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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1,2, 7-10 have been considered but are moot due to new grounds of rejection.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 16, it appears that “connectors” should be contactors. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 16, it appears that “connectors” should be contactors . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 11 and 12 are 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 11 recites the limitation "the connectors" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the connectors" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 20200317076) .
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Wang et al. teaches a method for identifying a malfunction of a DC voltage charging connection in an electric vehicle (see para [0032-0033]) with a first contactor arranged in a positive pole (see Fig. 4 - contactor 236) and a second contactor arranged in a negative pole (see Fig. 4 - contactor 238), the method comprising:
driving one of the two contactors to move it into an open or closed state (see para 0032-0033 - after charge cycle is completed, a command to open or close the contactors 236 issued depending on which contactor is being tested) and driving the other of the two contactors in order to move it into an open or closed state (see para [0032] - contactor 238 commanded to be open or closed depending on which contactor is being tested), without applying a charging voltage (para [0032] - charger 132 ordered not to provide power);
applying an internal reference DC voltage of the electric vehicle between both contactors (high voltage bus 152 is still connected at one end of each contactor and considered as providing internal DC voltage internal reference DC voltage), including applying a positive pole of the reference DC voltage at the first contactor and a negative pole of the reference DC voltage at the second contactor (see Fig. 2 – positive and negative pole of voltage from 152 remains applied to the terminals of 236, 238, respectively);
measuring a first voltage potential between the contactors on a respective output side of the contactors (voltage sensor 230 measures output voltage);
measuring a second voltage potential between the contactors on a respective input side of the contactors (voltage sensor 234 measures input voltage);
identifying a malfunction of the two contactors based at least in part on the first voltage potential and the second voltage potential (see para [0032] -- voltage between input and output of 236/238 is measured from voltage sensors 234 and 230 to detect if relay is welded shut. If voltages are equal, one relay is welded in the closed state. If the voltage on charger side of the relay goes to zero, then it opened and is operational);
driving the contactors to a state B, wherein the first contactor is driven into the open state and the second contactor is driven into the closed state (see para [0032- 0033] - describes a procedure to check the contactor 236 and is performed by opening 236 and closing 238);
identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero (see para [0032-0033] - no malfunction is determined during the procedure when the voltage on the charger 132 goes to zero and the voltage on the battery/high voltage bus 124/152 side is greater); and/or
identifying the first contactor as blocked in the closed state and the second contactor as not blocked in the open state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage (see para [0032-0033] - when the voltage on both sides of contactors 236/238 as measured by voltage sensors 234 and 230 are equal, it is the contactor is welded shut).
Regarding claim 2, Wang et al. teach driving the contactor to a state A, wherein both contactors are driven into an open state; ([0036] As a compromise, the controller 250 may command both the charger positive contactor 236 and the charger return contactor 238 to open.) identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero; (see para [0032-0033] - no malfunction is determined during the procedure when the voltage on the charger 132 goes to zero and the voltage on the battery/high voltage bus 124/152 side is greater) and/or identifying both contactors as blocked in the closed state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage. (If the charger voltage is approximately equal to the HV-bus voltage/battery voltage, a welded contactor issue may be present. However, this strategy may only detect a problem when both charge contactors 236, 238 are welded closed. If only one of the charge contactors 236, 238 is welded closed, the issue may not be detected.) Note par. 0036
Regarding claim 5, Wang et al. teach driving the connectors into a state D, wherein the first contactor is driven into the closed state and the second contactor is driven into the open state;(Note pars. 0038-0039 note that first and second contactors are alternately opened and closed) identifying the first contactor as not blocked in the open state and the second contactor as blocked in the closed state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage; (see para [0032-0033] - when the voltage on both sides of contactors 236/238 as measured by voltage sensors 234 and 230 are equal, it is the contactor is welded shut).
and/or identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero. (see para [0032-0033] - no malfunction is determined during the procedure when the voltage on the charger 132 goes to zero and the voltage on the battery/high voltage bus 124/152 side is greater);
Regarding claim 12, Wang et al. teaches a method for identifying a malfunction of a DC voltage charging connection in an electric vehicle (see para [0032-0033]) with a first contactor arranged in a positive pole (see Fig. 4 - contactor 236) and a second contactor arranged in a negative pole (see Fig. 4 - contactor 238), the method comprising:
driving one of the two contactors to move it into an open or closed state (see para 0032-0033 - after charge cycle is completed, a command to open or close the contactors 236 issued depending on which contactor is being tested) and driving the other of the two contactors in order to move it into an open or closed state (see para [0032] - contactor 238 commanded to be open or closed depending on which contactor is being tested), without applying a charging voltage (para [0032] - charger 132 ordered not to provide power);
applying an internal reference DC voltage of the electric vehicle between both contactors (high voltage bus 152 is still connected at one end of each contactor and considered as providing internal DC voltage internal reference DC voltage), including applying a positive pole of the reference DC voltage at the first contactor and a negative pole of the reference DC voltage at the second contactor (see Fig. 2 – positive and negative pole of voltage from 152 remains applied to the terminals of 236, 238, respectively);
measuring a first voltage potential between the contactors on a respective output side of the contactors (voltage sensor 230 measures output voltage);
measuring a second voltage potential between the contactors on a respective input side of the contactors (voltage sensor 234 measures input voltage);
identifying a malfunction of the two contactors based at least in part on the first voltage potential and the second voltage potential (see para [0032] -- voltage between input and output of 236/238 is measured from voltage sensors 234 and 230 to detect if relay is welded shut. If voltages are equal, one relay is welded in the closed state. If the voltage on charger side of the relay goes to zero, then it opened and is operational);
driving the connectors into a state D, wherein the first contactor is driven into the closed state and the second contactor is driven into the open state;(Note pars. 0038-0039 note that first and second contactors are alternately opened and closed) identifying the first contactor as not blocked in the open state and the second contactor as blocked in the closed state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage; (see para [0032-0033] - when the voltage on both sides of contactors 236/238 as measured by voltage sensors 234 and 230 are equal, it is the contactor is welded shut).
and/or identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero. (see para [0032-0033] - no malfunction is determined during the procedure when the voltage on the charger 132 goes to zero and the voltage on the battery/high voltage bus 124/152 side is greater);
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20200317076) in view of Applicant’s admission of prior art.
Wang et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 7, Wang et al. does not teach the electric vehicle has a cover opened for access to the charging connection when the charging voltage is to be applied; the cover is closed when the elements of the method are carried out.
Applicant’s admission of prior art teach the electric vehicle has a cover opened for access to the charging connection when the charging voltage is to be applied. the cover is closed when the elements of the method are carried out. (par. 0003 of PGPUB 2024/0317060 of the instant application)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al. to include the teaching of the electric vehicle has a cover opened for access to the charging connection when the charging voltage is to be applied, the cover is closed when the elements of the method are carried out so that protection is provided for the charging connections.
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20200317076) in view of Gonzales et al. (US 9260015).
Wang et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 8, Wang does not teach the apparatus is disposed in the electric vehicle and, during a journey of the electric vehicle.
Gonzales et al. teach the apparatus is disposed in the electric vehicle and, during a journey of the electric vehicle. (Note abstract)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al. to include the teaching of the apparatus is disposed in the electric vehicle and, during a journey of the electric vehicle so that the driver can be alerted to any faults that occur during driving and take appropriate actions.
Regarding claim 10, Wang et al. teach drives one of the two contactors to move it into an open or closed state and driving the other of the two contactors in order to move it into an open of closed state, without applying a charging voltage; applies an internal reference DC voltage of the electric vehicle between both contactors, including applying a positive pole of the reference DC voltage at the first contactor and a negative pole of the reference DC voltage at the second contactor; measures a first voltage potential between the contactors on a respective output side of the contactors; measures a second voltage potential between the contactors on a respective input side of the contactors; and identifies a malfunction of the two contactors based at least in part on the first voltage potential and the second voltage potential. (see rejection of claim 9 in which the method steps are inherent)
Wang does not teach the apparatus is disposed in the electric vehicle and, during a journey of the electric vehicle.
Gonzales et al. teach the apparatus is disposed in the electric vehicle and, during a journey of the electric vehicle. (Note abstract)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al. to include the teaching of the apparatus is disposed in the electric vehicle and, during a journey of the electric vehicle so that the driver can be alerted to any faults that occur during driving and take appropriate actions.
Examiner’s Note:
Claim 11 stand rejected under 35 USC 112(b) as outlined above. No prior art rejection has been applied to these claims because the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fails to teach the following features recited in these claims:
Regarding claim 11, driving the connectors into a state C, wherein both contactors are driven into the closed state; and identifying the first contactor or the second contactor as blocked in the open state if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero and/or identifying no malfunction if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage as claim in combination with all other claim limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4, driving the connectors into a state C, wherein both contactors are driven into the closed state; identifying the first contactor or the second contactor as blocked in the open state if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero; and/or identifying no malfunction if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage.
Regarding claim 6, driving the contactor to a state A, wherein both contactors are driven into an open state; identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero; and/or identifying both contactors as blocked in the closed state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage; driving the contactors to a state B, wherein the first contactor is driven into the open state and the second contactor is driven into the closed state; identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero; and/or identifying the first contactor as blocked in the closed state and the second contactor as not blocked in the open state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage driving the contactors to a state B, wherein the first contactor is driven into the open state and the second contactor is driven into the closed state; identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero; and/or identifying the first contactor as blocked in the closed state and the second contactor as not blocked in the open state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage; driving the connectors into a state D, wherein the first contactor is driven into the closed state and the second contactor is driven into the open state; identifying the first contactor as not blocked in the open state and the second contactor as blocked in the closed state if both the first and the second voltage potential essentially correspond to the reference DC voltage; and/or identifying no malfunction if the first voltage potential essentially corresponds to the reference DC voltage and the second voltage potential is essentially zero; wherein the states are set up in the sequence A, B, C, D, A.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMETRIUS R PRETLOW whose telephone number is (571)272-3441. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 5:30-1:30.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/DEMETRIUS R PRETLOW/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights