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 . The instant application with Application Number 18/401,122 filed on 12/29/2023 is presented for examination. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemahieu et al. (US 2021/0151996) (Hereinafter, Lema) in view of Russell et al. (US 2018/0166997).
With respect to claims 1, 9 and 10, Lema discloses a power storage apparatus Fig. 1, 135), comprising: a first power storage unit (Fig. 1, 135(1)); a second power storage unit (Fig. 1, 135(2)); a resonant circuit; a first switch (Fig. 1, SWT(1)); a second switch(Fig. 1, SWT(2)), wherein a first end of the first switch is coupled to a first end of the first power storage unit (Fig. 1, power storage 135(1) connected to SWT(1)), wherein a second end of the first switch is coupled to a first end of the second switch (Fig. 1, power storage 135(2) connected to SWT(2)) and is coupled to a first end of the resonant circuit, wherein a second end of the second switch is coupled to a second end of the first power storage unit and is coupled to a first end of the second power storage unit (Para. # 0021-0023: management cell 125 may be configured to monitor various conditions of a respective battery 135, such as over-voltage, under-voltage, temperature, and the like. In addition, the plurality of management cells 125(1):125(N) may operate together to perform autonomous balancing of each battery 135. For example, and referring to FIG. 2, each management cell 125 may comprise a first switch element SH, a second switch element SL, and a respective local control system 140);
PNG
media_image1.png
556
810
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a third switch; and a fourth switch, wherein a first end of the third switch is coupled to the first end of the second power storage unit and is coupled to the second end of the second switch (Para. # 0024: the first switch element SH is connected between the positive terminal of the battery 135 and the communication bus 115 and is responsive to a first control signal V.sub.T. The second switch element SL is connected between the negative terminal of the battery 135 and the communication bus 115 and is responsive to a second control signal V.sub.B.).
Lema, does not expressly disclose a resonant circuit. Russell, on the other hand, discloses a resonant circuit resonant circuitry having inductive and capacitive elements configured to create electrical resonance when an input voltage is applied a synchronous rectifier coupled between at least a portion of the resonant circuitry and an output of the resonant converter (Para. # 0004 and 0070: resonant circuitry having inductive and capacitive elements to create electrical resonance when an input voltage is applied to the resonant circuitry. Values of inductive and capacitive elements can vary, depending on switching frequency, desired functionality, and/or other factors).
PNG
media_image2.png
454
644
media_image2.png
Greyscale
LEMA and Russell are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor namely method and apparatus for autonomous balancing and communication in a battery system and adaptive synchronous switching resonant circuit.
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added a resonant circuit to the autonomous balancing system of Lema in view to Russell for the benefit and advantage of balancing voltage and current in a system as resonant circuits are advantageous in balancing voltage and current due to their ability to maintain a stable frequency and minimize energy loss.
With respect to claim 2, the combined references of Lema and Russell disclose the power storage apparatus as described above, further Lema discloses wherein the first power storage unit and the second power storage unit are capacitors (Fig. 1, capacitors 130(1)-130(N); para. # 0015: switching devices, capacitive storage elements).
With respect to claim 3, the combined references of Lema and Russell disclose the power storage apparatus as described above, further Russell discloses wherein the first switch, the second switch, the third switch, the fourth switch and the resonant circuit are used for balancing a voltage difference between the first power storage unit and the second power storage unit (Para. # 0006 and 0024: resonant circuitry having inductive and capacitive elements configured to create electrical resonance when an input voltage is applied).
With respect to claim 4, the combined references of Lema and Russell disclose the power storage apparatus as described above, further Lema discloses further comprising a control module, wherein the control module adjusts a switching frequency set of the first switch, the second switch, the third switch and the fourth switch according to a resonant frequency of the resonant circuit (Para. #0039: the main controller 120 may operate the management cells 125 in one of the balancing mode or the communication mode).
With respect to claim 5, the combined references of Lema and Russell disclose the power storage apparatus as described above, further Lema discloses wherein the control module controls duty ratios of the first switch and the third switch as 50%, wherein the control module controls duty ratios of the second switch and the fourth switch as 50% (Para. # 0044: The first switch element SH of a respective management cell 125 is operated according to the first control signal V.sub.T and the second switch element SL of the same management cell 125 is operated according to the second control signal V.sub.B. furthermore, controlling a duty ratio is an obvious controlling mechanism in a switch circuit that help reduce heat generated in a system during continuous operation and increase the longevity of the power system).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 11 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, including overcoming the objection or/and rejection sated above. Claims 7-8 and 12-20 are depend on the above objected claims of 6 and 11 respectively.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YALKEW FANTU whose telephone number is (571)272-8928. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00AM-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, DREW A DUNN can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/YALKEW FANTU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights