DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 2013/03/16, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2024/01/16 and 2026/03/05 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because
The drawing's descriptive legend does not correspond to the specification's terminology for the same reference characters: FIG. 1 labels reference characters 12 and 50 as "POWER INVERTER CIRCUIT," but the specification consistently describes both as "a power conversion circuit" that "includes, for example, at least one of a DC/DC converter and an inverter" (¶[0011])
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Cell Equalization Control for All-Solid-State Battery Systems Based on Plateau Region Detection.
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, 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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI (US 2016/0013669 A1), in view of LIU et al. (DOI: 10.1007/s10008-019-04296-4).
In re claims 1, 5, SHIRAISHI discloses
a battery system (charging and discharging system 10) comprising:
an assembled battery including a plurality of cells connected to each other (FIG. 1; ¶[0023]: battery assembly 12 includes a plurality of secondary batteries 50 connected in series); and
a control device configured to perform charge control and discharge control on the assembled battery (FIG. 1; ¶s [0023, 0032, 0055]: BMS 20 monitors and controls the secondary batteries 50 of the battery assembly 12; equalization process executed associated with the charging control process in the first embodiment and with a discharging control process in the second embodiment); wherein:
each of the cells is an olivine-type iron battery (¶[0024]: olivine-type lithium-ion iron batteries used for secondary batteries 50); and
the control device is configured to, in the charge control or the discharge control (¶s [0032, 0055]: equalization process executed during charging in the first embodiment; equalization process executed associated with a discharging control process in the second embodiment), perform an equalization process for equalizing power storage amounts of the cells (¶s [0009, 0032]: controller configured to control the discharging circuit to discharge the electric storage devices such that capacities of the electric storage devices are equalized; equalization process performed by the BMS 20) in a plateau region in a relationship between a voltage and a power storage amount of the assembled battery (FIGS. 3 – 6; ¶s [0007, 0034]: plateau region defined as the region where the voltage V of the secondary battery 50 of the battery assembly 12 stays substantially constant irrespective of changes in SOC).
As to claim 5, SHIRAISHI further discloses a vehicle comprising the battery system (¶[0023]: battery assembly 12 may be mounted on an electric vehicle).
SHIRAISHI does not expressly disclose the battery system is an all-solid-state battery system, wherein: each of the cells is an all-solid-state battery.
LIU teaches olivine-type iron batteries can be solid-state (Conclusion, p. 2115: in situ electrochemical XPS was employed to investigate the solid electrolyte/electrodes interphase of an all-solid-state lithium-ion battery, consisting of Li as the anode, garnet-type Ga-doped LLZO as the solid electrolyte, and LiFePO4 as the cathode).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to modify SHIRAISHI's assembled battery to use all-solid-state battery cells, as taught by LIU, in order to obtain the safety benefits of a nonflammable solid electrolyte, including reduced risk of leakage and explosion, that all-solid-state lithium-ion batteries provide over conventional liquid-electrolyte batteries.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI (US 2016/0013669 A1), in view of LIU et al. (DOI: 10.1007/s10008-019-04296-4), and further in view of OTAKI et al. (US 2021/0391576 A1) and DOPILKA et al. (DOI: 10.1002/aesr.202000114).
In re claim 2, SHIRAISHI is silent to wherein each of the cells includes an electrode layer including a silicon clathrate; and the assembled battery includes the plateau region in at least a part of a range in which a state of charge indicating a ratio of a current power storage amount to a power storage amount in a fully charged state is 0% or more and 30% or less.
OTAKI teaches wherein:
each of the cells includes an electrode layer including a silicon clathrate (FIG. 2, ¶s [0022, 0046, 0052]: anode layer 2 includes the active material, comprising a silicon clathrate II type crystal phase).
A PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine OTAKI's silicon clathrate active material to SHIRAISHI's plateau-region equalization framework in order to decrease the volume variation of the battery due to charge/discharge.
OTAKI does not expressly teach the assembled battery includes the plateau region in at least a part of a range in which a state of charge indicating a ratio of a current power storage amount to a power storage amount in a fully charged state is 0% or more and 30% or less.
DOPILKA teaches the assembled battery includes the plateau region in at least a part of a range in which a state of charge indicating a ratio of a current power storage amount to a power storage amount in a fully charged state is 0% or more and 30% or less (Figure 3; Sec 2.2: plateau at 0.30 V measured at a capacity of 236 mAh g⁻¹ against a total capacity of 3700 mAh g⁻¹).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to modify SHIRAISHI's plateau-region equalization framework to locate the equalization-triggering plateau region within a state of charge range of 0% to 30%, as taught by DOPILKA, in order to apply the equalization process during the specific low-state-of-charge window at which cage insertion produces a substantially flat voltage response.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI (US 2016/0013669 A1), in view of LIU et al. (DOI: 10.1007/s10008-019-04296-4), and further in view of HONG et al. (US 2019/0044194 A1).
In re claim 3, SHIRAISHI is silent to wherein the control device is configured to perform the charge control on the assembled battery at a voltage lower than a reference voltage in the plateau region as the equalization process, and perform the charge control on the assembled battery at the reference voltage after completion of the equalization process.
HONG teaches wherein the control device is configured to perform the charge control on the assembled battery at a voltage lower than a reference voltage in the plateau region as the equalization process (¶s [0048 – 0050, 0056]: pack charging voltage source 125 set to 16.8 V; cell balancing voltage source 126 set to 5 V; BMS 110 stops provision of the pack charging voltage and switches to the cell balancing voltage when cell balancing is necessary), and perform the charge control on the assembled battery at the reference voltage after completion of the equalization process (¶[0057]: BMS 110 switches the cell balancing voltage back to the pack charging voltage after completion of the cell balancing).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to combine HONG's voltage-source-switching charging circuit to SHIRAISHI's plateau-region equalization framework in order to reduce the charging voltage supplied across the assembled battery's shared charging bus during cell balancing, while continuing to supply charging current to the battery pack at a safely reduced voltage level.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI (US 2016/0013669 A1), in view of LIU et al. (DOI: 10.1007/s10008-019-04296-4), and further in view of LONCAREVIC (US 2010/0052615 A1).
In re claim 4, SHIRAISHI is silent to wherein the control device is configured to stop charging the assembled battery as the equalization process when the power storage amount of the assembled battery belongs to the plateau region in the charge control, and charge the assembled battery after completion of the equalization process.
LONCAREVIC teaches wherein the control device is configured to stop charging the assembled battery as the equalization process when the cell voltage of the assembled battery reaches a threshold value, and charge the assembled battery after completion of the equalization process (¶[0114]: charging is stopped when the highest cell voltage reaches the Cell voltage max value), and charge the assembled battery after completion of the equalization process (¶[0114]: charging is re-enabled when the maximum cell voltage falls below the Cell voltage max reset value).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to combine LONCAREVIC's voltage-threshold-triggered charge-stop mechanism to SHIRAISHI's plateau-region equalization framework, setting the configurable cell voltage max threshold to correspond to SHIRAISHI's own plateau-region boundary as a matter of routine optimization, in order to interrupt charging so that cell balance equalizes the cell voltages without further increasing the state of charge of the assembled battery.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
FUJII (JP 2015-201939 A): Discloses an equalization discharger (20) for a series-connected olivine-based lithium-ion battery pack that adjusts its voltage-monitoring update period depending on whether a cell's SOC belongs to a "plateau region" or "non-plateau region" (Claim 3).
MURAO et al. (US 2011/0127963 A1): Discloses a battery ECU that groups series-connected cells and selectively discharges the highest-SOC group to reduce simultaneous discharge current and heat, expressly disclosing an "electric vehicle" incorporating the battery system (¶s [0013, 0032–0033]).
KIKUCHI et al. (US 2021/0188121 A1): Discloses a power control system maintaining an assembled battery's cell SOC values within a predetermined permissible range (e.g., 20%–80%, ¶[0066]) via a calculated "representative SOC," for an electric powered vehicle.
ODENDALL (DE 10 2020 115 793 A1): Discloses a control device that determines a cell-specific charge curve voltage for each cell of a series-connected battery and discontinues that cell's charging as its individual target voltage is reached (¶s [0001, 0016]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHANN DJANAL-MANN whose telephone number is (571)272-4697. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00 - 17:00.
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 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.
/D. JOHANN DJANAL-MANN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights