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 Status
Claims 1-10 are currently pending and are presented for examination on the merits.
Priority
Applicant's claim of priority to Chinese patent application CN202210538432.2, filed May 18, 2022, under 35 U.S.C. 119(a-d) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/14/2025 and 4/29/2024 were filed before the filing of a first office action on the merits. As such, the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Objections
Drawings
The drawings are objected because some Figure titles (e.g., FIG. 4, etc.) are smaller than the text. Please make the Figure titles larger than the text.
The drawings are objected, because the labels, external to objects and boxes, are shown without leader lines, and labels, internal to objects and boxes, are shown without underlining (see, e.g. FIG. 3). 37 CFR 1.84(q).
The drawings are objected, because they contain raster line type, which results in some symbols and letters being hard to decipher. Please change to continuous line type throughout, if possible. As stated in 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1), photographs will be accepted if they are the only practical medium for illustrating the claimed invention. The instant drawings are of poor image quality, such that the details are not readily discernible. Applicant is reminded that all drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black, sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. See 37 CFR 1.84(l).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected, for “an switching…”; please change to “a switching…” and make similar grammatical corrections throughout.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
a. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
b. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
c. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
d. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0091436 to Haring et al., alone.
With respect to Claim 1, Haring teaches an expandable energy storage system (Abstract;[0079], expanded), comprising: an inverter system ([0006];[0025]), being provided with a built-in battery (FIG. 1; [0082]); at least one external batteries, each of which being communicatively connected with the inverter system through a hot-plug connection line ([0014];[0034];[0075], hot-swap teaches hot-plug); at least one switching compensation circuits, each of the external batteries further being connected with the built-in battery through the switching compensation circuit ([0057]). Haring teaches balancing ([0021]), which would teach one of ordinary skill in the art, armed with the state of the art at the time, wherein the inverter system is configured to turn off a charging tube of the built-in battery and turn on a discharging tube of the built-in battery when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than a preset electric quantity; and the switching compensation circuit is configured to control the external battery to be connected with the built-in battery when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the preset electric quantity and the electric quantity of the external battery is higher than the electric quantity of the built-in battery ([0021]; FIGS. 1,2). Harig teaches an equivalent system operable to perform the method recited in the instant invention, but does not use the same verbiage, such as “discharging tube,” “built-in,” etc., however, the applied reference(s) need not use the same terminology, or disclose the limitations verbatim. Harig teaches a different electrical configuration that effects balancing to better charge multiple batteries. See, also, KSR international Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (simple substitution, and obvious to try).
With respect to Claim 2, Harig teaches wherein the switching compensation circuit comprises: an switching transition compensation module, being connected between the built-in battery and the external battery ([0057]); and a controller, being connected with a control end of the switching transition compensation module and a control end of the battery main switch module respectively, and being configured to control the conduction states of the switching transition compensation module and the battery main switch module respectively according to the electric quantity state of the built-in battery ([0028];[0033];[0050]). Harig teaches a battery main switch module, being connected between a negative electrode of the built-in battery and a negative electrode of the external battery ([0044]; FIGS. 1, 2).
With respect to Claim 6, Harig teaches wherein the controller is configured to output a PWM signal to the switching transition compensation module so as to control the conduction state and output voltage of the switching transition compensation module ([0031-33]; [0066];[0074]); wherein when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the preset electric quantity, the controller gradually increases the duty ratio of the PWM signal within a preset time, and controls the battery main switch module to be in a closed state after the duty ratio reaches 100% (“fully” charged battery) so that the external battery is completely connected to the inverter system ([0031-33]; [0066];[0074]).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under § 103, as being unpatentable over Harig, in view of US 5656915 to Eaves.
With respect to Claim 3, Harig fails to expressly teach, but Eaves teaches wherein the switching transition compensation module comprises: a flywheel (col 8, ln 49-59; FIG. 1) diode, having a cathode connected between a positive electrode of the built-in battery and a positive electrode of the external battery; an inductor, having one end connected with an anode of the flywheel diode (col 4, ln 45-54; FIG. 1) and the other end connected with the negative electrode of the external battery; a unidirectional diode, having an anode connected with one end of the inductor; a first switch tube, having a drain connected with an cathode of the unidirectional diode, a source connected with the negative electrode of the built-in battery, and a gate connected with the controller, wherein the controller is configured to drive the first switch tube to be turned on when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the preset electric quantity and the electric quantity of the external battery is higher than the electric quantity of the built-in battery (FIG. 1). Eaves discusses the problem of overcharging (col 1, ln 20-67). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Harig to teach the use of a controller to effect balancing as further taught by Eaves.
With respect to Claim 4, Harig fails, but Eaves teaches wherein the switching transition compensation module further comprises: a first resistor, being connected between the source and the gate of the first switch tube; a second resistor, being connected between the controller and the gate of the first switch tube. (FIG. 1; col 1, ln 50-60) Under the same rationale as Claim 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Harig to include this limitation taught by Eaves.
Claim 5 is rejected under § 103, as being unpatentable over Harig, in view of Eaves, and further in view of Zhang.
With respect to Claim 5, Harig fails to expressly teach, but Zhang teaches wherein the battery main switch module comprises: a second switch tube, having a source connected with the negative electrode of the built-in battery and a gate connected with the controller, wherein the second switch tube is configured to be turned on when the external battery charges the built-in battery; a third switch tube, having a source connected with the negative electrode of the external battery ([0008-09]), a gate connected with the controller ([0008-09]), and a drain connected with the drain of the second switch tube, wherein the third switch tube is configured to be turned on when the built-in battery supplies power ([0008-09];[0054]).
Claim 7-10 are rejected under § 103, as being unpatentable over Harig, in view of US 2022/0115897 to Ijaz.
With respect to Claim 7, Harig fails to expressly teach, but Ijaz teaches wherein when the external battery is discharged to the extent that the electric quantity thereof is consistent with the electric quantity of the built-in battery, the inverter system controls the charging tube of the built-in battery to be turned on so that the built-in battery and the external battery are connected in parallel. ([0075]) Ijaz discusses the desire to manage the strain of cells ([0075]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Harig to include these limitations as taught by Ijaz, in order to manage the strain of the batteries, with respect to charging.
With respect to Claim 8, Harig fails to expressly teach, but Ijaz teaches an expansion method of an energy storage system, being applied to the energy storage system according to Claim 1, comprising: determining whether the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than a preset electric quantity; turning off a charging tube of the built-in battery and turning on a discharging tube of the built-in battery by the inverter system when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the preset electric quantity ([0075]; FIG. 1); determining whether the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the electric quantity of the external battery; controlling the external battery to be connected with the built-in battery through the switching compensation circuit when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the electric quantity of the external battery. ([0075]; FIG. 1)
With respect to Claim 9, Harig teaches balancing. Moreover, Ijaz teaches wherein when at least two external batteries are provided (“a plurality” teaches at least two), the method further comprises: determining whether the electric quantity of the external battery currently supplying power is lower than the electric quantity of the built-in battery; when the electric quantity of the external battery currently supplying power is lower than the electric quantity of the built-in battery, acquiring other external batteries with higher electric quantity than the built-in battery and establishing connection through the switching compensation circuit ([0075]; FIG. 1).
With respect to Claim 10, Harig teaches wherein the step of controlling the external battery to be connected with the built-in battery through the switching compensation circuit comprises: when the electric quantity of the built-in battery is lower than the preset electric quantity, gradually increasing the duty ratio of a PWM signal within a preset time by the switching compensation circuit, and controlling the external battery to be completely connected to the inverter system by the switching compensation circuit after the duty ratio reaches 100%. ([0031-33]; [0066];[0074])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-3082. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00, alternating Fri. off.
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, Matthew Gart can be reached on 5712723955. 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 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.
/WILLIAM J JACOB/ Examiner, Art Unit 3696
Prosecution Insights