DETAILED ACTION
1. This is the first action on the merits relating to U.S. Application Serial No. 18/443,950 filed on February 16, 2024. Currently claims 1-20 remain in the examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a first cell and a second cell, a third cell and a fourth cell must be shown in the figures or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. Corrected drawings must show the above-listed elements: a first cell and a second cell, a third cell and a fourth cell.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
5. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
6. Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim states:
“A system comprising:
a battery including cells each having a state; and
a controller configured to charge and discharge the battery according to a state of the battery derived at least in part from (i) the state of a first cell and (ii) a difference of the state of a second cell with the state of the first cell.”
No where in the specification and drawings, “a first cell” and “a second cell” of the battery are shown. It is noted that “the first cell” and “the second cell” are used as they are in the abstract and in the summary of the invention (see paragraph 0003 -0012). However, they are not further described under the detailed description of the speciation. And they are not shown in the drawings, and therefore, it is unclear to one ordinary skill in the art how the first cell and second cell are being controlled.
Claim 11 is limited to
“A method comprising:
detecting a state of a first cell of a battery based on electrical measurements of the first cell;
detecting a difference of a state of a second cell of the battery with the state of the first cell based on electrical measurements of the second cell and on the state of the first cell;
detecting the state of the second cell from a summation of (i) the state of the first cell and (ii) the difference of the state of the second cell with the state of the first cell; and
charging and discharging the battery according to a state of the battery derived from a summation of the state of the first cell and the state of the second cell.
Claim 11 is limited to a method, however, it contains the same issue regarding the first cell and the second cell as shown in claim 1. Without further description regarding the first cell and the second cell, it runs to enablement issues. Moreover, they are not shown in the drawings, and therefore, it is unclear to one ordinary skill in the art how the first cell and second cell are being controlled.
Claims 2-10 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as being dependent on rejected base claim, claims 1 and 11.
To overcome this rejection, the replacement drawings showing a first cell, a second cell, a third cell, and a fourth cell must be submitted, and the specification must include sections describing how the claimed subject matter is embodied.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
8. Claims 4, 6, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, it unclear why “factor A” and “factor B” are capitalized. Are there any significance/ground for labeling the condition as “factor A” or “factor B?”
Regarding claim 13, this claim is rejected on the same ground as claim 4.
Regarding claim 6, in the claim, “a first rate” and “a second rate” are recited. It is unclear what the rate is related to. It is understood that the first rate and second rate are compared, however, what is the rate relating to? Is this a rate of charge, rate of discharge, as an example?
Regarding claim 15, this claim is rejected on the same ground as claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, this claim is rejected on the same ground as claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2022/0176845 A1 to Lee (hereinafter “Lee”).
Regarding claim 17, Lee discloses an electric vehicle 1 (see paragraph 0009, figure 1, and paragraph 0037 and thereafter) comprising a plurality of battery cells (see figure 4 and paragraph 0066); a control unit 120 (see figure 1) to detect SOC of each cells (see paragraph 0066); and the controller determines SOC of each cells and group them and charges and discharge the cells based on the grouping (see paragraph 0066 and thereafter).
Regarding claim 18, each cell is measured with Kalman filter (see abstract and paragraph 0008 and 0020).
Regarding claim 20, the state of each cell is state of charge (SOC) of each cell (see abstract and paragraph 0020).
Conclusion
The pertinent prior arts made of record but not relied are listed in the attached form PTO-892. These are considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Applicant is respectfully suggested to carefully review these references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ahshik Kim whose telephone number is (571)272-2393. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday. Examiner’s fax phone number is (571)273-2393.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Thomas Pham, can be reached on (571)272-3689. The fax phone number for this Group is (571)273-8300.
Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [ahshik.kim@uspto.gov].
PTO employees do not engage in Internet communications where there exists a possibility that sensitive information could be identified or exchanged unless the record includes a properly signed express waiver of the confidentiality requirements of 35 U.S.C. 122. This is more clearly set forth in the Interim Internet Usage Policy published in the Official Gazette of the Patent and Trademark on February 25, 1997 at 1195 OG 89.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AHSHIK KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
September 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights