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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDSs) submitted on 09/22/2023 and 10/25/2024 were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites:
A battery diagnosis apparatus comprising:
a plurality of batteries:
sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries; and
a processor configured to:
determine a largest SOC deviation between a first battery and a second battery selected among the batteries,
obtain a largest voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery based on the largest SOC deviation,
set a first threshold value proportional to the largest voltage deviation, and
diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.”
Step 1: under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (Machine).
Step 2A, Prong One: under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation that falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts - mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations and mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion.
For example, the limitations of “determining, by a processor set, different baseline vibration patterns of a bridge for different vehicle categories (para. [0082]: step 710 of instant application),” “classifying, by the processor set, the vehicle into a respective one of the vehicle categories (para. [0084]: step 730 of instant application),” and “selecting, by the processor set, a respective one of the baseline vibration patterns based on the respective one of the vehicle categories (para. [0085]: step 740 of instant application)” are mental processes (i.e., evaluation or judgement).
Further, the limitation of “determine a largest SOC deviation between a first battery and a second battery selected among the batteries (para. [0064] of instant application),” “obtain a largest voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery based on the largest SOC deviation (para. [0065] of instant application),” “set a first threshold value proportional to the largest voltage deviation (para. [0065] of instant application),” and “diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value (paras. [0072], [0088] of instant application)” are mathematical calculations. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mathematical calculations, then it falls within the and/or “Mathematical Concepts” and/or “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 11.
Step 2A, Prong Two: under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
Step 2B:
The above claims comprise the following additional elements:
In Claim 1: a battery diagnosis apparatus (preamble); processor; a plurality of batteries; sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries;
In Claim 11: a battery diagnosis (preamble); processor.
The additional elements such as a battery diagnosis apparatus, a plurality of batteries, and a processor are recited at a high-level of generality (MPEP 2106.05(d)). Therefore, none of the additional elements indicate a practical application.
Further, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these additional elements/steps are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the relevant based on the prior art of record (Lee, Lee`371). For example, Lee and Lee`371 teach sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries (page 5, lines 26-28 of Lee; para. [0050] of Lee`371).
Regarding claims 2-10 and 12-20,
All features recited in these claims are abstract ideas, as all features found in these claims are directed towards mathematical calculation/mental process steps or insignificant extra solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(9)) . The explanation for the rejection of Claims 2-10 and 12-20 therefore are incorporated herein and applied to Claims 1 and 11. These claims therefore stand rejected for similar reasons as explained in above Claims 1 and 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (KR 20220060931 A, hereinafter referred to as “Lee”).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a battery diagnosis apparatus (page 3, lines 20: the diagnosis unit 120) comprising:
a plurality of batteries (page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging):
sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries (page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum); and
a processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) configured to:
determine a largest SOC deviation between a first battery and a second battery selected among the batteries (page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum),
obtain a largest voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery based on the largest SOC deviation (page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum, note that above feature of maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell reads on “largest voltage deviation”),
set a first threshold value proportional to the largest voltage deviation (page 5, lines 26-28: maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell; page 5, line 30: use a first threshold to diagnose the plurality of battery cells), and
diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value (page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold, the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to select a pair of batteries including a largest measured voltage deviation among the batteries as the first battery and the second battery (page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum, note that above feature of maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell reads on “largest voltage deviation”).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to:
detect replaced batteries among the batteries (page 9, lines 13-18: the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell having the maximum SOC and the minimum SOC among the plurality of battery cells to diagnose the abnormality of the battery cel…even if the battery module is replaced, the influence of the replaced module or the existing module can be reduced. there is. In addition, even when a voltage drop or a capacity drop due to a problem in the battery cell itself occurs, it is possible to diagnose more accurately than in the related art),
select the first battery among the replaced batteries (page 9, lines 13-17: the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell having the maximum SOC and the minimum SOC among the plurality of battery cells to diagnose the abnormality of the battery cel…even if the battery module is replaced, note that the above feature of “disclosure compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell having the maximum SOC and the minimum SOC among the plurality of battery cells…even if the battery module is replaced” reads on “select the first battery among the replaced batteries”), and
select the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries (page 9, lines 13-17: the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell having the maximum SOC and the minimum SOC among the plurality of battery cells to diagnose the abnormality of the battery cel… even if the battery module is replaced, the influence of the replaced module or the existing module can be reduced, note that the above feature of “disclosure compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell having the maximum SOC and the minimum SOC among the plurality of battery cells…even if the battery module is replaced, the influence of the replaced module or the existing module can be reduced” reads on “select the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries”).
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to determine the largest SOC deviation (page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum) in proportion to a state of health (SOH) deviation between the first battery and the second battery (page 5, lines 26-28: see above; page 7, lines 32-33: the SOH calculator 110 may calculate the SOH based on the state of charge (SOC) of each of the plurality of battery cells, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and “the SOH calculator 110 may calculate the SOH based on the state of charge (SOC) of each of the plurality of battery cells” in page 7, lines 32-33 reads on “to determine the largest SOC deviation in proportion to a state of health (SOH) deviation between the first battery and the second battery”).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 5, in addition, Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to determine the largest SOC deviation to be proportional to a maximum available SOC range (page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum, note that above feature of “maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell” in page 5, lines 26-28 reads on “determine the largest SOC deviation to be proportional to a maximum available SOC range”).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to obtain the largest voltage deviation using a table in which battery voltage values are matched according to SOC values of the plurality of batteries (page 5, lines 26-28: see claim 6 above; page 8, line 19: The storage unit 140 may store SOC and SOH data and threshold values of each of the plurality of battery cells, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and “the storage unit 140 storing SOC and SOH data and threshold values of each of the plurality of battery cells” in page 8, line 19 reads on “largest voltage deviation using a table (or table in memory)”).
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to set the first threshold value by adding a preset fixed value and the largest voltage deviation (page 5, lines 26-28: see claim 6 above; page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold, the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged; page 5, line 30: use a first threshold to diagnose the plurality of battery cells, note that the above feature of “maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell” in page 5, lines 26-28 and “thresholds” in page 5, lines 26-28 and page 5, line 30 reads on “set the first threshold value by adding a preset fixed value and the largest voltage deviation”).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee discloses that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to:
select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries (page 5, lines 26-28: see above; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method), and
determine whether a voltage deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery with the first threshold value (page 5, lines 26-28: see above; page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold, the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged; page 7, lines 4-5: see above, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee discloses that the processor is further configured to:
select a third battery and a fourth battery among the plurality of batteries (page 5, lines 26-28: see claim 9 above; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method),
set a second threshold value based on a largest SOC deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery (page 5, lines 26-28: maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell; page 5, line 30: use a first threshold to diagnose the plurality of battery cells; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method), and
diagnose whether or not a voltage deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery is abnormal based on the second threshold value (page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold, the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method).
Regarding claim 11, it is an apparatus type claim having similar limitations as of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 13, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 3 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 15, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 5 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 16, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 6 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 17, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 7 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 18, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 8 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 19, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 9 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 20, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 10 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 10 above.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lee et al. (US 2022/0069371 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Lee`371”).
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches all the limitation of claim 3, in addition, Lee teaches that the processor (page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to:
transmit data (page 8, lines 22-24: the battery management apparatus 100 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure may include a communication unit. Various data for diagnosing a battery cell, for example, data such as the aforementioned SOC, SOH, and threshold, may be transmitted/received from an external server through the communication unit) to the sensing units (page 7, lines 7-8: a battery management system 100 (eg, RBMS) that monitors the voltage, current, temperature, etc. of the battery rack 1),
receive the data (page 8, lines 22-24: see above) from the sensing units (page 7, lines 7-8: a battery management system 100 (eg, RBMS) that monitors the voltage, current, temperature, etc. of the battery rack 1).
Lee does not specifically teach that identification number and determine unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units, which transmits no identification number among the sensing units, as the replaced batteries.
However, Lee`371 teaches identification number (para. [0075]: the control unit 300 may select the target module based on identification numbers assigned to the plurality of battery modules BM1, BM2, BM3 and BM4) and
determine unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units, which transmits no identification number among the sensing units, as the replaced batteries (para. [0076]: the control unit 300 may randomly select a target module from battery modules whose flag is set to 0., note that the above feature of “flag is set to 0” reads on “unidentified batteries”).
Lee and Lee`371 are both considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the similar filed of diagnosing a state of a battery pack based on a SOC of a battery module included in the battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the identification number such as is described in Lee`371 into Lee, in order to provide an apparatus and method for diagnosing a state of a battery pack, which blocks the connection of some of battery cells included in a battery module provided in the battery pack and diagnoses a state of the battery module and the battery pack based on a SOC of the battery module (Lee`371, para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 14, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 4 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park (KR 2015/0037406A) teaches that according to the present invention, a battery management apparatus comprises: a module state measuring unit which measures state information including voltage values of each of a plurality of battery modules; and a control unit which estimates SOC and SOH of the battery modules based on the state information to output a balancing signal if the maximum deviation of the SOC is equal to or greater than a first limit deviation and to output a diagnosis signal if the maximum deviation of the SOC is equal to greater than a second limit deviation (A).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGKYUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3669. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:00pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached on (571)270-5628. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, 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.
/SANGKYUNG LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858