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 § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 11-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a ) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2011/0109268), hereinafter Lee.
As to claims 1, 11 and 19, Lee discloses in figure 5 (reproduced below):--
PNG
media_image1.png
480
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a voltage balancing circuit [see figure 5] comprising:
a direct current to direct current (DC-to-DC) voltage converter [converter (320); and ¶0038] interconnecting a first battery [battery units (cell 1)]] having a first voltage and a second battery [battery units (Cell 2)l see ¶0022 and the battery units are designated by Cell 1, Cell 2 and Cell 3] having a second voltage [the equalization circuits are DC-DC converters] ; wherein the DC-to-DC converter transfers electrical power from the first battery to the second battery when the first voltage is greater than the second voltage [see ¶0023], and transfers electrical power from the second battery to the first battery when the first voltage is less than the second voltage; wherein the transfer of electrical power from the first battery to the second battery or from the second battery to the first battery balances the electrical power difference between the first battery and the second battery [see ¶0039; the highest battery unit (cell unit) connected to the buck-boost converter (320) and charge the inductor L3 and in the second time the lowest battery unit (cell unit) electrically connected to the L3 to restore change. The balancing process stops when the voltages of the battery units are equal; see ¶0024, ¶0039-0041].
As to claims 2 and 12, Lee discloses in figure 5, wherein the DC-to-DC converter transfers electrical power from the first battery to the second battery until the first voltage equals the second voltage [see ¶0024, ¶0039].
As to claims 3 and 13, Lee discloses in figure 5, wherein the DC-to-DC converter transfers electrical power from the second battery to the first battery until the first voltage equals the second voltage [see ¶0024, ¶0039].
As claims 4 and 14, Lee discloses in figure 5, wherein the DC-to-DC converter comprises a buck-boost circuit comprising an inductor, a first switch, and a second switch [converting unit (320) is a buck/boost converter; see ¶0039] .
As to claims 5 and 15, Lee discloses in figure 5, a controller that controls operation of the first switch and the second switch of the buck-boost circuit based on the first voltage and the second voltage [see ¶0039].
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 6, 8 -10, 16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Yang et al. (US 2016/0082858), hereinafter Yang.
As to claims 8 and 18, Lee discloses in figure 5, wherein the first battery and the second battery are connected in series [see figure 5]
However, Lee does not disclose explicitly, form a split battery for an electric vehicle.
Yang discloses in figure 1, a form a split battery for an electric vehicle [see Abstract, ¶008, ¶0063 and figure 1].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to use the battery balancing apparatus of Lee for electrical vehicle as taught by Yang to expand the usage of the circuit and extend vehicle battery life.
As to claim 9, Yang discloses in figure 1, a vehicle comprising the voltage balancing circuit according to claim 1 [see Abstract, figure 1] .
As to claim 10, Yang discloses in figure 1, wherein the voltage balancing circuit operates while the vehicle is in motion [see ¶0063].
As to claim 20, Yang discloses in figure 1, wherein the voltage balancing circuit operates according to the computer executable instructions while the vehicle is in motion [¶0063].
As to claims 6 and 16, neither Lee nor Yang discloses, wherein the DC-to-DC converter provides a minimum power transfer of one-half kilowatt in the event of an unbalanced condition between the first battery and the second battery.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to transfer only one-half kilowatt for effective balancing of battery units, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine s-kill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Garnier et al. (US 2014/0035531), hereinafter Gornier.
As to claims 7 and 17, Lee discloses all of the claim limitations except, balancing circuit according to claim 1, further comprising a first fuse connected between the first battery and the DC-to-DC converter, and a second fuse connected between the second battery and the DC-to-DC converter.
Garnier discloses in figure 9, a first fuse [fuse 117] connected between the first battery and the DC-to-DC converter, and a second fuse connected between the second battery and the DC-to-DC converter [fuse (117) connected the battery with the converter; see also ¶00198].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to add protection device such as fuse in Lee’s apparatus as taught by Garnier to protect the converter circuit from short circuit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kutkut et al. (US 6,150,795) discloses in figure 1, a direct current to direct current (DC-to-DC) balancing series connected batteries.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights