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 .
Response to Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed January 9, 2024 is acknowledged. Action on the merits of claims 1-5 follows.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed January 9, 2024 has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits.
With respect to foreign language references with no translation of the document: “If no translation is submitted, the examiner will consider the information in view of the concise explanation and insofar as it is understood on its face, e.g., drawings, chemical formulas, English language abstracts, in the same manner that non-English language information in Office search files is considered by examiner in conducting searches.” See MPEP §609.04(a)(II) (D) and 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(ii).
Drawings
The drawings received January 9, 2024 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Specification
The specification received January 9, 2024 has been reviewed for examination purposes.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words. A 150-word limit has been imposed by the USPTO to conform to PCT applications and Pre-Grant Publications. See 37 CFR 1.72 and rule changes applied thereto. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Interpretation
The phrase "configured to" typically holds patentable weight. It means the unit is specifically designed, programmed, or made to perform the objective, rather than just being passively capable of it.
In cases involving a special purpose computer-implemented the Federal Circuit has consistently required that the structure be more than simply a general purpose computer or microprocessor and that the specification must disclose an algorithm for performing the claimed function. See, e.g., Noah Systems Inc. v. Intuit Inc., 675 F.3d 1302, 1312, 102 USPQ2d 1410, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1333, 86 USPQ2d at 1239.
With respect to claims 1-3 and 4, the “control device … configured to” is more than a general purpose control device and defines a control device specifically designed to perform as claimed.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huh et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0188326) in view of Gil (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0174077).
As to claim 1, Huh discloses an energy storage apparatus comprising:
a cell 110;
positive and negative external terminals T+ and T-, respectively;
a current interruption device 120 that is disposed on a first line L1 that connects the cell 110 and one of the external terminals T+;
a resistor (RSHUNT 141) for current measurement that is disposed on a second line L2 that connects the cell 110 and the other of the external terminals T-;
a discharge circuit connected to the cell and the current interruption device in parallel; and
a control device 170,
wherein the discharge circuit includes:
a discharge resistor 150 and
a discharge switch 160.
Huh measures current via the control device 170 to diagnose a state of operation of the system (Fig. 2).
As to claim 4, Huh discloses a method of diagnosing a failure in a current interruption device used in an energy storage apparatus, wherein:
the energy storage apparatus includes:
a cell 110;
positive and negative external terminals, T+ and T-, respectively;
a current interruption device 120 that is disposed on a first line L1 that connects the cell 110 and one of the external terminals T+;
a resistor (RSHUNT 141) for current measurement that is disposed on a second line L2 that connects the cell 110 and the other of the external terminals T-; and
a discharge circuit 150/160 connected to the cell 110 and the current interruption device 120 in parallel (Fig. 2).
Huh does not teach that the control device is configured, in a state where the current interruption device is controlled to take an open state, to measure a current by the resistor with respect to a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take a closed position and a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take an open position, and to diagnose a failure in the current interruption device based on a difference between a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take the closed position and a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take the open position (claim 1); the control device is configured to determine that the current interruption device is normal in a case where the difference between the current values is equal to or greater than a threshold (claim 2), the control device is configured to determine that a failure has occurred in the current interruption device in a case where the difference between the current values is less than a threshold (claims 3 and 5), the method comprising: measuring a current by the resistor with respect to a state where the discharge switch of the discharge circuit is controlled to take a closed position and a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take an open position in a state where the current interruption device is controlled to take an open state, and diagnosing a failure in the current interruption device based on a difference between a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch of the discharge circuit is controlled to take the closed position and a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take the open position (claim 4).
Huh teaches the energy storage apparatus and corresponding method diagnostic framework, main switch on one line, output measurement element on the opposite line and a controller that diagnoses switch failure from output measurements. Huh teaches the energy storage apparatus and corresponding method diagnostic framework, main switch on one line, output measurement element on the opposite line and a controller that diagnoses switch failure from output measurements. The core elements of Huh are identical except for the controller configured to measure and diagnose as recited in claim 1 and the method comprising measuring and diagnosing the same elements.
Measuring when switch 160 of Hugh is opened would have provided a baseline condition for comparison to when the switch is closed and provide a comparison value to determine the health of the battery apparatus. Current measurements are commonly used to determine state of health (SOH) in a battery system so switch-state dependent current comparison would be a predictable diagnostic technique to determine SOH in the battery apparatus.
Gil is drawn to the same field of endeavor, monitoring and detecting failures in electrical pathways of an electric storage (energy storage) apparatus. A switch140b/resistor140b is connected in parallel with a battery cell 10 and is further connected to a resistor 130, current measurement unit 120, control unit and current interruption device 110. Gil recognized and implemented designing the energy/electric storage device with switch failure diagnosis when the switch 140b is both in an energized state (close state) and in non-energized states (open state), measuring current through resistor 130 via the current measurement unit 120 and the control unit 160 to determine a difference in current value and executing open failure diagnosis process steps to determine whether or not failure is detected in current interruption device 110 (Figs. 2-4, for example, applied to claims 1 and 4). Gil teaches that failure determination in the open state was identified when the difference is below a threshold value (claims 2 and 5) and operating normally when greater than the threshold value (claim 3).
Gil teaches that the control device and methodology above provides determination as to whether failures of switches/relays/current interruption devices exist (abstract/examples). By opening and closing the switch 140b and measuring output (current) in the presence of an switch state, the function of the main switch 110 can be validated as operating normally or not, thereby identified as failing.
Gil teaches of a system and method for diagnosing a relay fault in a battery wherein a first relay 110 (current interruption device) and a second relay 140b/resistor140a are provided and the control unit 160 is configured to operate the second relay 140b (switch) in on and off states and measuring current in conjunction with those states to diagnose whether the main relay 110 is function or not. Gil further teaches that the control unit 160 can be configured to calculate a difference value between the measured current to diagnose if the relay unit 110 is operating correctly or not.
Using shunt measurement to measure electrical parameters in a circuit was known. Switch driven changes in shunt paths are also known current sensing designs to provide a first current measured when the diagnosing switch is in the open state and a second current measured when the diagnosing switch is in the closed state and using the calculated difference to determine whether relay 120 is functioning properly or not.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller and method of Huh by configuring the control device in a state where the current interruption device is controlled to take an open state, to measure a current by the resistor with respect to a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take a closed position and a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take an open position, and to diagnose a failure in the current interruption device based on a difference between a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take the closed position and a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take the open position (claim 1); the control device configured to determine that the current interruption device is normal in a case where the difference between the current values is equal to or greater than a threshold (claim 2), the control device configured to determine that a failure has occurred in the current interruption device in a case where the difference between the current values is less than a threshold (claims 3 and 5), and the method comprising: measuring a current by the resistor with respect to a state where the discharge switch of the discharge circuit is controlled to take a closed position and a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take an open position in a state where the current interruption device is controlled to take an open state, and diagnosing a failure in the current interruption device based on a difference between a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch of the discharge circuit is controlled to take the closed position and a current value measured in a state where the discharge switch is controlled to take the open position (claim 4) as taught by Gil above, since it would have provided a suitable control design and methodology for determination as to whether failures of switches/relays/current interruption devices exist in an energy storage apparatus.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shiraishi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0320986) discloses prior art energy storage control where parallel switches and diagnostic commands are used to monitor a battery.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGG CANTELMO whose telephone number is (571)272-1283. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7am to 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, Basia Ridley can be reached at (571) 272-1453. 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.
/GREGG CANTELMO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights