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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. With regard to independent claim 6, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer program product without a recitation of a physical non-transitory medium (i.e. software per-se), are not patent eligible, see MPEP 2106.03. For example, the MPEP provides some examples, such as:
“Non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include:
• Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as “data per se”) or a computer program per se (often referred to as “software per se”) when claimed as a product without any structural recitations”.
As can be seen, when a broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers software per-se, the claim must be rejected. The claim may be amended to recite sufficient structure which excludes transitory embodiments to overcome the rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-11 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Instant invention relates to techniques for performing management of an array of batteries arranged on a rack in a Energy Storage System, “the system”, composed of, a Battery Management System (BMS) (i.e. a system BMS), wherein the BMS is communicatively coupled with a controller or Enterprise/Energy Management System (EMS) which issues commands for a rack of batteries supported by a rack BMS, which is communicatively coupled with the higher layer system BMS. The system BMS and rack BMS utilize the Controller Area Network (CAN) or otherwise known as CanBus, and the system BMS receives commands from an EMS. The commands are for controlling the rack BMS which is coupled with the system BMS. The EMS communicates the commands for the rack BMS via TCP/IP over a communications link with the system BMS. The system BMS is configured as a gateway to convert the rack BMS commands sent over the TCP/IP communications link between the EMS and the system BMS into CanBus which is utilized between the system BMS and the rack BMS.
Each of the Independent claims 1 and 7 contains features which, when combined with other features in the claims, the prior art of record failed to anticipate or render obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application:
With regard to the prior art, it is known to have a EMS which is configured to issue commands to a BMS system, which is configured manage a rack of batteries of the BMS. For example, the prior art Choi (US 2022/0232110 A1) depicts, in fig.10, a system with an Enterprise Management System (EMS) in element 100, a plurality of BMS element 200(a), 200(b), and 200(c), and a rack BMS element 310. The EMS 100 is configured to transmit a request for battery state information via MODBUS TCP/IP over a first interface, par.[0098 – 0101]. It is noted that the command from the EMS 100 is control command information transmitted via MODBUS TCP as discussed in par.[0007, 0097, 0099]. However, the disclosure of Choi teaches that the BMS comprises a receiver for TCP/IP (i.e. ModBus TCP) and CANBUS, wherein the first communciation unit of the BMS and the EMS 100 utilize MODBUS, while the second communication units of the BMS and EMS utilize CANBUS. Thus, with regard to conversion, as discussed in the claims, there is no need to convert MODBUS to CANBUS, because the EMS element 100 has transmitter corresponding to both protocols and can communicate with the BMS utilizing either protocol. Additionally, the conversion is performed at the EMS element 100 and not the BMS which is required by the claim. Further, the conversion amalgamates the feedback from the first the battery information sent over first and second communications interface(s) in a format defined in fig.5, and described in par.[0124 – 0125]. The purpose being that all of the data may not be able to be transmitted over a single interface when required.
Other prior art references generally disclose an ESS which comprises a EMS, coupled to a high layer BMS, which is further communicatively coupled with rack level BMS, as shown in fig.2 of Kadam et al. (US 2024/0387887 A1). Kadam discloses that the EMS forwards dispatch instructions to a level 3 BMS which are then forwarded to a rack level BMS, as discussed in fig.2 and paragraphs [0002 and 0026]. However, the disclosure of Kadam does not disclose that the level 3 BMS is configured to convert the instruction received from the EMS to CANBUS, and instead relies on ethernet communciation from EMS to system BMS, to rack level BMS, as discussed in fig.5.
Additionally, other prior art in this space teaches CANBUS to TCP/IP, conversion as discussed in Sander et al. (US 2017/0005515 A1), but does not describe the conversion as being bi-directional (par.[0022, 0051, 0201]) and does not provide a suggestion or motivation for alternating the direction of the conversion as claimed.
Other prior art references describes a system similar to the claims wherein the EMS is configured to transmit MODBUS TCP/IP commands, but these command are not translated at all. For example, the disclosure of Ouyang et al. (CN 114025032 A), Abstract wherein the data read/write commands are transmitted from the EMS to the BMS, however the invention provides a means for controlling the BMS via TCP without translation as discussed in par.[0002, 0015].
Thus, the disclosure either alone or in combination fail to anticipate or render obvious the claims:
“A communication method by which an Enterprise Management System (EMS), a Battery Management System (BMS), and a rack BMS included in an energy storage system (ESS) communicate with each other, the communciation method comprising:
receiving, by the system BMS from the EMS, a Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) communication including a Controller Area Network (CAN) communication command for controlling the rack BMS; and
Converting, by the system BMS, TCP/IP format to CAN format based on the TCP/IP communication command and transmitting the converted CAN communication to the rack BMS.”.
That is, the prior art fails to disclose and/or render obvious the reception at a system BMS of TCP/IP instructions for a rack BMS, which needs to be converted, by the system BMS to CanBus protocol for communications with the rack BMS.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gary (EP 3 151 373 A1) “Cabinet and Battery Management and Monitoring System for Use With Uninterruptible Power Supplies”
Xia et al. (US 2023/0307922 A1) “Method and System for Microgrid Control” par.[0051].
Joo (US 2024/0258589 A1) “Power Storage Device and Method for Operating Same” par.[0014]
Brooker et al. (US 2023/0335995 A1) “Stationary Energy Storage Battery Augmentation”, par.[0114]
Miki et al. (US 2018/0233914 A1) “Control Device, Energy Management Device, System, and Control Method”
ManlyBatteries, “Increase Knowledge! Introduction to Energy Storage Battery Management System”, March 12, 2021,
Li et al. (US 2022/0373475 A1) “Energy Storage System, Physical Position Identification Method, and Photovoltaic Power Generation System”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411