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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-13 and 15 set forth in the amendment submitted 12/23/2025 form the basis of the present examination.
Response to Arguments
The objection to the drawing, set forth to the Non-Final Office action mailed on 9/24/2025 has been withdrawn because of the amendment filed on 12/23/2025.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 7-8, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 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 have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 7-8, of the remarks, filed on 12/23/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 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, that “The claims are amended to recite that the time-evolved terminal voltages and currents are represented as sequences of voltage and current values associated with future time points in time. Support for this amendment is found, verbatim, in [0029] ("[t]he time-evolved terminal voltage/current may be represented as a sequence of voltage/current values associated with future points in time...") (Remarks-Page 7).
…….
The claims have been corrected to eliminate the informality noted by the Examiner. It is respectfully submitted that all pending claims are in all aspects in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
Therefore, the withdrawal of this rejection is respectfully requested (Remarks-Page 8).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 7-8 (stated above), filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 9/24/2025 have been fully considered and is persuasive. Because, applicant has amended the claims which makes the limitation clear. Therefore, the rejection of Claims 1-15 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, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 9/24/2025 has been withdrawn as set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 8-9, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 8-9, of the remarks, filed on 12/23/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, that “The claims are amended to address the rejection. Any abstract idea of computing a SoC for the ESS is integrated into the practical application of controlling an operation of e.g. the (Remarks-Page 8) vehicle. At the end of each independent claim is added: controlling an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS……..
Withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested (Remarks-Page 9).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 8-9 (stated above), filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 9/24/2025 have been fully considered and is persuasive. Because applicant has amended the claims and added the practical application of invention which overcomes the present the rejection(s) of Claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 9/24/2025. Therefore, the rejection of Claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 9/24/2025 has been withdrawn as set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 9-11, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by GOTTAPU et al. (Hereinafter, “Gottapu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20210288353 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 5, 8 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gottapu ‘353 A1 in view of KLINTBERG ANTON [SE]; ALTAF FAISAL et al. (Hereinafter, “Altaf”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2021121609 A1 have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 9-11, of the remarks, filed on 12/23/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by GOTTAPU et al. (Hereinafter, “Gottapu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20210288353 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 5, 8 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gottapu ‘353 A1 in view of KLINTBERG ANTON [SE]; ALTAF FAISAL et al. (Hereinafter, “Altaf”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2021121609 A1, that “The claims are amended to recite controlling an operation of an entity comprising an ESS, instead of just computing a state of charge of an ESS.
……..
The Office Action misinterprets the term "time-evolved" to somehow relate to what in Gottapu is called "uptime" of a battery pack. With the clarification now made to independent claim 1, the "time-evolved terminal voltages and currents" have nothing to do with such uptime.
……… Thus, there is no prediction of time-evolved voltages and currents, i.e. as associated with future time points in time as required by the claims as amended (Remarks-Page 10).
………..
In view of the above, it is clear that that the cited reference fails to disclose each and every element recited in the claims. Therefor the withdrawal of this rejection is respectfully requested (Remarks-Page 11).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 9-11, of the remarks, filed on 12/23/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by GOTTAPU et al. (Hereinafter, “Gottapu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20210288353 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 5, 8 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gottapu ‘353 A1 in view of KLINTBERG ANTON [SE]; ALTAF FAISAL et al. (Hereinafter, “Altaf”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2021121609 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 9/24/2025 have been fully considered and is persuasive. Because applicant has amended the claims and added the limitation in claim 1, “A method of controlling an operation of an entity comprising an energy storage system, ESS, with multiple parallel battery packs, the method comprising: for each battery pack, predicting a time-evolved terminal voltage and current based on a respective measured terminal voltage, wherein the time-evolved terminal voltages and currents are represented as sequences of voltage and current values associated with future time points in time;……..and controlling an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS” which overcomes the present rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by GOTTAPU et al. (Hereinafter, “Gottapu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20210288353 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 9/24/2025. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Plett in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20050110498 A1 and Mergener et al in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210359526 A1 is applied to meet at least the amended limitation of claim 1. Therefore claim 1 is now rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOTTAPU et al. (Hereinafter, “Gottapu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20210288353 A1 in view of Plett in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20050110498 A1 and further in view of Mergener et al in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210359526 A1, as set forth below. Applicant’s argument is moot in view of newly applied combination of references. See the rejection set forth below.
For expedite prosecution Applicant is invited to call to discuss the present rejection also if any further clarification needed and to discuss any possible amendment to overcome the references to make the claims allowable.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-11, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOTTAPU et al. (Hereinafter, “Gottapu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20210288353 A1 in view of Plett in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20050110498 A1 and further in view of Mergener et al in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20210359526 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Gottapu teaches a method of computing a state of charge of an energy storage system, ESS, with multiple parallel battery packs [205] (methods and electronic devices for accurately estimating State of Charge (SOC), uptime and capacity of a battery pack; Paragraph [0002] Line 2-4; A battery pack comprises a plurality of cells, wherein each cell can be connected to other cells in series or parallel; Paragraph [0003] Line 1-3; FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example Battery Management System (BMS) 200 configured to predict capacity and SOC of a battery pack 205, according to various embodiments. As illustrated in FIG. 2, the BMS 200 includes a Power Management Integrated Circuit (PMIC) 201. The PMIC 201 includes a processor (e.g., including processing circuitry) 202, a memory 203 and a display 204. The BMS 200 is hosted in a device (not shown), which includes the battery pack 205. The battery pack 205 may include a plurality of cells, wherein the plurality of cells can be arranged in series and/or parallel. In an embodiment, the battery pack 205 comprises a plurality of modules connected in series, wherein each module comprises a plurality of cells connected in parallel; Paragraph [0042] Line 1-14), the method comprising:
for each battery pack, predicting a time-evolved (the uptime of the battery pack 205 is the time evolve measurement as the time evolved is not clear in the claim) terminal voltage and current based on a respective measured terminal voltage (The BMS 200 is configured to estimate remaining capacity and uptime of the battery pack 205, for determining the time period for which a user can expect to operate the device without interruption and to avoid possible failures during runtime (execution of an instruction). The BMS 200 is configured to determine the chargeable capacity of the battery pack 205. The BMS 200 is configured to consider variations of SOC, temperature, capacity, voltage, current, ambient temperature, and surface temperature of each of the individual cells of the battery pack 205, during the estimation of the SOC of the battery pack 205, the remaining capacity of the battery pack 205, the chargeable capacity of the battery pack 205, and the uptime of the battery pack 205; Paragraph [0043] Line 1-17; The equivalent circuit model generates the current flowing through the cell as output. The current flowing through the cell is used by the electrochemical model as input, to predict the voltage of the cell as output, estimate the SOC of the cell, and estimate the capacity of the cell. The cell voltage is used as an input, by the equivalent circuit model, to calculate the voltage drop across the terminals and generating the current flowing through the cell as output. Therefore, the equivalent circuit model and the electrochemical model are coupled with each other; Paragraph [0047] Line 1-10);
based on the predicted time-evolved terminal voltages and currents, computing a chargeable and/or dischargeable capacity of the ESS (In an embodiment, the processor 202 may estimate the uptime of the battery pack 205 based on the uptime of a cell in the battery pack 205. The uptime of the cell is determined based on SOC of a cell, capacity of the cell, and current flowing through the cell. The value of the uptime of the cell is lowest amongst values of uptimes of a plurality of battery cells in the plurality of branches of each of the plurality of modules; Paragraph [0051] Line 1-8); and
computing the state of charge of the ESS based on the chargeable and/or dischargeable capacity of the ESS (The processor 202 may estimate the SOC of the battery pack 205, the remaining capacity of the battery pack 205, the chargeable capacity of the battery pack 205, and the uptime of the battery pack 205, based on the estimated values of capacity, SOC, voltage, current, and ambient and surface temperatures of each of the individual cells of the battery pack 205; Paragraph [0050] 1-7).
Gottapu fails to teach wherein the time-evolved terminal voltages and currents are represented as sequences of voltage and current values associated with future time points in time; and controlling an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS.
Plett teaches a method and apparatus for estimating battery charge power and discharge power (Paragraph [0004] Line 1-3), wherein
the time-evolved terminal voltages and currents are represented as sequences of voltage and current values associated with future time points in time ([0055] As shown in steps 10 and 20 of FIGS. 1A and 1B, embodiments of the present invention calculate the maximum charge/discharge current values using SOC limits. Various embodiments also have the explicit inclusion of a time horizon .DELTA.t in the calculation. The SOC limits are included as follows. First, for a constant current i.sub.k, the SOC recurrent relationship is described as:
z.sub.k(t+.DELTA.t)=z.sub.k(t)-(.eta..sub.i.DELTA.t/C)i.sub.k, (4) [0056] where z.sub.k(t) is the present SOC for cell k, z.sub.k(t+.DELTA.t) is the predicted SOC .DELTA.t seconds into the future, C is the cell capacity in ampere-seconds, and .eta..sub.i is the Coulombic efficiency factor at current level i.sub.k. Here, for simplicity of presentation, it is assumed that .eta..sub.i=1 for discharge currents and .eta..sub.i=.eta..ltoreq.1 for charge currents.[0081] For convenience of presentation, it is assumed that the cell model is in a discrete-time state-space form. Also assume that .DELTA.t seconds may be represented in discrete time as T sample intervals. Then, this model can be used to predict cell voltage .DELTA.t seconds into the future by v.sub.k[m +T]=(x.sub.k[m+T], u.sub.k[m +T]), [0082] where x.sub.k[m+T] may be found by simulating (14) for T time samples. It is assumed that the input remains constant from time index m to m+T, so if temperature change (for example) over this interval is significant, it must be included as part of the dynamics modeled by (14) and not as a part of the measured input u.sub.k[m]; Therefore time evolved current and voltage is determined for future time points in time as explained in paragraph 55, 56 for current and 81-82 for voltage). The purpose of doing so is to estimate the maximum charge/discharge current and to yield a confidence level of the maximum charge/discharge current estimate, to estimate the absolute maximum charge or discharge power.
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify Gottapu in view of Plett, because Plett teaches to have the time-evolved terminal voltages and currents represented as sequences of voltage and current values associated with future time points in time estimates the maximum charge/discharge current and to yield a confidence level of the maximum charge/discharge current estimate (Paragraph [0020]), estimates the absolute maximum charge or discharge power (Paragraph [0023]).
The combination of Gottapu and Plett fails to teach controlling an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS.
Mergener teaches battery power sources and battery-powered devices and, more particularly, to series-connected battery packs in such power sources and devices (Paragraph [0002] Line 1-3), wherein.
controlling an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS (Selectively electrically disconnecting may include determining characteristics or condition of the first battery pack, and controlling operation of a bypass portion. When the first battery pack is to be disabled, controlling may include disconnecting the first battery pack from the circuit. When another battery pack is substituted for a disabled first battery pack, controlling may include determining whether to control the bypass portion to connect the other battery pack to the circuit; Paragraph [0015] Line 1-9). The purpose of doing so is to determine a non-use condition of the discharge circuit, and to operate the balance circuit during the non-use condition.
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify Gottapu and Plett in view of Mergener, because Mergener teaches to control an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS determines a non-use condition of the discharge circuit, and operates the balance circuit during the non-use condition (Paragraph [0022]) and controls the bypass portion to connect the other battery pack to the circuit (Paragraph [0022]).
Regarding claim 2, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the chargeable and/or dischargeable capacity of the ESS is computed using a Coulomb-counting approach (A battery pack comprises a plurality of cells, wherein each cell can be connected to other cells in series or parallel. Currently, coulomb counting is being used for determining the State of Charge (SOC) of the battery pack. Coulomb counting typically considers the input current at the battery pack level, assuming that the current distribution across all cells of the battery pack is uniform and capacities of all cells in the battery pack are same; Paragraph [0003] Line 1-8).
Regarding claim 3, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the chargeable capacity of the ESS is computed under an assumption of minimum charge time (The battery pack model may determine variations in temperature, SOC, capacity, internal resistance, busbar resistance, voltage, and current, amongst the six cells in six branches of the three modules of battery pack. The battery pack model determines the currents flowing through the two branches of each of the three modules. The currents are labeled as i.sub.11, i.sub.12, i.sub.21, i.sub.22, i.sub.31, and i.sub.32. The battery pack model may determine the uptime of the battery pack, the remaining capacity of the battery pack, the chargeable capacity of the battery pack, and the SOC of the battery pack; based on variations in the temperature, SOC, capacity, internal resistance, busbar resistance, voltage, and current, amongst the six cells in six branches of the three modules of battery pack; Paragraph [0070] Line 1-14;
PNG
media_image1.png
360
904
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; Paragraph [0071]-[0074]).
Regarding claim 4, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the minimum charge time is calculated by: calculating an expected charge time for each battery pack based on its time-evolved terminal voltage; and selecting, from the expected charge times for all battery packs, the smallest expected charge time as said minimum charge time.
PNG
media_image2.png
388
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; Paragraph [0071]-[0074]).
Regarding claim 6, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the dischargeable capacity of the ESS is computed under an assumption of minimum discharge time (Once the parameters have been determined/identified, various example embodiments may include estimating/obtaining the uptime of the battery pack, the remaining capacity of the battery pack available for discharge, the chargeable capacity of the battery pack, and the SOC of the battery pack; Paragraph [0015] Line 1-6
PNG
media_image2.png
388
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; Paragraph [0071]-[0074]; Although Gottapu only shows minimum charging time. However, Gottapu discloses charging or discharging cycle. Therefore, same equation is applicable for minimum discharge time; Various example embodiments herein disclose methods and systems for providing a model for accurately estimating at least one of State of Charge (SOC) of a battery pack, battery pack uptime, chargeable capacity of the battery pack, voltage of the battery pack, temperature of the battery pack, and remaining capacity of the battery pack. Various embodiments include performing the estimations using, for example, and without limitation, an equivalent circuit model, an electrochemical model, and a thermal model. The equivalent circuit model, the electrochemical model, and the thermal model may be coupled to each other. The estimation can be performed in real time (online) or prior to termination of every discharge cycle; Paragraph [0025] Line 1-13).
Regarding claim 7, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the minimum discharge time is calculated by: calculating an expected discharge time for each battery pack based on its time- evolved terminal voltage; and selecting, from the expected discharge times for all battery packs, the smallest expected discharge time as said minimum charge time. (Once the parameters have been determined/identified, various example embodiments may include estimating/obtaining the uptime of the battery pack, the remaining capacity of the battery pack available for discharge, the chargeable capacity of the battery pack, and the SOC of the battery pack; Paragraph [0015] Line 1-6
PNG
media_image2.png
388
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; Paragraph [0071]-[0074]; Although Gottapu only shows minimum charging time. However, Gottapu discloses charging or discharging cycle. Therefore, same equation is applicable for minimum discharge time; Various example embodiments herein disclose methods and systems for providing a model for accurately estimating at least one of State of Charge (SOC) of a battery pack, battery pack uptime, chargeable capacity of the battery pack, voltage of the battery pack, temperature of the battery pack, and remaining capacity of the battery pack. Various embodiments include performing the estimations using, for example, and without limitation, an equivalent circuit model, an electrochemical model, and a thermal model. The equivalent circuit model, the electrochemical model, and the thermal model may be coupled to each other. The estimation can be performed in real time (online) or prior to termination of every discharge cycle; Paragraph [0025] Line 1-13).
Regarding claim 9, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the time-evolved terminal voltages are predicted using a dynamic model of currents and voltages in a multi-battery system (The equivalent circuit model generates the current flowing through the cell as output. The current flowing through the cell is used by the electrochemical model as input, to predict the voltage of the cell as output, estimate the SOC of the cell, and estimate the capacity of the cell. The cell voltage is used as an input, by the equivalent circuit model, to calculate the voltage drop across the terminals and generating the current flowing through the cell as output. Therefore, the equivalent circuit model and the electrochemical model are coupled with each other; Paragraph [0047] Line 1-10; The current flowing through the individual cells, the voltage drop across the terminals of the individual cells, the ambient temperature of the individual cells, surface temperature of the individual cells, act as internal input parameters and external input parameters. The charging current, internal resistances of the individual cells, connection resistances, electrochemical parameters, and thermal parameters, are the (external) inputs of the model, which are received as inputs by the sub-models (the equivalent circuit model, the electrochemical model, and the thermal model); Paragraph [0049] Line 1-10).
Regarding claim 10, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the model is variable with respect to battery temperature and/or a setpoint charge/discharge-current profile (For a particular cell, the equivalent circuit model receives the charging current (current fed to the battery pack 205), internal resistances of the cell, and connection resistance (contributed by the connectors, bolts and nuts, cables, and bus bars) of the cell as inputs. The equivalent circuit model further receives the voltage of the cell, from the electrochemical model, as an input. The electrochemical model receives electrochemical parameters (comprising of electrode level information such as length, particle radius, active material loading capacities, diffusion characteristics, and so on) as input. The electrochemical model further receives the current flowing through the cell from the equivalent circuit model, and the ambient temperature of the cell from the thermal model, as inputs. The thermal model receives thermal parameters (comprising of heat transfer coefficients and cooling fluid material properties such as density, specific heat capacity, and so on) as input. The thermal model further receives the surface temperature of the cell from the electrochemical model as an input; Paragraph [0046] Line 1-19; The equivalent circuit model generates the current flowing through the cell as output. The current flowing through the cell is used by the electrochemical model as input, to predict the voltage of the cell as output, estimate the SOC of the cell, and estimate the capacity of the cell. The cell voltage is used as an input, by the equivalent circuit model, to calculate the voltage drop across the terminals and generating the current flowing through the cell as output. Therefore, the equivalent circuit model and the electrochemical model are coupled with each other; Paragraph [0047] Line 1-10).
Regarding claim 11, Gottapu teaches a method,
wherein the current for each battery pack is predicted using current split prediction based on a total reference ESS current and a measured terminal voltage for the battery pack (The uptime of the battery pack 205 may be the uptime of a battery cell in a branch of a module. For a particular branch in a module, various embodiments include computing a product of capacity of the battery cell and SOC of the battery cell. Various embodiments include obtaining a ratio of the product and the current flowing through the battery cell. Various embodiments include computing the ratios for each of the battery cells in each of the branches of the module. The ratio with the lowest value can be considered as the uptime of the module. Similarly, various embodiments include computing the uptimes of each of the plurality of modules. The lowest value of uptime, among the values of the uptimes of each of the plurality of modules, is considered as the uptime of the battery pack 205; Paragraph [0060] Line 1-14).
Regarding claim 13, Gottapu teaches a processor device [200] for controlling an operation of an entity comprising an energy storage system, ESS [201], with multiple parallel battery packs [205] (As illustrated in FIG. 2, the BMS 200 includes a Power Management Integrated Circuit (PMIC) 201. The PMIC 201 includes a processor (e.g., including processing circuitry) 202, a memory 203 and a display 204. The BMS 200 is hosted in a device (not shown), which includes the battery pack 205. The battery pack 205 may include a plurality of cells, wherein the plurality of cells can be arranged in series and/or parallel; Paragraph [0042] Line 4-11),
the device [200] (FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example Battery Management System (BMS) 200 configured to predict capacity and SOC of a battery pack 205; Paragraph [0042] Line 1-3) comprising:
an interface (As illustrated in FIG. 2, the BMS 200 includes a Power Management Integrated Circuit (PMIC) 201. The PMIC 201 includes a processor (e.g., including processing circuitry) 202, a memory 203 and a display 204; Paragraph [0042] Line 4-8) or receiving sensor signals (equivalent circuit model) associated with the ESS [201]; and
processing circuitry [202] configured to perform the method of claim 1 (See rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 15, Gottapu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions which, when executed by the processor device [202] (Various example embodiments disclosed herein describe methods and systems for providing a model for accurately estimating battery pack uptime, remaining capacity of the battery pack available for discharge, and chargeable capacity of the battery pack. Therefore, it is understood that the scope of the disclosure is extended to such a program and in addition to a computer readable medium having a message therein, such computer readable storage medium may contain program code for implementation of one or more steps of the method, when the program runs on a server or mobile device or any suitable programmable device. The method may be implemented in example embodiment through or together with a software program written in example Very high speed integrated circuit Hardware Description Language (VHDL), or any other programming language, or implemented by one or more VHDL or several software modules being executed on at least one hardware device; Paragraph [0076] Line 1-18) cause the processor device to perform the method of claim 1 (See rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim(s) 5, 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gottapu ‘353 A1 in view of Plett ‘498 A1 and Mergener ‘526 A1, as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of KLINTBERG ANTON [SE]; ALTAF FAISAL et al. (Hereinafter, “Altaf”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2021121609 A1.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Gottapu, Plett and Mergener fails to teach a method, wherein the expected charge time is calculated by applying to the time-evolved terminal voltage a termination criterion including a charging limit voltage and an equilibrium condition.
Altaf teaches a method for estimating a capacity of a battery unit in an energy storage system of a vehicle. The invention further relates to a computer program, a computer readable medium, a control unit, a battery management system, and a vehicle; TECHNICAL FIELD; Page 2 Line 1-3),
wherein the expected charge time is calculated by applying to the time-evolved terminal voltage a termination criterion including a charging limit voltage and an equilibrium condition (Optionally, the terminal voltage used to determine the transient voltage response is measured within a predetermined period of time after a termination of an immediately preceding charge process or discharge process of the battery unit. For example, the measurement may be initiated within a predetermined period of time after disconnecting the load; page 4 Line 22-25; Optionally, the estimation of the capacity of the battery unit based on at least the estimated at least first value of the open circuit voltage comprises using Coulomb counting. For Coulomb counting, at least two values of the state of charge (SOC) of the battery unit are needed, which two values may be determined from the open circuit voltage values prior to and subsequent to a charge or discharge process using look-up tables. Both of these open circuit voltage values, i.e. prior to and subsequent to the charge or discharge process, may be obtained as described above, but it is also possible to obtain one of the values during a relaxed no-load condition, when the battery unit is in full equilibrium. It is also possible to determine one of the SOC values from the first value of the open circuit voltage as described above, and to obtain the other SOC value in some other way; Page 4 Line 26-33). The purpose of doing so is to estimate the capacity based on the two open circuit voltage values and measured current during the charge or discharge process, to estimate the capacity without having to wait for the battery unit to achieve a full equilibrium, or a full steady-state, after removal of a load, to estimate the capacity much faster after disconnection of a load, such as 5-10 times faster than by waiting for full equilibrium to be achieved, to determine the capacity on-board the vehicle in a more time efficient manner in comparison with prior art methods relying on open circuit voltage values measured during a relaxed steady-state of the battery unit.
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify Gottapu, Plett and Mergener in view of Altaf, because Altaf teaches to calculate the expected charge time by applying to the time-evolved terminal voltage a termination criterion including a charging limit voltage and an equilibrium condition estimates the capacity based on the two open circuit voltage values and measured current during the charge or discharge process (Page 4), estimates the capacity without having to wait for the battery unit to achieve a full equilibrium, or a full steady-state, after removal of a load, estimates the capacity much faster after disconnection of a load, such as 5-10 times faster than by waiting for full equilibrium to be achieved, determines the capacity on-board the vehicle in a more time efficient manner in comparison with prior art methods relying on open circuit voltage values measured during a relaxed steady-state of the battery unit (Page 3).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Gottapu, Plett and Mergener fails to teach a method, wherein the expected discharge time is calculated by applying to the time-evolved terminal voltage a termination criterion including a discharging limit voltage and an equilibrium condition.
Altaf teaches a method for estimating a capacity of a battery unit in an energy storage system of a vehicle. The invention further relates to a computer program, a computer readable medium, a control unit, a battery management system, and a vehicle; TECHNICAL FIELD; Page 2 Line 1-3),
wherein the expected discharge time is calculated by applying to the time-evolved terminal voltage a termination criterion including a discharging limit voltage and an equilibrium condition (Optionally, the terminal voltage used to determine the transient voltage response is measured within a predetermined period of time after a termination of an immediately preceding charge process or discharge process of the battery unit. For example, the measurement may be initiated within a predetermined period of time after disconnecting the load; page 4 Line 22-25; Optionally, the estimation of the capacity of the battery unit based on at least the estimated at least first value of the open circuit voltage comprises using Coulomb counting. For Coulomb counting, at least two values of the state of charge (SOC) of the battery unit are needed, which two values may be determined from the open circuit voltage values prior to and subsequent to a charge or discharge process using look-up tables. Both of these open circuit voltage values, i.e. prior to and subsequent to the charge or discharge process, may be obtained as described above, but it is also possible to obtain one of the values during a relaxed no-load condition, when the battery unit is in full equilibrium. It is also possible to determine one of the SOC values from the first value of the open circuit voltage as described above, and to obtain the other SOC value in some other way; Page 4 Line 26-33). The purpose of doing so is to estimate the capacity based on the two open circuit voltage values and measured current during the charge or discharge process, to estimate the capacity without having to wait for the battery unit to achieve a full equilibrium, or a full steady-state, after removal of a load, to estimate the capacity much faster after disconnection of a load, such as 5-10 times faster than by waiting for full equilibrium to be achieved, to determine the capacity on-board the vehicle in a more time efficient manner in comparison with prior art methods relying on open circuit voltage values measured during a relaxed steady-state of the battery unit.
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify Gottapu, Plett and Mergener in view of Altaf, because Altaf teaches to calculate the expected discharge time by applying to the time-evolved terminal voltage a termination criterion including a discharging limit voltage and an equilibrium condition. estimates the capacity based on the two open circuit voltage values and measured current during the charge or discharge process (Page 4), estimates the capacity without having to wait for the battery unit to achieve a full equilibrium, or a full steady-state, after removal of a load, estimates the capacity much faster after disconnection of a load, such as 5-10 times faster than by waiting for full equilibrium to be achieved, determines the capacity on-board the vehicle in a more time efficient manner in comparison with prior art methods relying on open circuit voltage values measured during a relaxed steady-state of the battery unit (Page 3).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Gottapu, Plett and Mergener fails to teach a method, wherein the ESS is a vehicular ESS.
Altaf teaches a method for estimating a capacity of a battery unit in an energy storage system of a vehicle. The invention further relates to a computer program, a computer readable medium, a control unit, a battery management system, and a vehicle; TECHNICAL FIELD; Page 2 Line 1-3),
wherein the entity is a vehicle (Fig. 1 shows a simplified perspective view of an all-electric vehicle in the form of a bus 201, which according to an embodiment is equipped with at least one electric machine (not shown) for operating the bus. The bus 201 carries an electric energy storage system (ESS) 200 comprising a battery unit 202 in the form of a battery pack; DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION; Page 6 Line 5-8). The purpose of doing so is to apply for hybrid vehicles or electrical vehicles, such as partly or fully electrical vehicles, to apply any type of electrical vehicle such as electrically powered construction equipment, electrical working machines, e.g. wheel loaders, articulated haulers, dump trucks, excavators and backhoe loaders etc.
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify Gottapu, Plett and Mergener in view of Altaf, because Altaf teaches to include the entity in a vehicle can apply for hybrid vehicles or electrical vehicles, such as partly or fully electrical vehicles, can apply any type of electrical vehicle such as electrically powered construction equipment, electrical working machines, e.g. wheel loaders, articulated haulers, dump trucks, excavators and backhoe loaders etc. (TECHNICAL FIELD; Page 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Li et al. (US 20140277866 A1) discloses, “REDUCED CENTRAL PROCESSING UNIT LOAD AND MEMORY USAGE BATTERY STATE OF CHARGE CALCULATION- A vehicle having a battery pack with cells grouped into subsets and at least one controller programmed to charge and discharge the battery pack is disclosed. A control output is generated based on a pack state of charge derived from each cell's initial state of charge at vehicle activation and an electric charge accumulated or spent by less than all of the cells of each of the subsets since vehicle activation. [0013] FIG. 1 depicts a typical hybrid-electric vehicle. A typical hybrid-electric vehicle 2 may comprise one or more electric motors 4 mechanically connected to a hybrid transmission 3. In addition, the hybrid transmission 6 is mechanically connected to an engine 8. The hybrid transmission 6 is also mechanically connected to a drive shaft 10 that is mechanically connected to the wheels 12. The electric motors 4 can provide propulsion and deceleration capability when the engine 8 is turned on or off. The electric motors 4 also act as generators and can provide fuel economy benefits by recovering energy that would normally be lost as heat in the friction braking system. The electric motors 4 may also provide reduced pollutant emissions since the hybrid electric vehicle 2 may be operated in electric mode under certain conditions. [0014] The battery pack 14 stores energy that can be used by the electric motors 4. A vehicle battery pack 14 typically provides a high voltage DC output. The battery pack 14 is electrically connected to the power electronics module 16. The power electronics module 16 is also electrically connected to the electric motors 4 and provides the ability to bi-directionally transfer energy between the battery pack 14 and the electric motors 4. For example, a typical battery pack 14 may provide a DC voltage while the electric motors 4 may require a three-phase AC current to function. The power electronics module 16 may convert the DC voltage to a three-phase AC current as required by the electric motors 4. In a regenerative mode, the power electronics module 16 will convert the three-phase AC current from the electric motors 4 acting as generators to the DC voltage required by the battery pack 14. The method described herein is equally applicable to a pure electric vehicle or any other device using a battery pack-However Li fails to teach predicting a time-evolved terminal voltage and current based on a respective measured terminal voltage, wherein the time-evolved terminal voltages and currents are represented as sequences of voltage and current values associated with future time points in time;……..and controlling an operation of the entity based on the computed state of charge of the ESS.”
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 NASIMA MONSUR whose telephone number is (571)272-8497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am-6:00 pm.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/NASIMA MONSUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858