CTNF 18/537,303 CTNF 101942 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings 06-22-03 AIA The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “ 20 Fig. 1 ” has been used to designate both "v and "v . 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. 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 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 3-4 and 12 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 3 recites the limitation “and steering control, and a dampening mechanism” in line 3 of the claim. The multiple “ands” leads to indefiniteness regarding whether “a dampening mechanism” is included in “the at least one vehicle control parameter” list or separate from the list. It is indefinite whether the claim is intended to be read as a list of alternatives or if “at least one vehicle control parameter” is intended to include several parameters, including at least one from the list. For examination purposes all listed control parameters in claim 3 will be read as alternatives. Claim 4 depends on claim 3, therefore claim 4 inherits the same issues as claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the processor device" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes claim 12 will be read as “a processor device”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-10, 12-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recites an abstract idea as discussed below. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application for reasons discussed below. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for reasons discussed below. Step 1 of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine if the claims are to one of the statutory categories of invention. Applied to the present application, the claims belong to the statutory class of a product or process. Step 2A of the 2019 Guidance is divided into two Prongs. Prong 1 requires the examiner to determine if the claims recite an abstract idea, and further requires that the abstract idea belong to one of three enumerated groupings: mathematical concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity. Claim 1 is copied below, with the limitations belonging to an abstract idea being underlined. A computer implemented-method for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle, the method comprising: estimating a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system ; determining vibration data including mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system; determining a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health , and adapting at least one vehicle control parameter to vary at least one of the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency to reduce the degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system. The limitations underlined can be considered to describe a mathematical calculation, namely a mathematical operation to determine the current health of a battery and the impact of vibrations on the health of a battery. The lack of specific equation in the claim merely points out that the claim would monopolize all possible appropriate equations for accomplishing this purpose in all possible systems. The additional limitation of “determining vibration data” is insignificant extra-solution activity, i.e. data gathering (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The additional limitation of “adapting at least one vehicle control parameter” is mere instructions to apply an exception (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitation does not recite a particular machine. The claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Various considerations are used to determine whether the additional elements are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim does not recite a particular machine applying or being used by the abstract idea. The claim does not effect a real-world transformation or reduction of any particular article to a different state or thing. The claim does not contain additional elements which describe the functioning of a computer, or which describe a particular technology or technical field, being improved by the use of the abstract idea. Step 2b of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine whether the additional elements cause the claim to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The considerations for this particular claim are essentially the same as the considerations for Prong 2 of Step 2a, and the same analysis leads to the conclusion that the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claim 1 is rejected as ineligible under 35 USC 101. Dependent claims 2-5, 7, 9-10, 12-14 are similarly ineligible. Dependent Claim 2 adds the recited “employing a vibration model” to the abstract idea limitations discussed above. Dependent Claim 3 recites a list of “vehicle control parameters”. The recited “a speed profile, an acceleration profile, a gear-shifting strategy, a braking strategy, and steering control” are mental processes. The recited “dampening mechanism” is a generic product. Dependent Claim 4 additionally recites “the dampening mechanism is a controllable local dampening mechanism”. However, claim 3 is written in the alternative, meaning “the dampening mechanism” is not a required element of the claim. Dependent Claim 5 adds the recited “adapting a combination” step to the abstract idea limitations. Dependent Claim 7 adds the recited “adapted” step to the abstract idea limitations. Dependent Claim 9 adds the recited “outcome of the adaption” step to the abstract idea limitations. Dependent Claim 10 recites “while the vehicle is traveling”, which is not a particular machine. Dependent Claim 12 and 13 recites “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions” and “control unit”, which are generic computer components that are invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which does not cause the claim as a whole to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application or provide significantly more than the recited abstract idea. Dependent Claim 14 adds “a vehicle” which is not a particular machine. None of these dependent claims recite any further additional elements which would cause the claim as a whole to integrate the recited abstract idea into a particular practical application at Prong 2, or provide significantly more than the recited abstract idea at Step 2B. Claims 2-5, 7, 9-10, 12-14 are therefore rejected as ineligible under 35 USC 101 as well. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because "a computer product comprising program code" is software per se. Examiner’s Note Concerning Eligibility Under 35 USC § 101 Claims 6, 8, 15 are eligible. Claim 6 recites a “local dampening mechanism”. This integrates the judicial exception into a particular machine. Claim 6 is therefore eligible. Claims 8 and 15 recite a “vibration sensor arranged on or near the electrical energy storage system”. This integrates the judicial exception into a particular machine. Claims 8 and 15 are therefore eligible. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-8, 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (CN 108679160 A) in view of Sung (US 20170261473 A1) . Regarding Claim 1 , He teaches adapting at least one vehicle control parameter to vary at least one of the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency to reduce the degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system (Fig. 1; ¶77: “The vibration damping device can dampen vibration-damping objects to increase their service life”). He does not explicitly teach: estimating a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system; determining vibration data including mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system; determining a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health. Sung teaches: estimating a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system (Fig. 1A; ¶50: “the battery state monitoring apparatus 130 may further estimate a state of the battery 110 based on estimated influence of a vibrating impact on a state of charge (SoC), a state of health (SoH), and a useful remaining life of the battery 110”); determining vibration data including mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system (Fig. 6; ¶132: “a method of determining a frequency and an impact magnitude level in a method of collecting vibration information”); determining a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health (Fig. 1A; ¶50: “the battery state monitoring apparatus 130 may further estimate a state of the battery 110 based on estimated influence of a vibrating impact on a state of charge (SoC), a state of health (SoH), and a useful remaining life of the battery 110”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the battery state monitoring apparatus of Sung with the dampening device of He by putting both on a vehicle. Doing so would allow for monitoring and control of the impact of vibrations on a battery. Regarding Claim 2 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, and He further teaches wherein adapting the at least one vehicle control parameter includes employing a vibration model including at least one relationship between the at least one vehicle control parameter and the respective effect on the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency of the electrical energy storage system (¶99: “the controller 202 determines that the vibration damping object 300 needs to be damped when the parameter reaches a preset threshold value through some parameters”). Regarding Claim 3 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, and He further teaches wherein the at least one vehicle control parameter includes a speed profile, an acceleration profile, a gear-shifting strategy, a braking strategy, and steering control, and a dampening mechanism, of the vehicle (¶77: “The vibration damping device can dampen vibration-damping objects to increase their service life”). Regarding Claim 4 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 3, and He further teaches wherein the dampening mechanism is a controllable local dampening mechanism for the electrical energy storage system (¶85: “At least one vibration damping device 200 is mounted on the central beam 101 of the casing”). Regarding Claim 5 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, and He further teaches wherein the step of adapting comprises adapting a combination of at least two vehicle control parameters (¶85: “two damping devices 200 can be symmetrically mounted on the central beam 101.”). Regarding Claim 6 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 5, and He further teaches wherein one of the at least two vehicle control parameters is a local dampening mechanism for the electrical energy storage system (¶85). Regarding Claim 7 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, and He further teaches wherein the vehicle control parameters are adapted in such a way that the vehicle can reach an intended destination subject to travelling constraints (¶99: “when the electric vehicle enters a relatively bumpy road condition”). Regarding Claim 8 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, but He does not explicitly teach wherein vibration data are measured using a vibration sensor arranged on or near the electrical energy storage system or on an electrical energy storage cell, and the mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum are determined from analysing the vibration data. Sung teaches wherein vibration data are measured using a vibration sensor arranged on or near the electrical energy storage system or on an electrical energy storage cell, and the mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum are determined from analysing the vibration data (acceleration sensor 120 Fig. 1; ¶50 “the acceleration sensors 120 are attached to corners of the battery 110”; ¶132: “a method of determining a frequency and an impact magnitude level in a method of collecting vibration information”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the sensors of Sung with the invention of He in view of Sung by attaching the acceleration sensors of Sung to the battery in order to measure vibrations. Doing so would allow for accurate determination of the impact of vibrations on state of health. Regarding Claim 10 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, and He further teaches wherein the method steps are performed while the vehicle is travelling (¶99-100). Regarding Claim 11 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, but He does not explicitly teach a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by a processor device, the method of claim 1, when said program is run on a computer. Sung teaches a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by a processor device, the method of claim 1, when said program is run on a computer (battery state monitoring apparatus 300, collector 310 Fig. 3; ¶66). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the battery state monitoring apparatus of Sung with the invention of He in view of Sung for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 12 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, but He does not explicitly teach a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processor device, cause the processor device to perform the method of claim 1. Sung teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processor device, cause the processor device to perform the method of claim 1 (battery state monitoring apparatus 300, collector 310 Fig. 3; ¶66). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the battery state monitoring apparatus of Sung with the invention of He in view of Sung for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 13 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 1, but He does not explicitly teach a control unit for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle, the control unit is configured to perform the steps of the method according to claim 1. Sung teaches a control unit for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle, the control unit is configured to perform the steps of the method according to claim 1 (battery state monitoring apparatus 300, collector 310 Fig. 3; ¶66). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the battery state monitoring apparatus of Sung with the invention of He in view of Sung for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 14 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 13, and He further teaches a vehicle (¶99). Regarding Claim 15 , He in view of Sung teaches the limitations of claim 13, but He does not explicitly teach a vibration sensor on or near the electrical energy storage system, the vibration sensor is configured to acquire vibration data indicative of a vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system. Sung teaches a vibration sensor on or near the electrical energy storage system, the vibration sensor is configured to acquire vibration data indicative of a vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system (acceleration sensor 120 Fig. 1; ¶50 “the acceleration sensors 120 are attached to corners of the battery 110”; ¶132: “a method of determining a frequency and an impact magnitude level in a method of collecting vibration information”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the sensors of Sung with the invention of He in view of Sung by attaching the acceleration sensors of Sung to the battery in order to measure vibrations. Doing so would allow for accurate determination of the impact of vibrations on state of health. Examiner’s Notes The Examiner notes that Claim 9 is distinguishable over the prior art made of record. Claim 9 distinguishes over the prior art for the following reasons: He teaches a vibration model and adapting a vehicle control parameter to reduce vibrations. He does not teach updating the model with the outcome of adapting control parameter on state of health. Sung teaches state of health analysis with vibration data. Sung does not teach a vibration model or adapting a vehicle control parameter. Neither He nor Sung teach updating a vibration model with the outcome on state of health of the electrical energy storage system. Sakurai (US 20220097560 A1) teaches determining degeneration of a battery due to vibration magnitude (¶27) and adjusting vehicle control parameters (Fig. 6). Sakurai does not teach updating a vibration model with the outcome of adapting a vehicle control parameter. The prior art, when taken alone or in combination, cannot be construed as teaching or suggesting all of the elements of claim 9 as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-2, 7, and 10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 7-9 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because application claims 1-2, 7, and 10 are anticipated by copending application claims 7-9. Regarding Claim 1 , claim 7 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 teaches: A computer implemented-method for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle, the method comprising: (Claim 7 depending on Claim 5 “A computer-implemented method for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle when travelling on a route from an origin to a destination for accomplishing a mission, the method comprising”) estimating a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 7 depending on Claim 5 “acquiring data of a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system”); determining vibration data including mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 7 “determining mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system”); determining a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health, and (Claim 7 “determining a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health”) adapting at least one vehicle control parameter to vary at least one of the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency to reduce the degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 7 “adapting at least one vehicle control parameter to vary at least one of the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency spectrum to reduce degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system using a control parameter-vibration model”). Regarding Claim 2 , claim 8 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 teaches: adapting the at least one vehicle control parameter includes employing a vibration model including at least one relationship between the at least one vehicle control parameter and the respective effect on the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 8 “the control parameter-vibration model includes at least one relationship between the at least one vehicle control parameter and the respective effect on the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency of the electrical energy storage system”). Regarding Claim 7 , claim 9 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 teaches: the vehicle control parameters are adapted in such a way that the vehicle can reach an intended destination subject to travelling constraints (Claim 9 “the vehicle control parameters are adapted in such a way that the vehicle mission can be accomplished”). Regarding Claim 10 , claim 9 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 teaches: the method steps are performed while the vehicle is travelling (Claim 9 “the vehicle control parameters are adapted in such a way that the vehicle mission can be accomplished”) . This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. 08-37 AIA Claim s 1-8, 10-15 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1, 3, and 14 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 in view of He (CN108679160A). Regarding Claim 1 , claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/537,363 teaches: A computer implemented-method for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle, the method comprising: (Claim 1 “A computer-implemented method for establishing map relating geographical location to vibration health impact on electrical energy storage systems adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle”) estimating a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 1 “estimating, by a control unit, a present state of health of the electrical energy storage system”); determining vibration data including mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 1 “determining, by the control unit, mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system”); determining a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health, and (Claim 1 “determining, by the control unit, a degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system on the state of health of the electrical energy storage system by processing the determined vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum in a vibration-SOH model adapted to infer a relationship between vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum, and state of health”) Copending Application No. 18/537,363 does not teach: adapting at least one vehicle control parameter to vary at least one of the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency to reduce the degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system. He teaches adapting at least one vehicle control parameter to vary at least one of the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency to reduce the degree of impact of the vibrations of the electrical energy storage system (Fig. 1, ¶0077 “The vibration damping device can dampen vibration-damping objects to increase their service life”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of 18/537,363 and the invention of He by including a dampening device to reduce impact of vibrations on the state of health of an electrical energy storage system. Regarding Claim 2 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, but copending application does not explicitly teach wherein adapting the at least one vehicle control parameter includes employing a vibration model including at least one relationship between the at least one vehicle control parameter and the respective effect on the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency of the electrical energy storage system. He teaches wherein adapting the at least one vehicle control parameter includes employing a vibration model including at least one relationship between the at least one vehicle control parameter and the respective effect on the vibration magnitude and the vibration frequency of the electrical energy storage system (¶99 “the controller 202 determines that the vibration damping object 300 needs to be damped when the parameter reaches a preset threshold value through some parameters”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the controller of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He. Doing so would allow for determination of when the dampening device should be used. Regarding Claim 3 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach wherein at least one vehicle control parameter includes a speed profile, an acceleration profile, a gear-shifting strategy, a braking strategy, and steering control, and a dampening mechanism, of the vehicle. He teaches at least one vehicle control parameter includes a speed profile, an acceleration profile, a gear-shifting strategy, a braking strategy, and steering control, and a dampening mechanism, of the vehicle (Fig. 1, ¶77 “The vibration damping device can dampen vibration-damping objects to increase their service life”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the dampening device of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 4 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 3, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach wherein dampening mechanism is a controllable local dampening mechanism for the electrical energy storage system. He teaches dampening mechanism is a controllable local dampening mechanism for the electrical energy storage system (¶85 “At least one vibration damping device 200 is mounted on the central beam 101 of the casing”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the dampening device of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 5 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach wherein the step of adapting comprises adapting a combination of at least two vehicle control parameters. He teaches the step of adapting comprises adapting a combination of at least two vehicle control parameters (¶85 “two damping devices 200 can be symmetrically mounted on the central beam 101”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multiple dampening devices of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He. Doing so would improve the reduction of the impact of vibrations on the battery. Regarding Claim 6 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 5, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach wherein one of the at least two vehicle control parameters is a local dampening mechanism for the electrical energy storage system. He teaches wherein one of the at least two vehicle control parameters is a local dampening mechanism for the electrical energy storage system (¶85). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the dampening device of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 7 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach wherein the vehicle control parameters are adapted in such a way that the vehicle can reach an intended destination subject to travelling constraints. He teaches wherein the vehicle control parameters are adapted in such a way that the vehicle can reach an intended destination subject to travelling constraints (¶99-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He by installing the invention on the vehicle of He. Doing so would allow for vibration reduction and monitoring of the state of health while the vehicle is in transit. Regarding Claim 8 , claim 3 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, and claim 3 of copending application 18/537,363 further teaches wherein vibration data are measured using a vibration sensor arranged on or near the electrical energy storage system or on an electrical energy storage cell, and the mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum are determined from analysing the vibration data (Claim 3 “vibration data are measured using a vibration sensor arranged on, in, or near the electrical energy storage system, and the mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum are determined from analysing the vibration data”). Regarding Claim 10 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach wherein the method steps are performed while the vehicle is travelling. He teaches the method steps are performed while the vehicle is travelling (¶99-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He by for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 11 , claim 14 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, and claim 14 of copending application 18/537,363 further teaches a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by a processor device, the method of claim 1, when said program is run on a computer (Claim 14 “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by a processor device, cause the processor device to perform the method of claim 1”). Regarding Claim 12 , claim 14 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, and claim 14 of copending application 18/537,363 further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processor device, cause the processor device to perform the method of claim 1 (Claim 14 “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by a processor device, cause the processor device to perform the method of claim 1”). Regarding Claim 13 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 1, and claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 further teaches a control unit for improving a lifetime of an electrical energy storage system adapted for providing propulsion power for a vehicle, the control unit is configured to perform the steps of the method according to claim 1. (Claim 1 “control unit”). Regarding Claim 14 , claim 1 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 13, but copending application 18/537,363 does not explicitly teach a vehicle comprising a control unit according to claim 13. He teaches a vehicle (¶99-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle of He and the invention of 18/537,363 in view of He by for reasons stated above. Regarding Claim 15 , claim 3 of copending application 18/537,363 in view of He teaches the limitations of claim 13, and claim 3 of copending application 18/537,363 further teaches a vibration sensor on or near the electrical energy storage system, the vibration sensor is configured to acquire vibration data indicative of a vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum of the electrical energy storage system (Claim 3 “vibration data are measured using a vibration sensor arranged on, in, or near the electrical energy storage system, and the mechanical vibration magnitude and vibration frequency spectrum are determined from analysing the vibration data”) . This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nakagawa ( US 20220105829 A1 ) teaches degradation state detector of a battery and adjusting vehicle control parameters to reduce degradation (Fig. 3; Abstract). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODGER MENSING whose telephone number is (571)270-0129. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm. 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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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. /RODGER STEWART MENSING/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857 /ANDREW SCHECHTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 2 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 3 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 4 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 5 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 6 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 7 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 8 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 9 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 10 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 11 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 12 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 13 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 14 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 15 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 16 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 17 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 18 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 19 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 20 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/537,303 Page 21 Art Unit: 2857
