DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/113,578 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/113,578 anticipates the limitations of instant claims 1-2, literally or in what amounts to a rewording.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Claims 18/433,354
Application No. 18/113,578
1. A method of heating a battery comprising:
generating a repeating signal to apply to a battery,
the repeating signal having first
portion and a second portion over a period,
the first portion defining a leading edge rising to
a body portion terminating in a falling edge,
the second portion comprising an alternating current following the falling edge of the first portion,
and
wherein a frequency of the alternating current is selected to be between 2kHz and 1MHz.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the alternating current is a sinusoidal shape.
(Currently Amended) A method of heating a battery comprising:
generating a repeating signal to apply to a battery,
the repeating signal comprising a first portion and a second portion over a period,
the first portion defining
a body portion comprising a constant current and terminating at a falling edge,
the first portion defining a first percentage of the period,
the second portion comprising an alternating current directly following the falling edge of the first portion,
the alternating current of the second portion comprising a sinusoidal signal comprising a plurality of oscillations to alternate between charging and discharging the battery, the second portion defining a second percentage of the period where the first percentage and the second percentage comprise the period.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-2 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun et al. US PGPUB 2019/0027792.
Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses a method of heating a battery [fig. 20] comprising:
generating a repeating signal to apply to a battery [fig. 1 & 19-20; pars. 164-165; the “middle frequency two-way oscillation current” and the “high frequency oscillation current” alternate, thus the two of them for a repeating signal applied to the battery (i.e. 300 in fig. 1)], the repeating signal having first portion and a second portion over a period [fig. 20; periods T3 and T2 over the combined period formed by their combination; pars. 164-165], the first portion defining a leading edge rising to a body portion terminating in a falling edge, the second portion comprising an alternating current following the falling edge of the first portion [pars. 11-16, 56-58, 85-86, 88 & 93-96; fig. 3; the hybrid wave has a period, with a first portion defining a sinusoidal shaped leading edge rising to a constant current portion (see the trough of the first sine wave, the signal rises from the trough to a constant current flat portion), which then terminates at the falling edge (of the square wave) and completes the negative portion of the square wave and then completes the period, with the first portion comprising the portion from the positive zero crossing of the sine wave to the beginning of the falling edge of the square wave, thus the first portion and the second portion each comprises percentages of the period], and
wherein a frequency of the alternating current is selected to be between 2kHz and 1MHz [pars. 37, 45, 53; a frequency between 0.1 Hz and 200 kHz is chosen].
Regarding claim 2, Sun discloses wherein the alternating current is a sinusoidal shape [fig. 20].
Regarding claim 12, Sun discloses wherein the frequency is selected such that at least one full period of the alternating current fits between the falling edge of the first portion of a first repeating signal and the leading edge of the first portion of a second repeating signal [fig. 20; par. 164; between the two constant current portions more than one full period of the sinusoidal signal is included].
Regarding claim 13, Sun discloses wherein the frequency of the alternating current is selected such that a number of alternating current periods completed between sequential first portions of the signal is a whole number [fig. 20; 3 periods].
Regarding claim 14, Sun discloses wherein the frequency of the alternating current is selected to target a net zero coulomb exchange [fig. 20; 3 equal periods].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. US PGPUB 2019/0027792 In view of Singer et al. US PGPUB 2023/0353035.
Regarding claims 3-5, Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the alternating current comprises an approximation of the sinusoidal shape, wherein the approximation is a linear piecewise approximation of the sinusoidal shape or wherein each period of the linear piecewise approximation comprises at least three linear segments having different slopes.
However, Singer discloses a battery heating system which uses a sinusoidal current [par. 57 & 81; figs. 5-6], wherein the alternating current comprises an approximation of the sinusoidal shape, wherein approximation is a linear piecewise approximation of the sinusoidal shape, and wherein each period of the linear piecewise approximation comprises at least three linear segments having different slopes [fig. 5-7; pars. 91-100; a linear piecewise approximation of the sinusoidal shape output by the batteries to heat the battery without transferring energy].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to further include wherein the alternating current comprises an approximation of the sinusoidal shape, wherein the approximation is a linear piecewise approximation of the sinusoidal shape or wherein each period of the linear piecewise approximation comprises at least three linear segments having different slopes for the purpose of heating the batteries to an efficient temperature without transferring energy, as taught by Singer (pars. 57, 81 & 100).
Regarding claim 6, Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the alternating current comprises a first linear ramp with a positive slope and a second linear ramp with a negative slope.
However, Singer discloses a battery heating system which uses a sinusoidal current [par. 57 & 81; figs. 5-6] wherein the alternating current comprises a first linear ramp with a positive slope and a second linear ramp with a negative slope [fig. 5-7; pars. 91-100; a linear piecewise approximation of the sinusoidal shape output by the batteries to heat the battery without transferring energy; thus positive slope on rising edge of the approximation, the approximation comprising linear pieces].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to further include wherein the alternating current comprises a first linear ramp with a positive slope and a second linear ramp with a negative slope for the purpose of heating the batteries to an efficient temperature without transferring energy, as taught by Singer (pars. 57, 81 & 100).
Claims 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. US PGPUB 2019/0027792 in view of Rastegar US PGPUB 2021/0307113.
Regarding claim 7, Sun does not explicitly disclose selecting an offset for the alternating current based on a state of charge of the battery.
However, Rastegar discloses a battery heating system [abs.] including selecting an offset for the alternating current based on a state of charge of the battery [abs; par. 104, 110, 128 & 164; a DC offset is applied or DC charging can take place with a superimposed AC current for heating the battery (par. 128); pars. 97 & 147
DC charging takes place based on the charge level of the battery].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sun to further include wherein the alternating current is applied with a positive direct current offset for the purpose of heating the battery if the temperature drops to an unsafe level while the battery is charging, as taught by Rastegar (par. 128).
Regarding claim 8-11, Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the offset is selected to charge the battery when the battery state of charge is about zero.
However, Rastegar discloses a battery heating system [abs.] wherein the offset is selected to charge the battery or discharge the battery [abs; par. 104, 110, 119, 128 & 164; a DC offset is applied or DC charging can take place with a superimposed AC current for heating the battery (par. 128); pars. 97 & 147; DC charging takes place based on the charge level of the battery].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sun to further include wherein the offset is selected to charge the battery or discharge the battery for the purpose of heating the battery if the temperature drops to an unsafe level while the battery is charging or discharging, as taught by Rastegar (par. 119 & 128).
The combination of Sun and Rastegar does not explicitly disclose charging the battery when the battery state of charge is about zero, wherein the offset is a current offset at or less than C/20, wherein the offset is selected to discharge the battery when the battery state of charge is about full or wherein the offset is at or less than C/10.
However, Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the battery charging arts to charge the battery when the charge is low or discharge the battery when the SOC is too high choosing a battery current within the battery’s capabilities to prevent damage. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sun and Rastegar to further include charging the battery when the battery state of charge is about zero, wherein the offset is a current offset at or less than C/20, wherein the offset is selected to discharge the battery when the battery state of charge is about full and wherein the offset is at or less than C/10 for the purpose of preventing overdischarge, overcharge and overheating damage and restoring usefulness to the battery, and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) which was ready for improvement in order to yield results predictable by one of ordinary skill the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. US PGPUB 2019/0027792 in view of Huang et al. US PGPUB 2009/0027056.
Regarding claim 17, Sun discloses a method of heating a battery [fig. 20] comprising:
generating a repeating signal to apply to a battery [fig. 1 & 19-20; pars. 164-165; the “middle frequency two-way oscillation current” and the “high frequency oscillation current” alternate, thus the two of them for a repeating signal applied to the battery (i.e. 300 in fig. 1)], the repeating signal having first portion and a second portion over a period [fig. 20; periods T3 and T2 over the combined period formed by their combination; pars. 164-165], the first portion defining a charging portion terminating in a falling edge, the second portion comprising an alternating current following the falling edge of the first portion [fig. 20; T0 and T3 are DC offset charging portions terminating in a falling edge leading into the second portion].
Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein a frequency of the alternating current is based on at least one of a conductance response or a susceptance response.
However, Huang discloses a battery monitoring system [abs.; figs. 1-2] which uses wherein a frequency of the alternating current is based on at least one of a conductance response or a susceptance response [par. 136; dynamic conductance ].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sun to further include wherein a frequency of the alternating current is based on at least one of a conductance response or a susceptance response for the purpose of using a microprocessor to determine the test frequency based on a combination of parameters, as taught by Huang (par. 136).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. US PGPUB 2019/0027792 in view of Huang et al. US PGPUB 2009/0027056, and further in view of Shidore et al. US PGPUB 2022/0102769
Regarding claim 20, Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the frequency is further based on a temperature of the battery.
However, Shidore discloses a battery heating system [abs.; par. 37] wherein the frequency is further based on a temperature of the battery [par. 37; the frequency is chosen based on the temperature].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sun to further include wherein the frequency is further based on a temperature of the battery since the frequency depends on the response time of reactions within the battery cell, which depends on the temperature of the battery, as taught by Shidore (par. 37).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-16 and 18-19 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.
With respect to claim 15, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “probing the battery to dynamically determine an upper frequency bound and a lower frequency bound with the lower frequency bound at an inflection point in a conductance response and the upper frequency bound at an inflection point in a susceptance response” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 15.
Claim 16, being dependent on claim 15, would be allowable for the same reasons as claim 15.
With respect to claim 18, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “wherein the frequency is between an upper frequency bound and a lower frequency bound with the lower frequency bound at an inflection point in the conductance response and the upper frequency bound at an inflection point in the susceptance response” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 18.
Claim 19, being dependent on claim 18, would be allowable for the same reasons as claim 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Huang et al. US PGPUB 2022/0209707 discloses a battery heating method using a plurality of harmonics of a frequency.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID V HENZE whose telephone number is (571)272-3317. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 7pm.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/DAVID V HENZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights