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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDSes filed 10/16/24 and 10/29/24 have both been considered and placed of record. The two (2) initialed copies are attached herewith.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by European document EP2372866A2.
Re claim 1, the document discloses a battery pack 600 having, inter alia, a plurality of battery blocks 120/140/160, each comprising a plurality of battery cells; a plurality of analog front ends (AFEs) sequentially located 122/142/162, and configured to monitor states of the plurality of battery blocks, respectively; a main management unit 680 configured to communicate with the plurality of AFEs; and a power compensation circuit connected to a highest stage AFE 162 from among the plurality of AFEs, and comprising a power compensation resistor 196 and a power compensation switch 154 connected in series with each other, wherein a lowest stage AFE 122 from among the plurality of AFEs is configured to communicate with an upper stage AFE thereof and the main management unit, wherein the highest stage AFE is configured to communicate with a lower stage AFE thereof (BUS path in figure 1), and wherein the highest stage AFE 162 comprises: a power circuit configured to generate a driving voltage from a block voltage of a highest stage battery block from among the plurality of battery blocks (para 37-38); a pair of output voltage pins configured to output the driving voltage to the power compensation circuit (figure 1); and a global purpose input output (GPIO) pin configured to output a power compensation control signal to control the power compensation switch (figure 1; 154).
Re claim 9, the document further discloses the highest stage AFE having an IC with input pins, output pins and GPIO pins (para 41 and 43-44).
Re claim 10, the document further discloses an intermediate AFE 142 located between the highest stage AFE 162 and the lowest stage AFE 122 wherein the intermediate AFE communicated with the highest and lowest AFEs (communicate via BUS in figure 1).
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.
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.
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 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over European document EP2372866A2.
Re claims 2 and 3, the document is silent on a power control signal having a PWM signal with a duty cycle and is controlled by the main unit. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included a signal with a PWM signal with a duty cycle since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known materiale on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Re claim 4, the document does not disclose the highest AFE having a pair of input pins and are connected at opposite ends of the highest stage battery cell that are connected in series in the highest stage battery block. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modified the highest stage AFE as claimed since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571.273.8300.
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.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087
Prosecution Insights