is divided into an equivalent series resistor (R1) of the target battery cell and a target balancing resistor connected to the target switching element when the target switching element is turned on (Pham: Fig. 6 and Page 6: structure of the cell balancing circuit when a certain pair of cells is connected to the converter for balancing operation. Battery cell number Bn-1 represents the cell with the highest voltage, and cell number B1 represents the cell with the lowest voltage. Therefore, battery cell B1 is connected to the output of the converter by turning on relay Rb_1 and cell Bn-1 is connected to the input of the converter by turning on the relay Ra-n-1, respectively. All other relays remain turned off. Then these two cells start to become balanced immediately by the operation of the push-pull converter. Also see Fig. 5 and its description at section 2.3, when the selected cells have been balanced, the controller continuously updates all the voltages and the balancing current, and the average voltage of all the cells, e.g. ratio is calculated again. When one of the two cells reach the average value of the voltage, both relays Ra-max and Rb-min, are turned off. After that, the next two cells that have the highest and lowest voltage are found and balanced. The balancing process continues until all the cell voltages are balanced).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 4 are patentably distinguishable over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 2, the closest prior art of record either alone or in combination fails to anticipate or render obvious the combination wherein “wherein the control unit (120) measures the voltage of the target battery cell for each cycle with a preset period, and determines the alternating current internal resistance using a difference between the voltage of the target battery cell measured in a first cycle immediately before the target switching element is turned on and the voltage of the target battery cell measured in a second cycle immediately after the target switching element is turned on” in combination with other limitations in the claims as defined by Applicants.
Regarding claim 4, the closest prior art of record either alone or in combination fails to anticipate or render obvious the combination wherein “4wherein the control unit (120) is further configured to: open a relay connecting the battery stack (140) in parallel with another battery stack prior to measuring the alternating current internal resistance; select, from among an odd-numbered group including odd-numbered battery cells in the battery stack (140) and an even-numbered group including even-numbered battery cells in the battery stack (140), a group including a highest voltage battery cell that is a battery cell having a highest voltage among the one or more battery cells (Cell-1, …, Cell-N) as a first group, and select another group as a second group; turn on first switching elements corresponding to first battery cells in the first group, determine the alternating current internal resistance of the first battery cells; turn off the first switching elements; turn on second switching elements corresponding to second battery cells in the second group; and determine the alternating current internal resistance of the second battery cells” in combination with other limitations in the claims as defined by Applicants.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hao et al. (USPAP. 20220196748) discloses a method, apparatus, device and medium for detecting an internal short-circuit fault of a battery cell. The method includes obtaining electrical signal values for each of m battery cells of a battery pack, when it is in a preset condition including that a current detection is an n.sup.th detection; performing following steps for a target battery cell: calculating a first parameter of the target battery cell using the electrical signal values of the target battery cell, which characterizes a degree of fluctuation of the electrical signal values; calculating a second parameter that characterizes a degree of dispersion between the first parameter of the target battery cell and first parameters of other battery cells; and determining that an internal short-circuit fault occurs in the target battery cell, under a condition that the second parameter is greater than a threshold (Abstract; Pars. 60-64 and 71-91).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-2718. 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 M 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.
/PHUONG HUYNH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 November 19, 2025