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 § 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al, CN 108539841 in view of Zeng et al, CN110126658.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, He et al disclose a power supply system for a hybrid combination DC-DC converter comprising: a photovoltaic cell 21, a rechargeable battery 24, a switching group 27, a bidirectional DC-DC converter 22, a bidirectional DC-DC converter 25, a controller 28, an inverter 26, and an alternating current power supply 29. Output ends of the photovoltaic cell 21 and the rechargeable battery 24 are connected to input ends of the bidirectional DC-DC converters 22 and 25 by means of the switching group 27, output ends of the bidirectional DC-DC converters 22 and 25 are connected in parallel to a direct current (DC) bus, and the switching group 27 comprises four switches S 1-S4. The controller 28 is used for controlling a switching or turn-on state of the switching group 27, and controlling working modes of the bidirectional DC-DC converters 22 and 25 (figure 2), wherein the working modes comprise first to sixth working modes (figures 3-8). In the working modes, the photovoltaic cell 21 and the rechargeable battery 24 can be in turn-on connection to one or two of the bidirectional DC-DC converters 22 and 25 by means of the switching group 27 for charging or discharging.
He et al fail to disclose that the control unit is connected to at least one battery cluster by means of a control bus for controlling the rated charging and discharging rate of an energy storage system and/or for obtaining the output current magnitude and an initial charge state of each battery cluster, and controlling charging and discharging of each battery cluster according to the output current magnitude and the initial charge state of each battery cluster, so as to balance the remaining power of the each battery cluster. However, the purpose of the connection and the technical problems to be solved are how to control the rated charging and discharging rate of the system, and how to prevent overcharge and over-discharge of a battery. Therefore, it would be easily conceived by combining the teachings of He et al with the common general knowledge in the art (i.e. preventing overcharging and over-discharging of batteries) to arrive at the technical structure as presented by the claims.
He et al fail to expressly disclose requiring the controller to select different quantities of DC/DC circuits to obtain corresponding rated charge/discharge rates.
Zeng et al disclose a port multiplexer bidirectional charger and application method comprising multiple isolated bidirectional DC/DC converters and switches with a battery connected to the interface; selecting the number and connection mode to the DC//DC converters by controlling the switches according to the battery charge/discharge power requirement (see Fig. 1 and its corresponding description in the US translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to apply the selectable modular converter arrangement of Zeng et al into the multiple bisectional DC/DC converter system of He et al in order to allow different numbers of converters to operate in parallel when different power are required, without requiring redesign of the converter system. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art.
Regarding claims 2-11 and 13-19, the additional features are disclosed in He et al, or would be easily conceived of by combining He et al and common general knowledge in the art. For instance:
Regarding claim 2, wherein: the at least one battery cluster comprises a first battery cluster; and the controller is configured to turn-on a first switch connecting the first battery cluster to a first DC/DC conversion circuit of the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits, to be turned on and turn-off a second switch connecting the first battery cluster to a second DC/DC conversion circuit of the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits so that the rated charge/discharge rate of the energy storage system is a first rated charge/discharge rate. (See Fig. 2 of He et al and its description in the English translation). Additionally, Zeng et al disclose an alternative in which a single DC/DC converter is connected to the battery interface and other converters are not part of the selected output configuration which accomplishes the converter selection trough ON/OFF states of the switches. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claims 3 and 18, wherein the controller is further configured to turn-on n switches connecting the first battery cluster to n DC/DC conversion circuits in the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits and turn-off a third switch connecting the first battery cluster to connect to a third DC/DC conversion circuit that is other than the n DC/DC conversion circuits and that is in the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits so that the rated charge/discharge rate of the energy storage system is a second rated charge/discharge rate, wherein the n DC/DC conversion circuits or the third DC/DC conversion circuit comprise the first DC/DC conversion circuit, the second rated charge/discharge rate is n times the first rated charge/discharge rate, and n is an integer greater than 1 (with respect to the number of DC/DC conversion circuits and/or the ratio between the rated charge/discharge rate, such limitations are merely an engineering choice for meeting specific customer requirements, which therefore, obvious. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art. Additionally, Zeng et al teach switching between a single converter and at least two parallel converters according to the battery charge/discharge power requirements. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 4, wherein the controller is further configured to control charging and discharging of each of the at least one battery cluster based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of the battery cluster, to balance remaining power of each battery cluster. (See Fig. 2 and its description in the English translation). Furthermore, controlling charging/discharging of the battery clusters based on output current magnitude and the initial state of charge to balance the remaining power is common in the art for improving charge distribution between battery units. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 5, wherein the controller is further configured to control charging and discharging of each of the at least one battery cluster based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of the battery cluster, to balance remaining power of each battery cluster. (See Fig. 2 and its description in the English translation). Furthermore, controlling charging/discharging of the battery clusters based on output current magnitude and the initial state of charge to balance the remaining power is common in the art for improving charge distribution between battery units. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claims 6 and 15-17, further comprising at least two battery clusters, the at least two battery clusters comprising a first battery cluster and a second battery cluster, wherein the controller is further configured to: turn-on a fourth switch connecting the first battery cluster to h DC/DC conversion circuits in the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits; turn-off a fifth switch connecting the first battery cluster to a fourth DC/DC conversion circuit that is other than the h DC/DC conversion circuits and that is in the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits; and turn-off a sixth switch connecting the second battery cluster to each of the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits so that the rated charge/discharge rate of the energy storage system is a target rated charge/discharge rate, wherein h is an integer greater than 0 (with respect to the number of DC/DC conversion circuits and/or the ratio between the rated charge/discharge rate, such limitations are merely an engineering choice for meeting specific customer requirements, which therefore, obvious. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art. Furthermore, it is common in the art to use isolation technique of batteries where clusters of batteries are removed from active operation when they are not required while using other remaining cluster with the converter appropriate to the required power. Therefore, He et al in view Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, wherein the controller is further configured to control charging and discharging of each of the at least one battery cluster based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of the at least one battery cluster to balance remaining power of each of the at least one battery cluster. (See Figs. 2 and 9-10 of He et al and their description in the English translation). Furthermore, controlling charging/discharging of the battery clusters based on output current magnitude and the initial state of charge to balance the remaining power is common in the art for improving charge distribution between battery units. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 8, wherein each of the at least one battery cluster comprises at least one battery module connected in series, each at least one battery module comprises a battery management unit (BMU), the controller is connected to a BMU of each of the at least one battery module in each of the at least one battery cluster through the control bus, and the controller is configured to obtain an initial state of charge of each of the at least one battery cluster by using a BMU of each of the at least one battery module. (See Figs. 2, 9-10 and their description in the English translation). Furthermore, controlling charging/discharging of the battery clusters based on output current magnitude and the initial state of charge to balance the remaining power is common in the art for improving charge distribution between battery units. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 9, wherein each of the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits comprises a battery control unit (BCU), the controller is connected to each BCU in the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits through the control bus, and the controller is configured to obtain an output current magnitude of each of the at least one battery cluster through each BCU. (See Figs. 2, 9-10 and their description in the English translation). Additionally, monitoring the battery characteristics is common in the art in order to provide the status of the battery. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 10, wherein the at least two DC/DC conversion circuits comprise a battery control unit (BCU), the controller is connected to the BCU through the control bus, and the controller is configured to obtain an output current magnitude of each battery cluster through the BCU. (See Figs. 2, 9-10 and their description in the English translation). Additionally, monitoring the battery characteristics is common in the art in order to provide the status of the battery. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 11, further comprising a power converter, wherein an input end of the power converter is connected to the direct current bus, an output end of the power converter is connected to an alternating current bus, and the power converter is configured to convert, into alternating current electricity during discharging of the at least one battery cluster, direct current electricity that is input based on the direct current bus, or the power converter is configured to convert, into direct current electricity during charging of the at least one battery cluster, alternating current electricity that is input based on the alternating current bus. (See Figs. 2, 9-10 of He et al and their description in the English translation).
Regarding claim 13, wherein the controlling charging and discharging of each of the at least one battery cluster based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of the respective battery cluster comprises: controlling, based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of each of the at least one battery cluster, operating power of each DC/DC conversion circuit correspondingly connected to the respective battery cluster, to control charging and discharging of each of the at least one battery cluster. (See Figs. 2, 9-10 and their description in the English translation). Furthermore, controlling charging/discharging of the battery clusters based on output current magnitude and the initial state of charge to balance the remaining power is common in the art for improving charge distribution between battery units. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 14, wherein the controlling, based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of each of the at least one battery cluster, operating power of each DC/DC conversion circuit correspondingly connected to the respective battery cluster comprises: determining, based on an output current magnitude and initial state of charge of the respective battery cluster, a first state of charge corresponding to the respective battery cluster; and controlling, based on a first state of charge corresponding to each of the at least one battery cluster, operating power of each DC/DC conversion circuit correspondingly connected to the respective battery cluster, to control charging and discharging of each of the at least one battery cluster. (See Figs. 2, 9-10 and their description in the English translation). Furthermore, controlling charging/discharging of the battery clusters based on output current magnitude and the initial state of charge to balance the remaining power is common in the art for improving charge distribution between battery units. Therefore, He et al in view of Zeng et al render the claim obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 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.
Remarks:
In response to the applicant’s argument regarding requiring that the controller selects different quantities of DC/DC circuits to obtain corresponding rated charge/discharge rates, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The new prior art (Zeng et al) discloses a port multiplexer bidirectional charger and application method comprising multiple isolated bidirectional DC/DC converters and switches with a battery connected to the interface; selecting the number and connection mode to the DC//DC converters by controlling the switches according to the battery charge/discharge power requirement (see Fig. 1 and its corresponding description in the US translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to apply the selectable modular converter arrangement of Zeng et al into the multiple bisectional DC/DC converter system of He et al in order to allow different numbers of converters to operate in parallel when different power are required, without requiring redesign of the converter system. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art.
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 DANIEL ST CYR whose telephone number is (571)272-2407. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:00-8:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pham Thomas can be reached at 571-272-3689. 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.
DANIEL ST CYR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/DANIEL ST CYR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights