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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doll et al. (US 2015/0088253).
Re claims 1, 2, 15 and 16, the reference discloses a battery system for a provided electric vehicle, the provided electric vehicle includes a provided DC load, the battery system having, inter alia, first battery pack (line 910); a second battery pack (line 920) (para 20); a first DC-DC converter, the first DC-DC converter (inherent feature for converting voltages) electrically coupled to the first battery pack; a second DC-DC converter (inherent feature for converting voltages), the second DC-DC converter electrically coupled to the second battery pack, the first DC-DC converter and the second DC-DC converter configured to provide a first amount of energy to the provided DC load (para 15, 20 and 82); and a processing circuit configured to control the first DC-DC converter and the second DC- DC converter to provide the first amount of energy to the provided DC load, the processing circuit further configured to detect a first voltage across the first battery pack and a second voltage across the second battery pack; wherein while the first battery pack and the second battery pack are being charged, the processing circuit is configured to: detect the first voltage and the second voltage; control the first DC-DC converter to provide a majority of the first amount of energy while the first voltage is greater than the second voltage; control the second DC-DC converter to provide a majority of the first amount of energy while the first voltage is less than the second voltage; and control the first DC-DC converter and the second DC-DC converter to each provide about half of the first amount of energy while the first voltage is about equal to the second voltage, whereby controlling the first DC-DC converter in the second DC-DC converter to provide the first amount of energy balances the first battery pack and the second battery pack until the first voltage is about equal to the second voltage (para 85). See para 15, 20, 82 and 85. (note: bolded text is not disclosed in the reference). However, the reference does not disclose whether the device is to be used in a vehicle environment or whether each battery is to provide half of the energy. Re its use in the vehicle environment, it would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have employed the system in a vehicle since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Re each battery is to provide half the energy, It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected half the value since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Re claims 6 and 7, method steps similar to apparatus claim 1. Hence, rationale applied to claim 1 applied to claim 6.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 8-14 and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087
Prosecution Insights