DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. This office action is in response to application number 18/444,935 filed on 02/19/2024,
and the amendments and arguments filed on 12/14/2025.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-16 have been amended.
No claims have been added.
Claims 2 and 10 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-16 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C 119
(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No.EP21465542.5, filed on 08/20/2021, No.DE102021209183.0, filed on 08/20/2021 and No.DE102021209487.2, filed on 8/30/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/19/2024 has been received
and considered.
Response to Amendment
5. Applicant' s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every rejection
previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 08/22/2025.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6-8 filed 12/14/2025, with respect to the rejections(s)
of claim(s) 1-4, 6-13, 15-16 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, each and every objection and rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds for rejection as necessitated by amendment is made under 35 USC 103 over Kim (US 202100534353 A1) in view of Kim (EP 3581431 A1) further in view of Marcos Pastor (US 11368035 B2) and further in view of Paryani (US 20170300439 A1).
Examiner Notes
6. Examiner cites particular paragraphs (or columns and lines) in the references as applied to Applicant’s claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the Applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP §2163.06. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims. See MPEP §2111.01. For purpose of examination The “second microcontroller” is being used as the “first controller” and the “first microcontroller” is being used as the “second controller” in the Kim reference (US 20210053453 A1).
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 nonobviousness.
7. Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9, and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 202100534353 A1) in view of Kim (EP 3581431 A1) and further in view of (US 11368035 B2) to Marcos Pastor et al. (hereinafter Marcos Pastor).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses A computer-implemented method for triggering a high level communication between an electric vehicle and a charging station, wherein the electric vehicle comprises a control unit with a first microcontroller for high level communication between the charging station and the electric vehicle (Kim Paragraph 0033: “Referring to FIGS. 1 to 3, an electric vehicle (EV) 10 may be charged by an electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) 20.”) (Kim Paragraph 0043: “the second controller 220 may be referred to as a main microcontroller (main MCU), a primary controller, and a primary controller.”) (Kim Paragraph 0044: “the second controller 220 may use the battery voltage to perform overall charging control.”) (Kim Paragraph 0076: “According to one embodiment, the above-described method may be implemented as a processor readable code in a medium in which a program is recorded. Examples of a processor readable medium include a ROM, a RAM, a CD-ROM, a magnetic tape, a floppy disk, an optical data storage system, and the like, and include what is implemented in the form of carrier waves ”) and a second microcontroller for basic communication between the charging station and the electric vehicle, the computer-implemented method comprising: (Kim Paragraph 0043: “In the present specification, the first controller 210 may be referred to as a submicrocontroller (sub-MCU)) (Kim Paragraph 0045: “The first controller 210 periodically detects a charging sequence signal, and when the charging sequence signal is detected”) […] in response to a connection between the control unit of the electric vehicle and the charging station, detecting, at the second microcontroller, a wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station; (Kim Paragraph 0045: “The first controller 210 may be driven based on a first driving voltage of a first power supply 230 during the second period which is the wake-up state, and may perform an operation of detecting a charging sequence signal (CSS) provided by an opto-coupler 250.”) (Kim Paragraph 0049: “Using such a principle, when the CSS provided from the charge sequence port 240 is sensed, the opto-coupler 250 may provide the CSS to the first controller 210.”) and when the wake-up signal is detected at the second microcontroller, activating the first microcontroller for high level communication between the electric vehicle and the charging station (Kim Paragraph 0008: “a first controller driven based on the first driving voltage, periodically repeating a wake-up state and a sleep state, and generating a wake-up signal when the charging sequence signal is input to the charge sequence port in the wake-up state; a second controller operating in the wake-up state when the wake-up signal is generated during maintaining of the sleep state”) (Kim Paragraph 0046: “The second controller 220 may operate in a wake-up state when the first controller 210 generates the wake-up signal”)
Kim does not disclose […] operating only the second microcontroller of the control unit for detecting a wake- up signal coming from a connection of the electric vehicle to a charging station and keeping the first microcontroller deactivated; […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence.
However, Kim does teach […] operating only the second microcontroller of the control unit for detecting a wake- up signal coming from a connection of the electric vehicle to a charging station and keeping the first microcontroller deactivated; (Kim Paragraph 0014: “a first control unit which receives the first control signal through the first switch unit, a second switch unit which receives a second control signal from the outside, a second control unit which is woken up by the first control unit and receives the second control signal through the second switch unit, and a motor control unit which is controlled by the second control unit and controls driving of a motor for a charging flap, wherein, when the second control unit is woken up by the first control unit, the second control unit disables the first switch and enables the second switch.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to include […] operating only the second microcontroller of the control unit for detecting a wake- up signal coming from a connection of the electric vehicle to a charging station and keeping the first microcontroller deactivated; taught by Kim. This would have been for the benefit to provide a charging control device for charging an electric vehicle, which includes a first switch unit which receives a first control signal from the outside, a first control unit which receives the first control signal through the first switch unit, a second switch unit which receives a second control signal from the outside, a second control unit which is woken up by the first control unit and receives the second control signal through the second switch unit, and a motor control unit which is controlled by the second control unit and controls driving of a motor for a charging flap, wherein, when the second control unit is woken up by the first control unit, the second control unit disables the first switch and enables the second switch. [Kim Paragraph 0014]
Kim in view of Kim does not teach […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence.
However, Marcos Pastor does teach […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence (Marcos Pastor Column 7, line number 10-11: “Per these main features, the CP signal has the following status definitions:”) (Marcos Pastor Column 7, line number 12-14: “State B1: Vg=12V, D=100%.fwdarw.cordset 20 is connected (i.e., plugged) to EV 12 but EVSE 24 is not ready to transfer electrical power from charging station 22 to the EV;”) (Marcos Pastor Column 14, line number 59-64: “Contact monitoring IC 46 can be programmed to adjust I.sub.CHARGE, t.sub.POLL_TIME, and t.sub.POLL_ACT_TIME and multiple voltage thresholds according to the wake-up needs depending on the status of the CP signal. OBC controller 38 can carry out such programming of contact monitoring IC 46 and may do so prior to the OBC controller falling asleep.”) (Note: Depending on the wake-up needs based on the status of the CP signal the Polling time is different and multiple polling periods may be used. The fast polling time will have a higher frequency than the slower polling time in Marcos Pastor.) and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence. (Marcos Pastor Column 6, line number 17-22: “OBC controller 36 in the awake mode is configured to control the charge unit (i.e., OBC power plant 34 and/or OBC relay 35) to charge traction battery 14 with energy from EVSE 24.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 7, line number 44-48: “As shown in FIG. 2, OBC 12 further includes a control pilot (CP) wake-up circuit 38 for waking up OBC 18. More particularly, CP wake-up circuit 38 is for waking up OBC controller 36 when the OBC controller is in the sleep mode (i.e., a low quiescent current mode).”) (Marcos Pastor Column 11, line number 9-12: “Contact monitoring IC 46 charges the capacitors C2 and C2s of second detector circuit 44 with a frequency rate of 1/t.sub.POLL_TIME. The frequency rate (1/t.sub.POLL_TIME) is much lower than the frequency (fCP) of the CP signal.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 11, line number 16-19: “In this regard, an example of the configuration of contact monitoring IC 46 is I.sub.CHARGE=5 mA, t.sub.POLL_TIME=64 ms (Control Pilot period=1 ms),”) (Marcos Pastor Column 11, line number 31-38: “However, upon the state of the CP signal changing from the state B2 to the state A or E/F, the voltage of capacitor C2s increases and eventually reaches a pre-programmed threshold voltage. A wake-up signal output (WUP output) of contact monitoring IC 46 is triggered upon the voltage of capacitor C2s becoming greater than the threshold voltage. Contact monitoring IC 46 in response provides a wake-up signal to OBC controller 36 to wake up the OBC controller.”) (Note: Contact monitoring IC 56 providing a wake-up signal. The frequency rates in C1 and C2 having high and lower frequency rates = fast and slow polling)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim to include […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence taught by Marcos Pastor. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient control pilot wake-up circuit which is configured to receive a control pilot signal from the EVSE, detect for a change in a current state of the control pilot signal while the controller is in the sleep mode, and generate a wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to a new state and a contact monitoring circuit which is further operable to generate the wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the voltage of the first capacitor becoming greater than the threshold due to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to the first new state. [Marcos Pastor Column 1, line number 31-37 and Column 1, line number 65 - Column 2, line number 2]
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the polling sequence and a length of the wake-up signal are adjusted to each other in order that each wake-up signal is detected by the second microcontroller. (Kim Paragraph 0045: “More specifically, the first controller 210 may repeat the wake-up state and the sleep state periodically. A cycle may be set arbitrarily. In addition, the cycle may include a first period and a second period. The first period may be a period in which the first controller 210 is in the sleep state. The second period may be a period in which the first controller 220 is in the wake-up state. The first period may be larger than the second period. For example, the first period may be 500 ms and the second period may be 50 ms.”) (Kim Paragraph 0045: “In addition, when the first controller 210 detects the CSS while operating during the second period of one cycle, the first controller 210 may generate a wake-up signal for waking up the second controller 220. The first controller 1210 may provide the wake-up signal to a second power supply 270.”)
Regarding claim 4, Kim in view of Kim and further in view of Marcos Pastor teaches claim 1, accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated above.
Kim in view of Kim does not teach A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the polling sequences are implemented using one PWM signals on the second microcontroller.
However, Marcos Pastor does teach A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the polling sequences are implemented using one PWM signals on the second microcontroller. (Marcos Pastor Column 9, line number 38-45: “Referring now to FIG. 5, with continual reference to FIGS. 3 and 4, a table 70 is shown. Table 70 depicts which of first CP state change detector circuit 42 (i.e., Block 1) and/or second CP state change detector circuit 44 (i.e., Block 2) of CP wake-up circuit 38 is used for detecting a change in the state of the CP signal while OBC controller 36 is asleep and generating a wake-up signal for waking up the OBC controller.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 6, line number 66-67: “To this end, the CP signal is generated using pulse width modulation (PWM).”) (Marcos Pastor Column 14, line number 3-13: “The voltage of capacitor C2s has already increased greater than the wake-up voltage threshold. The voltage of port IN23 of contact monitoring IC 46, which is the voltage of the capacitor C2s, is evaluated in a short time after the current injection ending during the fourth timing event 106. In response to contact monitoring IC 46 detecting the voltage of the capacitor C2s becoming greater than the wake-up voltage threshold, the contact monitoring IC generates a wake-up signal and provides same to OBC controller 36 to wake up the OBC controller.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim to include A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the polling sequences are implemented using one PWM signals on the second microcontroller taught by Marcos Pastor. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient control pilot wake-up circuit which is configured to receive a control pilot signal from the EVSE, detect for a change in a current state of the control pilot signal while the controller is in the sleep mode, and generate a wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to a new state and a contact monitoring circuit which is further operable to generate the wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the voltage of the first capacitor becoming greater than the threshold due to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to the first new state. [Marcos Pastor Column 1, line number 31-37 and Column 1, line number 65 - Column 2, line number 2]
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses A computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein the fast polling sequence is designed to capture a status of digital input (Kim Paragraph 0015: “Further, a cycle of turning on/off the coupler switch and a cycle of the wake-up/sleep state of the first controller are the same.”) (Kim Paragraph 0045: “More specifically, the first controller 210 may repeat the wake-up state and the sleep state periodically. A cycle may be set arbitrarily. In addition, the cycle may include a first period and a second period. The first period may be a period in which the first controller 210 is in the sleep state. The second period may be a period in which the first controller 220 is in the wake-up state. The first period may be larger than the second period. For example, the first period may be 500 ms and the second period may be 50 ms.”) (Paragraph 0061: Kim “Preferably, the first controller 1210 may turn on the coupler switch 1290 at a time of starting the operation in the wake-up state, and may turn off the coupler switch 1290 before a time of ending the wake-up state (before a time of starting the sleep state).”) (Note: digital input=switch)
Kim in view of Kim does not teach […] and wherein the slow polling sequence is designed to monitor a PWM-signal from the charging station and / or ADC input signals from the charging station.
However, Marcos Pastor does teach […] and wherein the slow polling sequence is designed to monitor a PWM-signal from the charging station and / or ADC input signals from the charging station. (Marcos Pastor Column 9, line number 38-45: “Referring now to FIG. 5, with continual reference to FIGS. 3 and 4, a table 70 is shown. Table 70 depicts which of first CP state change detector circuit 42 (i.e., Block 1) and/or second CP state change detector circuit 44 (i.e., Block 2) of CP wake-up circuit 38 is used for detecting a change in the state of the CP signal while OBC controller 36 is asleep and generating a wake-up signal for waking up the OBC controller.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 6, line number 66-67: “To this end, the CP signal is generated using pulse width modulation (PWM).”) (Marcos Pastor Column 8, line number 7-8: “In operation, CP wake-up circuit 38 receives the CP signal from EVSE 24”) (Marcos Pastor Column 12, line number 49-54: “Measurement output 90 is indicative of chronological events that lead to CP wake-up circuit 38 waking up OBC controller 36. From the moment that OBC controller 36 enters the sleep mode until the OBC controller awakens in response to a wake-up request from CP wake-up circuit 38, the polling sequence shown in FIG. 6 periodically occurs”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim to include […] and wherein the slow polling sequence is designed to monitor a PWM-signal from the charging station and / or ADC input signals from the charging station taught by Marcos Pastor. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient control pilot wake-up circuit which is configured to receive a control pilot signal from the EVSE, detect for a change in a current state of the control pilot signal while the controller is in the sleep mode, and generate a wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to a new state and a contact monitoring circuit which is further operable to generate the wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the voltage of the first capacitor becoming greater than the threshold due to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to the first new state. [Marcos Pastor Column 1, line number 31-37 and Column 1, line number 65 - Column 2, line number 2]
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the first microcontroller is activated via the second microcontroller by activating a power supply of the first microcontroller whereby the first microcontroller is woken up for the high level communication between the electric vehicle and the charging station. (Kim Paragraph 0045: “In addition, when the first controller 210 detects the CSS while operating during the second period of one cycle, the first controller 210 may generate a wake-up signal for waking up the second controller 220. The first controller 1210 may provide the wake-up signal to a second power supply 270.”)
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the second microcontroller switches to a transmit mode after detecting the wake-up signal, wherein in the transmit mode data from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station and / or high level communication data from and to the charging station is transmitted via the second microcontroller to and from the first microcontroller. (Kim Paragraph 0062: “The second controller 1220 may operate in a wake-up state when the first controller 1210 generates the wake-up signal, and may perform an operation for controlling charging of the EV as a whole. The second controller 1220 may consume current in the wake-up state. More specifically, when the first controller 12210 generates the wake-up signal, the wake-up signal may activate the second power supply 1270. The activated second power supply 1270 may provide a second driving voltage to the second controller 1220, and the second controller 1220 may operate in the wake-up state by the second driving voltage. In addition, the second controller 1220 may confirm the CSS provided by the opto-coupler 1250 when entering the wake-up state to perform the charge control operation.”)
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses A control device for triggering a high level communication between an electric vehicle and a charging station, the control device comprising: a control unit supported by the electric vehicle, the control unit includes: a first microcontroller for high level communication between the charging station and the electric vehicle, (Kim Paragraph 0008: “A charging control device for an electric vehicle according to an embodiment includes:”) (Kim Paragraph 0033: “Referring to FIGS. 1 to 3, an electric vehicle (EV) 10 may be charged by an electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) 20.”) (Kim Paragraph 0043: “the second controller 220 may be referred to as a main microcontroller (main MCU), a primary controller, and a primary controller.”) (Kim Paragraph 0044: “the second controller 220 may use the battery voltage to perform overall charging control.”) and a second microcontroller for basic communication between the charging station and the electric vehicle, the control unit executes a method comprising: (Kim Paragraph 0043: “In the present specification, the first controller 210 may be referred to as a submicrocontroller (sub-MCU)) (Kim Paragraph 0045: “The first controller 210 periodically detects a charging sequence signal, and when the charging sequence signal is detected”) […] in response to a connection between the control unit of the electric vehicle and the charging station, receiving at least one wake-up signal and detecting the wake-up signal coming from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station with the second microcontroller; (Kim Paragraph 0045: “The first controller 210 may be driven based on a first driving voltage of a first power supply 230 during the second period which is the wake-up state, and may perform an operation of detecting a charging sequence signal (CSS) provided by an opto-coupler 250.”) (Kim Paragraph 0049: “Using such a principle, when the CSS provided from the charge sequence port 240 is sensed, the opto-coupler 250 may provide the CSS to the first controller 210.”) and when the wake-up signal is detected at the second microcontroller, activating the first microcontroller for high level communication between the electric vehicle and the charging station (Kim Paragraph 0008: “a first controller driven based on the first driving voltage, periodically repeating a wake-up state and a sleep state, and generating a wake-up signal when the charging sequence signal is input to the charge sequence port in the wake-up state; a second controller operating in the wake-up state when the wake-up signal is generated during maintaining of the sleep state”) (Kim Paragraph 0046: “The second controller 220 may operate in a wake-up state when the first controller 210 generates the wake-up signal”)
Kim does not disclose […] operating only the second microcontroller for detecting a wake-up signal coming from a possible connection of the electric vehicle to a charging station and keeping the first microcontroller deactivated; […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence.
However, Kim does teach […] operating only the second microcontroller for detecting a wake-up signal coming from a possible connection of the electric vehicle to a charging station and keeping the first microcontroller deactivated; (Kim Paragraph 0014: “a first control unit which receives the first control signal through the first switch unit, a second switch unit which receives a second control signal from the outside, a second control unit which is woken up by the first control unit and receives the second control signal through the second switch unit, and a motor control unit which is controlled by the second control unit and controls driving of a motor for a charging flap, wherein, when the second control unit is woken up by the first control unit, the second control unit disables the first switch and enables the second switch.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to include […] operating only the second microcontroller for detecting a wake-up signal coming from a possible connection of the electric vehicle to a charging station and keeping the first microcontroller deactivated; taught by Kim. This would have been for the benefit to provide a charging control device for charging an electric vehicle, which includes a first switch unit which receives a first control signal from the outside, a first control unit which receives the first control signal through the first switch unit, a second switch unit which receives a second control signal from the outside, a second control unit which is woken up by the first control unit and receives the second control signal through the second switch unit, and a motor control unit which is controlled by the second control unit and controls driving of a motor for a charging flap, wherein, when the second control unit is woken up by the first control unit, the second control unit disables the first switch and enables the second switch. [Kim Paragraph 0014]
Kim in view of Kim does not teach […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence.
However, Marcos Pastor does teach […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence (Marcos Pastor Column 7, line number 10-11: “Per these main features, the CP signal has the following status definitions:”) (Marcos Pastor Column 7, line number 12-14: “State B1: Vg=12V, D=100%.fwdarw.cordset 20 is connected (i.e., plugged) to EV 12 but EVSE 24 is not ready to transfer electrical power from charging station 22 to the EV;”) (Marcos Pastor Column 14, line number 59-64: “Contact monitoring IC 46 can be programmed to adjust I.sub.CHARGE, t.sub.POLL_TIME, and t.sub.POLL_ACT_TIME and multiple voltage thresholds according to the wake-up needs depending on the status of the CP signal. OBC controller 38 can carry out such programming of contact monitoring IC 46 and may do so prior to the OBC controller falling asleep.”) (Note: Depending on the wake-up needs based on the status of the CP signal the Polling time is different and multiple polling periods may be used. The fast polling time will have a higher frequency than the slower polling time in Marcos Pastor.) and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence. (Marcos Pastor Column 6, line number 17-22: “OBC controller 36 in the awake mode is configured to control the charge unit (i.e., OBC power plant 34 and/or OBC relay 35) to charge traction battery 14 with energy from EVSE 24.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 7, line number 44-48: “As shown in FIG. 2, OBC 12 further includes a control pilot (CP) wake-up circuit 38 for waking up OBC 18. More particularly, CP wake-up circuit 38 is for waking up OBC controller 36 when the OBC controller is in the sleep mode (i.e., a low quiescent current mode).”) (Marcos Pastor Column 11, line number 9-12: “Contact monitoring IC 46 charges the capacitors C2 and C2s of second detector circuit 44 with a frequency rate of 1/t.sub.POLL_TIME. The frequency rate (1/t.sub.POLL_TIME) is much lower than the frequency (fCP) of the CP signal.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 11, line number 16-19: “In this regard, an example of the configuration of contact monitoring IC 46 is I.sub.CHARGE=5 mA, t.sub.POLL_TIME=64 ms (Control Pilot period=1 ms),”) (Marcos Pastor Column 11, line number 31-38: “However, upon the state of the CP signal changing from the state B2 to the state A or E/F, the voltage of capacitor C2s increases and eventually reaches a pre-programmed threshold voltage. A wake-up signal output (WUP output) of contact monitoring IC 46 is triggered upon the voltage of capacitor C2s becoming greater than the threshold voltage. Contact monitoring IC 46 in response provides a wake-up signal to OBC controller 36 to wake up the OBC controller.”) (Note: Contact monitoring IC 56 providing a wake-up signal = slow polling)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim to include […] wherein for the detection of the wake-up signal from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station, the second microcontroller operates using a polling sequence having a fast polling sequence and a slow polling sequence, the fast polling sequence has a higher frequency than the slow polling sequence than the slow polling sequence taught by Marcos Pastor. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient control pilot wake-up circuit which is configured to receive a control pilot signal from the EVSE, detect for a change in a current state of the control pilot signal while the controller is in the sleep mode, and generate a wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to a new state and a contact monitoring circuit which is further operable to generate the wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the voltage of the first capacitor becoming greater than the threshold due to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to the first new state. [Marcos Pastor Column 1, line number 31-37 and Column 1, line number 65 - Column 2, line number 2]
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses The control device of claim 9, wherein the polling sequence and a length of the wake-up signal are adjusted to each other in order that each wake-up signal is detected by the second microcontroller. (Kim Paragraph 0045: “More specifically, the first controller 210 may repeat the wake-up state and the sleep state periodically. A cycle may be set arbitrarily. In addition, the cycle may include a first period and a second period. The first period may be a period in which the first controller 210 is in the sleep state. The second period may be a period in which the first controller 220 is in the wake-up state. The first period may be larger than the second period. For example, the first period may be 500 ms and the second period may be 50 ms.”)
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses The control device of claim 9, wherein the polling sequence comprises a fast polling sequence and / or a slow polling sequence is designed to capture a status of digital input (Kim Paragraph 0015: “Further, a cycle of turning on/off the coupler switch and a cycle of the wake-up/sleep state of the first controller are the same.”) (Kim Paragraph 0045: “More specifically, the first controller 210 may repeat the wake-up state and the sleep state periodically. A cycle may be set arbitrarily. In addition, the cycle may include a first period and a second period. The first period may be a period in which the first controller 210 is in the sleep state. The second period may be a period in which the first controller 220 is in the wake-up state. The first period may be larger than the second period. For example, the first period may be 500 ms and the second period may be 50 ms.”) (Paragraph 0061: Kim “Preferably, the first controller 1210 may turn on the coupler switch 1290 at a time of starting the operation in the wake-up state, and may turn off the coupler switch 1290 before a time of ending the wake-up state (before a time of starting the sleep state).”) (Note: digital input=switch)
Kim in view of Kim does not teach […] and wherein the slow polling sequence is designed to monitor a PWM-signal.
However, Marcos Pastor does teach […] and wherein the slow polling sequence is designed to monitor a PWM-signal. (Marcos Pastor Column 9, line number 38-45: “Referring now to FIG. 5, with continual reference to FIGS. 3 and 4, a table 70 is shown. Table 70 depicts which of first CP state change detector circuit 42 (i.e., Block 1) and/or second CP state change detector circuit 44 (i.e., Block 2) of CP wake-up circuit 38 is used for detecting a change in the state of the CP signal while OBC controller 36 is asleep and generating a wake-up signal for waking up the OBC controller.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 6, line number 66-67: “To this end, the CP signal is generated using pulse width modulation (PWM).”) (Marcos Pastor Column 8, line number 7-8: “In operation, CP wake-up circuit 38 receives the CP signal from EVSE 24”) (Marcos Pastor Column 12, line number 49-54: “Measurement output 90 is indicative of chronological events that lead to CP wake-up circuit 38 waking up OBC controller 36. From the moment that OBC controller 36 enters the sleep mode until the OBC controller awakens in response to a wake-up request from CP wake-up circuit 38, the polling sequence shown in FIG. 6 periodically occurs”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim to include […] and wherein the slow polling sequence is designed to monitor a PWM-signal taught by Marcos Pastor. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient control pilot wake-up circuit which is configured to receive a control pilot signal from the EVSE, detect for a change in a current state of the control pilot signal while the controller is in the sleep mode, and generate a wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to a new state and a contact monitoring circuit which is further operable to generate the wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the voltage of the first capacitor becoming greater than the threshold due to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to the first new state. [Marcos Pastor Column 1, line number 31-37 and Column 1, line number 65 - Column 2, line number 2]
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Kim and further in view of Marcos Pastor teaches claim 9, accordingly, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated above.
Kim in view of Kim does not teach The control device of claim 9, wherein each polling sequence is implemented using a PWM signal on the second microcontroller.
However, Marcos Pastor does teach The control device of claim 9, wherein each polling sequence is implemented using a PWM signal on the second microcontroller. (Marcos Pastor Column 9, line number 38-45: “Referring now to FIG. 5, with continual reference to FIGS. 3 and 4, a table 70 is shown. Table 70 depicts which of first CP state change detector circuit 42 (i.e., Block 1) and/or second CP state change detector circuit 44 (i.e., Block 2) of CP wake-up circuit 38 is used for detecting a change in the state of the CP signal while OBC controller 36 is asleep and generating a wake-up signal for waking up the OBC controller.”) (Marcos Pastor Column 6, line number 66-67: “To this end, the CP signal is generated using pulse width modulation (PWM).”) (Marcos Pastor Column 14, line number 3-13: “The voltage of capacitor C2s has already increased greater than the wake-up voltage threshold. The voltage of port IN23 of contact monitoring IC 46, which is the voltage of the capacitor C2s, is evaluated in a short time after the current injection ending during the fourth timing event 106. In response to contact monitoring IC 46 detecting the voltage of the capacitor C2s becoming greater than the wake-up voltage threshold, the contact monitoring IC generates a wake-up signal and provides same to OBC controller 36 to wake up the OBC controller.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim to include The control device of claim 9, wherein each polling sequence is implemented using a PWM signal on the second microcontroller taught by Marcos Pastor. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient control pilot wake-up circuit which is configured to receive a control pilot signal from the EVSE, detect for a change in a current state of the control pilot signal while the controller is in the sleep mode, and generate a wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to a new state and a contact monitoring circuit which is further operable to generate the wake-up signal for waking up the controller in response to the voltage of the first capacitor becoming greater than the threshold due to the current state of the control pilot signal changing to the first new state. [Marcos Pastor Column 1, line number 31-37 and Column 1, line number 65 - Column 2, line number 2]
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses The control device of claim 9, wherein the first microcontroller is activated via the second microcontroller by activating a power supply of the first microcontroller whereby the first microcontroller is woken up for the high level communication between the electric vehicle and the charging station. (Kim Paragraph 0045: “In addition, when the first controller 210 detects the CSS while operating during the second period of one cycle, the first controller 210 may generate a wake-up signal for waking up the second controller 220. The first controller 1210 may provide the wake-up signal to a second power supply 270.”)
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses The control device of claim 9, wherein the second microcontroller switches to a transmit mode after detecting the wake-up signal, wherein in the transmit mode data from the connection of the electric vehicle to the charging station and / or high level communication data from and to the charging station is transmitted via the second microcontroller to and from the first microcontroller. (Kim Paragraph 0062: “The second controller 1220 may operate in a wake-up state when the first controller 1210 generates the wake-up signal, and may perform an operation for controlling charging of the EV as a whole. The second controller 1220 may consume current in the wake-up state. More specifically, when the first controller 12210 generates the wake-up signal, the wake-up signal may activate the second power supply 1270. The activated second power supply 1270 may provide a second driving voltage to the second controller 1220, and the second controller 1220 may operate in the wake-up state by the second driving voltage. In addition, the second controller 1220 may confirm the CSS provided by the opto-coupler 1250 when entering the wake-up state to perform the charge control operation.”)
8. Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 202100534353 A1) in view of Kim (EP 3581431 A1) further in view of Marcos Pastor (US 11368035 B2) and further in view of Paryani (US 20170300439 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kim in view of Kim and further in view of Marcos Pastor teaches claim 1, accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated above.
Kim in view of Kim and further in view of Marcos Pastor does not teach A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the communication between the first microcontroller and the second microcontroller is a synchronous to asynchronous communication from the first microcontroller to the second microcontroller.
However, Paryani does teach A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the communication between the first microcontroller and the second microcontroller is a synchronous to asynchronous communication from the first microcontroller to the second microcontroller. (Paryani Paragraph 0033: “In some embodiments the string control unit 304n includes the main controller 305n, which can be implemented with a microprocessor capable of communicating with other components with one or more communication protocols or interfaces, such as SPI, isoSPI, CAN bus, universal synchronous asynchronous receiver transmitter (USART), universal asynchronous receiver transmitter (UART), etc. The string control unit 304n can be configured to receive and process data regarding temperature, current, and voltage data of the individual battery modules 308n and/or the entire battery string 206n.”) (Paryani Paragraph 0035: “ In some embodiments, the safety controller 303n can be implemented with a microprocessor capable of communicating with other components with various communication protocols or interfaces, such as SPI, isoSPI, CAN bus, universal synchronous asynchronous receiver transmitter (USART), universal asynchronous receiver transmitter (UART), etc. Further details of the safety controller 303n are discussed in connection with FIG. 4 below.”)
PNG
media_image1.png
356
512
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim further in view of Marcos Pastor to include A computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the communication between the first microcontroller and the second microcontroller is a synchronous to asynchronous communication from the first microcontroller to the second microcontroller taught by Paryani. This would have been for the benefit to provide a multi-part system such as a battery management system can include distributed or subsidiary components for determining status of various parts of the system with the components in serial or point-to-point communication with a collective main controller and safety controller that can be implemented to be passively coupled to the serial or point-to-point communication between the main controller and the subsidiary units which can be used to evaluate the communications between the main and the subsidiary units. [Paryani Paragraph 0016]
Regarding claim 16, Kim in view of Kim and further in view of Marcos Pastor teaches claim 9, accordingly, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated above.
Kim in view of Kim and further in view of Marcos Pastor does not teach A The control device of claim 9, wherein the communication between the first microcontroller and the second microcontroller is a synchronous to asynchronous communication from the first microcontroller to the second microcontroller.
However, Paryani does teach The control device of claim 9, wherein the communication between the first microcontroller and the second microcontroller is a synchronous to asynchronous communication from the first microcontroller to the second microcontroller. (Paryani Paragraph 0033: “In some embodiments the string control unit 304n includes the main controller 305n, which can be implemented with a microprocessor capable of communicating with other components with one or more communication protocols or interfaces, such as SPI, isoSPI, CAN bus, universal synchronous asynchronous receiver transmitter (USART), universal asynchronous receiver transmitter (UART), etc. The string control unit 304n can be configured to receive and process data regarding temperature, current, and voltage data of the individual battery modules 308n and/or the entire battery string 206n.”) (Paryani Paragraph 0035: “ In some embodiments, the safety controller 303n can be implemented with a microprocessor capable of communicating with other components with various communication protocols or interfaces, such as SPI, isoSPI, CAN bus, universal synchronous asynchronous receiver transmitter (USART), universal asynchronous receiver transmitter (UART), etc. Further details of the safety controller 303n are discussed in connection with FIG. 4 below.”)
PNG
media_image1.png
356
512
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim in view of Kim further in view of Marcos Pastor to include The control device of claim 9, wherein the communication between the first microcontroller and the second microcontroller is a synchronous to asynchronous communication from the first microcontroller to the second microcontroller taught by Paryani. This would have been for the benefit to provide a multi-part system such as a battery management system can include distributed or subsidiary components for determining status of various parts of the system with the components in serial or point-to-point communication with a collective main controller and safety controller that can be implemented to be passively coupled to the serial or point-to-point communication between the main controller and the subsidiary units which can be used to evaluate the communications between the main and the subsidiary units. [Paryani Paragraph 0016]
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN J HARVEY whose telephone number is 571-272-5327. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-5:00PM M-Th, 8:00AM-4:00PM F.
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, Kito Robinson can be reached at 571-270-3921. 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.
/K.J.H./Junior Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664