DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-17, 19-22 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to claims 1, 10 the specification does not described ”dynamically” determining a modified SOC setpoint nor does it decried that the SOC setpoint is not preset or predefined.
Claims 2-9, 11-18 are rejected based on their dependency on the defective parent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 1,3-4, 7, 10, 12-13, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tu (US 2023/0264677) in view of Zhao (US 2015/0127199), and Telford (US 2025/0115168)
As to claim 1 Tu discloses an intelligent battery charge depletion system for an electrified powertrain of a range-extended electrified vehicle (REEV), the intelligent battery depletion system comprising:
a set of devices configured to monitor a set of parameters indicative of at least (i) a state of charge (SOC) of a battery system connected to an electric motor of the electrified powertrain(Paragraph 37 “The controller uses the charging control method for the range extend electric vehicle according to the present invention to perform predictive control over the state of charge (SOC) of the battery based on the predicted condition of the terrain ahead, which may ensure to a greater extent that the engine runs in the high efficiency power range even when charging the battery.”), (ii) an estimated road load of a road segment that the REEV is traversing, and (iii) an estimated gross combined vehicle weight (GCVW) of the REEV(Paragraph 15-18 “0015] As a preferred solution of the present invention, a traction change caused by the slope is:F.sub.s=mg sin(θ.sub.i−θ.sub.0)≈mg(θ.sub.i−θ.sub.0) [0016] a power change is: P=mgV(θ.sub.i−θ.sub.0); and [0017] the predicted load percentage of the engine is: N.sub.i′=N+mgV(θ.sub.i−θ.sub.0)/W.sub.max, [0018] where m is the mass of the vehicle, and g is an acceleration of gravity.”); and
a controller configured to:
determine a modified SOC setpoint based on the estimated road load and the estimated GCVW of the REEV, wherein the modified SOC setpoint is different than a charge sustaining SOC setpoint (Paragraph 7 “(2) determining, by the controller, the electric quantity of the battery, when the electric quantity of the battery is lower than the first threshold value and higher than the second threshold value, proceeding to a next step, and when the electric quantity of the battery is lower than the second threshold value, controlling, by the controller, the battery to be forcibly charged and returning to step (1) upon completion of charging;”);
control the electric motor based on the modified SOC setpoint and the battery system SOC to maintain a torque reserve that the electric motor and the battery system can use when needed (Paragraph 11 “As a preferred solution of the present invention, in the case that the optimal charging time does not occur in the terrain condition or road environment ahead, when the electric quantity of the battery is lower than the second threshold value, the controller controls the battery to be forcibly charged to the first threshold value.”); and
control an engine of the electrified powertrain to selectively recharge the battery system (Paragraph 41 “(2) Determine, by the controller, the electric quantity of the battery, when the electric quantity of the battery is lower than the first threshold value and higher than the second threshold value, skip immediately increasing, by the controller, the power of an engine for charging control over the battery, and proceed to a next step, and when the electric quantity of the battery is lower than the second threshold value, control, by the controller, the battery to be forcibly charged, and return to step (1) upon completion of charging.”).
Tu does not explicitly disclose dynamically determine, during an operating period of the electrified powertrain and based on real-time inputs received from the set of devices during the operating period, a modified setpoint that is not preset or predefined prior to the operating period.
Zhao teaches dynamically determine, during an operating period of the electrified powertrain and based on real-time inputs received from the set of devices during the operating period, a modified setpoint that is not preset or predefined prior to the operating period(Paragraph 15 “That preview information 201 is used to calculate route segmentation 202. The route segmentation 202 is performed by decomposing the continuous route into discrete segments. After the route is segmented, the route segmentation 202 information is forwarded to a receding horizon control 203 which also solves a formulated Dynamic Programming (DP) 205 problem which is used to obtain data such as the optimal battery SoC setpoints 204. As the vehicle travels, the receding horizon control 203 is conducted iteratively for the remaining route until the destination is reached. At every iteration, an optimal SoC setpoint 204 for the current segment may be calculated.”, Paragraph 23 “An example of a calculation for the average wheel power 303 can be based on a vehicle dynamics model considering aerodynamic drag, road grade, vehicle acceleration, rolling resistance and wheel bearing loss. An example of the analytical formula for average wheel power is below and .rho. is the mass density of the air, C.sub.D is the coefficient of aerodynamic resistance, A is the vehicle frontal area, v.sub.i is the vehicle speed at point i, v.sub.i+1 is the vehicle speed at point i+1, t.sub.i is the time at point i, t.sub.i+1 is the time at point i+1, m is the mass of the vehicle, g is the acceleration of gravity, .theta. is the road grade, J.sub.wheel is the inertia of one wheel, L.sub.TireRadius is the radius of the tire, a, b, c are the coefficients for rolling resistance, a.sub.bLoss, b.sub.bLoss are the coefficients for bearing loss, P.sub.tire is the tire inflation pressure, .alpha. and .beta. are the exponents, F.sub.wgtonFrnWhl is the weight on the front wheels and F.sub.wgtonRearWhl is the weight on the rear wheels. In this equation i can be the start of a segment and i+1 can be the end of a segment.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Tu to include the teachings of dynamically determining the SOC setpoint for the purpose of improving efficiency.
Tu does not explicitly selectively control the electric motor and the battery system to deplete the torque reserve during a high road load mode or conditions
Telford teaches selectively control the electric motor and the battery system to deplete the torque reserve during a high road load mode or conditions (Paragraph 88 “FIG. 9E shows the fuel cells power output during the operational case when the maximum output power setting is less than the rolling average power demand. This difference is then made up by the ESS system. FIG. 9F shows the same event for the fuel cells power output when the vehicle is operating in an ECO-type mode. In this drive mode, both the maximum output setting and the power change limits are less than the rolling average power demand, thus conserving primary energy. Conserving primary energy power from the fuel cell array is advantageous in that, amongst other factors, it provides greater fuel efficiency during the vehicle's route.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Tu to include the teachings of dynamically determining the SOC setpoint for the purpose of improving efficiency.
As to claim 3 Tu discloses an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the controller is configured to estimate the road load based on altitude, ambient temperature, and one or more road parameters (Paragraph 30).
As to claim 4 Tu discloses an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the one or more road parameters include at least one of road grade and road type or speed limit (Paragraph 12).
As to claim 7 Tu discloses an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the controller is further configured to: determine a set of navigation parameters associated with a navigation system of the set of devices; and control the electric motor based further on the set of navigation parameters (Paragraph 64).
As to claim 10 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 1.
As to claim 12 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 3.
As to claim 13 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 4.
As to claim 16 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 7.
Claims 2, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tu (US 2023/0264677) in view of Zhao (US 2015/0127199), and Telford (US 2025/0115168) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kava (US 2021/0086628)
As to claim 2 Kava teaches discloses an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the controller is configured to determine the modified SOC setpoint using a predetermined lookup table relating GCVW of the REEV to modified SOC setpoints for the battery system(Paragraph 38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Tu to include the teachings of different SOC setpoints for different loads for the purpose of improving the range prediction.
As to claim 11 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 2.
Claims 5, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tu (US 2023/0264677) in view of Zhao (US 2015/0127199), and Telford (US 2025/0115168) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Moravec (US 2024/0317106)
As to claim 5 Moravec teaches an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the controller is configured to estimate the road load based further on at least one of a driver selection of a tow/haul mode, a driver selection of a long trip mode, and a trailer hookup via monitoring of a trailer plug(Paragraph 57). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Tu to include the teachings of providing a selection of the different modes for the purpose of improving the range prediction when towing.
As to claim 14 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 5.
Claims 6, 8, 15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tu (US 2023/0264677) in view of Zhao (US 2015/0127199), and Telford (US 2025/0115168) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Yu (US 2012/0035795)
As to claim 6 Yu teaches an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the controller is further configured to perform blended charge depletion (BCD) by: determining a modified chare depletion rate at which the SOC of the battery system is depleted to power the electric motor, wherein the modified charge depletion rate is less than a maximum discharge rate; and controlling the electric motor based on the modified charge depletion rate until the SOC of the battery system reaches the modified SOC setpoint(Paragraph 22). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Tu to include the teachings of adjusting the charge depletion rate for the purpose of reaching a defined SOC setpoint.
As to claim 8 Yu teaches an intelligent battery charge depletion system, wherein the charge sustaining setpoint is a predetermined value for the REEV with no associated payload, and wherein the modified SOC setpoint is one of a plurality of values that are each different than the charge sustaining setpoint (Paragraph 20).
As to claim 15 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 6.
As to claim 17 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 8.
Claims 20, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tu (US 2023/0264677) in view of Zhao (US 2015/0127199), and Telford (US 2025/0115168) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Huh (US 2022/0402477)
As to claim 20 Huh teaches an intelligent charge depletion system wherein the controller is further configured to determine a minimum modified SOC setpoint and a maximum modified SOC setpoint defining a range of permissible modified SOC setpoints, and wherein the dynamically determined modified SOC setpoint is constrained to fall within the range defined by the minimum and maximum modified SOC setpoints(Paragraph 96). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify determining a range of the SOC setpoints for the purpose of improving efficiency of the vehicle along the route.
As to claim 22 the claim is interpreted and rejected as in claim 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 8 of the applicants arguments applicants ague that the specification clearly convey to a person of ordinary skill that the inventor possessed, as of the filing date, a system and method in which the modified SOC setpoint is: (1) determined during the operating period of the electrified powertrain; (2) based on real-time inputs received from the set of devices during that operating period; and (3) not preset or predefined prior to the operating period.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicants arguments. The examiner would like to note that some of the paragraph citations in the arguments are not found in the specification The specification only has 26 Paragraphs and the applicant refers to Paragraphs 28-32, 35, and 40-44. Thus it is not clear which portions of the specification the applicant is referring to in their arguments.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8, 10-17, 19-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 IMRAN K MUSTAFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1471. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, James J Lee can be reached at 571-270-5965. 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.
IMRAN K. MUSTAFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
/IMRAN K MUSTAFA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
10/6/2026
Prosecution Insights