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 .
Examiner's Note
2. Examiner has taken note that claims 2, 12, and 17 have been canceled by the Applicant, and has removed these claims below.
Claim Objections
3. Previous objections are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment filed June 17, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. Previous rejections are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment filed June 17, 2026. The amendments to the independent claims now recite physical control steps of "at least one of: the group is electrically isolated from the battery by way of a switching arrangement, a charging current is limited, and a discharging current is limited," which amount to an integration into a practical application for improving battery management and operation. Claim 13 has also been correctly amended to recite a "non-transitory" computer-readable storage medium.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. Previous rejections are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment filed June 17, 2026.
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
a) Independent claims 1, 11, 13, 14, and 15 remain indefinite and unclear due to the lack of spacing and punctuation in the claims. While the explanations for the two principal clarity issues make sense (see Applicant's Arguments/Remarks 06/17/2026) as one of the possible interpretations for the claims, it is difficult to discern such an intended meaning when all of the various calculations are lumped together. In other words, it is unclear when one series of calculations ends and another begins. The Examiner respectfully requests further amending the independent claims similarly to the example for claim 1 as provided below, in order for the printed claims in any final issued patent to be clear to the reader.
Claim 1 (Currently Amended): A method for determining a proportion of defective battery cells in a group of battery cells connected electrically in parallel in a battery, wherein
a voltage state of a terminal voltage of the group is determined based on at least one of:
a charging process or a relaxation of the battery under an environmental condition; and
a deviation and additionally a rate of change of the deviation of the determined voltage state of the terminal voltage is calculated from:
the voltage state of the terminal voltage of a same group from a previous charging process or a previous relaxation under a same environmental condition,
or from the voltage state of the terminal voltage of at least one of: an other group of the battery and an average value of the voltage state of the respective terminal voltage of at least two groups of the battery; [[is calculated,]]
wherein the proportion of defective battery cells in the group is determined from the calculated deviation and additionally from the rate of change of the deviation,
wherein if the proportion of defective battery cells exceeds a proportion threshold value, at least one of: the group is electrically isolated from the battery by way of a switching arrangement, a charging current is limited, and a discharging current is limited.
7. Dependent claims 3-10, 16, and 18-20 depend from claim 1 and are rejected for at least the same reasons as given for claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 1, 3-11, 13-16, and 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
9. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Lee et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0179008) fails to anticipate or render obvious a method for determining a proportion of defective battery cells in a group of battery cells connected electrically in parallel in a battery, wherein a deviation and additionally a rate of change of the deviation of the determined voltage state of the terminal voltage from the voltage state of the terminal voltage of a same group from a previous charging process or a previous relaxation under a same environmental condition or from the voltage state of the terminal voltage of at least one of: an other group of the battery and an average value of the voltage state of the respective terminal voltage of at least two groups of the battery is calculated, wherein the proportion of defective battery cells in the group is determined from the calculated deviation and additionally from the rate of change of the deviation, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
Claim 11 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Lee et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0179008) fails to anticipate or render obvious a battery controller configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in a group of battery cells connected electrically in parallel in a battery, wherein a processor unit is configured to calculate a deviation and additionally a rate of change of the deviation of the voltage state, determined by way of the measuring apparatus, of the terminal voltage from a voltage state, stored in a memory, of the terminal voltage of a same group from at least one of: a previous charging process, a previous relaxation under a same environmental condition, or from the voltage state, stored in memory, of at least one of: the terminal voltage of at least one of: an other group of the battery and an average value of the voltage state of the respective terminal voltage of at least two groups of the battery, wherein the processor unit is configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in the group from the calculated deviation and additionally from the rate of change of the deviation, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
Claim 13 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Lee et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0179008) fails to anticipate or render obvious a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored comprising steps for a battery controller configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in a group of battery cells connected electrically in parallel in a battery, wherein a processor unit is configured to calculate a deviation and additionally a rate of change of the deviation of the voltage state, determined by way of the measuring apparatus, of the terminal voltage from a voltage state, stored in a memory, of the terminal voltage of a same group from at least one of: a previous charging process, a previous relaxation under a same environmental condition, or from the voltage state, stored in a memory, of at least one of: the terminal voltage of at least one of: an other group of the battery and an average value of the voltage state of the respective terminal voltage of at least two groups of the battery, wherein the processor unit is configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in the group from the calculated and additionally from the rate of change of the deviation, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
Claim 14 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Lee et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0179008) fails to anticipate or render obvious a battery for a motor vehicle, comprising a battery controller configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in a group of battery cells connected electrically in parallel in a battery, wherein a processor unit is configured to calculate a deviation and additionally a rate of change of the deviation of the voltage state, determined by way of the measuring apparatus, of the terminal voltage from a voltage state, stored in a memory, of the terminal voltage of a same group from at least one of: a previous charging process, a previous relaxation under a same environmental condition, or from the voltage state, stored in a memory, of at least one of: the terminal voltage of an other group of the battery and an average value of the voltage state of the respective terminal voltage of at least two groups of the battery, wherein the processor unit is configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in the group from the calculated deviation and additionally from the rate of change of the deviation, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
Claim 15 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Lee et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2022/0179008) fails to anticipate or render obvious a motor vehicle comprising at least one of: a battery for a motor vehicle and a the battery controller configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in a group of battery cells connected electrically in parallel in a battery, wherein a processor unit is configured to calculate a deviation and additionally a rate of change of the deviation of the voltage state, determined by way of the measuring apparatus, of the terminal voltage from a voltage state, stored in a memory, of the terminal voltage of a same group from at least one of: a previous charging process, a previous relaxation under a same environmental condition, or from the voltage state, stored in a memory, of at least one of: the terminal voltage of at least one of: an other group of the battery and an average value of the voltage state of the respective terminal voltage of at least two groups of the battery, wherein the processor unit is configured to determine a proportion of defective battery cells in the group from the calculated deviation and additionally from the rate of change of the deviation, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
10. Dependent claims 3-10, 16, and 18-20 depend from claim 1 and contains allowable subject matter for at least the same reasons as given for claim 1.
Response to Arguments
11. Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant's Arguments/Remarks, filed June 17, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejections have been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections have been fully considered, but a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the meaning of the claims still not being clear even after the previous amendment.
Conclusion
12. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1598. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9:30 am to 6 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 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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached on (571)272-2619. 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.
PAUL D. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2857
/PAUL D LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 7/24/2026
Prosecution Insights