Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/403,202

BATTERY CELL HEALTH EVALUATION BASED ON STATE OF CHARGE DEVIATION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 03, 2024
Examiner
MIKELS, MATTHEW
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
GM Global Technology Operations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
1066 granted / 1316 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1331
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
35.5%
-4.5% vs TC avg
§112
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1316 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 1-5, 9-14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haraz, et al. (“State-of-Health and State-of-Charge Estimation in Electric Vehicles Batteries: A Survey of Machine Learning Approaches”, published in IEEE Access on October 28, 2024, herein Haraz).1 2 Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17 Haraz teaches a system for evaluating a battery assembly, method, and vehicle system,3 comprising: a sensing device configured to acquire parameters related to a group of cells of the battery assembly (Section I-C); and a diagnostic module configured to perform (Section I-B): estimating a state of charge (SOC) value for the group of cells based on measurements performed during a selected time window (Section I-C); calculating a statistical value related to the estimated SOC value for the group of cells (Section II-A); assigning the estimated SOC value to a selected bin of a plurality of SOC bins based on the statistical value, each SOC bin of the plurality of SOC bins including a subset of a range of SOC values (Section II-A); calculating a deviation of each SOC value in the selected bin relative to a plurality of SOC values in the selected bin (Table 3); and determining whether the group of cells is healthy based on the deviation (Table 4). Regarding claims 2 and 18, Haraz teaches the statistical value is an average group SOC calculated based on the measurements, and the deviation includes a group SOC deviation and a bin deviation, the group SOC deviation corresponding to a difference between the estimated SOC value and the average group SOC, the bin deviation corresponding to a difference between a SOC value in the selected bin and an average of the plurality of SOC values in the selected bin (Section III-E). Regarding claims 3, 12, and 19, Haraz teaches determining whether the group of cells is healthy includes calculating a change in the deviation (Section III-E). Regarding claim 4, Haraz teaches the change in the deviation is based on a difference between the group SOC deviation and the bin deviation (Section III-E). Regarding claims 5 and 14, Haraz teaches the group of cells is determined to be healthy based on the change in the deviation being less than a threshold change value (Section III-E). Regarding claims 9 and 16, Haraz teaches the battery assembly is at least one of a battery module and a battery pack of a vehicle (abstract). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-8, 15, and 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 or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW MIKELS whose telephone number is (571)270-5470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 7:30 AM ET - 5:00 PM ET, Friday 7:30 AM ET - 9:30 AM ET, the Examiner is on central time.4 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, Thomas K Pham can be reached at 571-272-3689. 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. /MATTHEW MIKELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876 1 See 892 form for the full citation. A copy of this references is attached to this Office Action. 2 In addition to the cited portions, please see also the associated figures. 3 The memory is found in Fig. 6, and the processor is found in the abstract. 4 The Examiner can also be reached at matthew.mikels@uspto.gov.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 03, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702525
COLORED CLOSING KIT
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12700708
DOPED FIBER AMPLIFIER HAVING PASS-THROUGH PUMP LASER WITH INTEGRATED OPTICAL ISOLATOR
3y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12694247
MULTI-PART CODE SYSTEM
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12688485
SHELVING STRUCTURE AND VALIDATION APPARATUS FOR IMPROVED IMAGE PROCESSING OF CODES ON STORAGE BINS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12688388
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SHARING INFORMATION BETWEEN/AMONG USERS
1y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.3%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1316 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month