DETAILED ACTION
1. This is the first action on the merits relating to U.S. Application Serial No. 18/474,570 filed on September 26, 2023. 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 .
3. Applicant’s claiming benefit of US provisional application is acknowledged.
Drawings
4. Drawings originally filed on September 26, 2023 is approved. However, if Applicant want to resubmit figure 2, which is gray and in not in clear resolution, Applicant may submit replacement drawing for figure 2.
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. 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
5. 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.
6. Claim 5 and 6 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "a backup battery management system” in claim 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation is neither in claim 3 or claim 1.
In claim 5, line 1: “wherein” should be replaced with “further comprising.” Which would overcome this rejection.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being dependent on rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 11,273,715 B1 to Vordermeier (hereinafter “Vordermeier”).
Regarding claim 1, Vordermeier discloses a vehicular control system comprising an electric motor and controller (col. 2, lines 20+); two battery packs (see abstract and col. 1, lines 33+). When the primary battery pack is depleted, (it is a first state), the vehicle switches over to the secondary battery (col. 2, lines 56+) (a second state). The second battery pack is a back up battery in claim 1, and when the primary battery is depleted, it can be equated to the failure condition of the primary battery in claim 1. The controller (col. 2, lines 20+) detects the condition of the primary battery and switches to the secondary battery based on the sensed condition (col. 2, lines 56+), which can be equated to ECU in the claim.
Regarding claim 2, when the secondary battery is used for the vehicle, the primary battery is fully charged, and when the primary is used for powering the vehicle, the secondary battery is charged (col. 2, lines 56+; col. 3, lines 5+).
Regarding claim 3, either primary battery or the secondary battery can be charged by the generator 1 (col. 2, lines 56+).
Regarding claim 9, the switch for changing the power source to primary battery to the secondary battery and back is electrical switch (col. 2, lines 56+).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
13. Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,273,715 B1 to Vordermeier in view of US 2020/0164763 A1 to HOLME (hereinafter “HOLME”).
Regarding claim 12, the he teachings of Vordermeier have been discussed above.
Vordermeier, however, fails to disclose or suggest that the system shows the battery status information comprising battery health information.
HOLME discloses a battery management system for a vehicle (see abstract) comprising primary battery and secondary battery (see paragraph 0003) and the system monitors battery health information indicating any safety or repair conditions of the battery (see paragraph 0009).
In view of HOLME”s disclosure it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to employe to further include means showing well-known battery health information to the teachings of Vordermeier in order to keep the users of the vehicle abreast of the critical information to the vehicle. Vordermeier reference is silent on many aspects of the EV and simply recite on the subject matter. However, most of EV has a dashboard displaying critical information of the vehicle for operational and safety concerns. Accordingly, showing battery health information is well within one ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, HOLME further discloses issuing a warning in various abnormal condition of the vehicle (see paragraph 0087, 0162 and see TABLE 2 and others). Generating a warning or other alerting means for the users is also an improvement one ordinary skill in the art would contemplate.
Allowable Subject Matter
14. Claims 13-20 are allowed.
15. Claims 4, 7, and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
16. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims are directed at a vehicular control system, the vehicular control system comprising:
an electric motor operable to, when powered, drive one or more wheels of a vehicle equipped with the vehicular control system;
a primary battery operable to provide electric power to the electric motor;
a backup battery operable to provide electric power to the electric motor; an electrical switch that is operable in a first state and that is operable in a second state, wherein, when the electrical switch is operating in the first state, the primary battery provides electric power to the electric motor and the backup battery does not provide electric power to the electric motor, and wherein, when the electrical switch is operating in the second state, the backup battery provides power to the electric motor and the primary battery does not provide electric power to the electric motor;
an electronic control unit (ECU) comprising electronic circuitry and associated software;
wherein battery status information of the primary battery is provided to and processed at the ECU;
wherein the vehicular control system, with the electrical switch operating in the first state and responsive to processing at the ECU of the battery status information of the primary battery, determines a failure condition of the primary battery; wherein the vehicular control system comprises an inverter, and wherein the inverter, with the electrical switch operating in the first state, changes direct current provided by the primary battery to alternating current for the electric motor, and wherein the inverter, with the electrical switch operating in the second state, changes direct current provided by the backup battery to alternating current for the electric motor; and
wherein the vehicular control system, responsive to determining the failure condition of the primary battery, adjusts the electrical switch from operating in the first state to operating in the second state.
Such a vehicular control system is neither disclosed nor suggested by the cited references. The limitation in the other allowed independent claim (18) is also and other objected claims are also allowable.
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
July 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights