Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/600,400

Battery Life Balancing Using Hard Disconnect of Parallel Batteries

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Mar 08, 2024
Priority
Mar 08, 2023 — provisional 63/450,917
Examiner
PELTON, NATHANIEL R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Smartville Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
561 granted / 753 resolved
+14.5% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
771
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
56.8%
+16.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 753 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . 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 1-7 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. With respect to claim 1, the claim recites “one or more batteries having capacity differences between batteries”. It is not possible, or at the very least unclear, how one battery can have capacity differences between batteries. The examiner assumes the claim should have been written to state –two or more batteries—for the purposes of examination below. Claims 2-6 depend on claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons. With respect to claims 4-6, “the one of more batteries having less capacity” lacks antecedent basis. It appears claim 4 is supposed to depend on claim 2. Additionally, “one of more” appears to be a misspelling and should recited –one or more--. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Trezise [US 20240356341]. With respect to claim 1, Trezise discloses a battery storage system comprising one (two) or more batteries [Fig. 1] having capacity differences between batteries [par. 0131] and at least one relay [112 and/or 114], wherein the at least one relay disconnects or reconnects the one or more batteries from the system [i.e. connected between the batteries and the system]. With respect to claim 2, Trezise further discloses wherein the one (two) or more batteries comprise batteries with more capacity and batteries with less capacity relative to an average capacity across the battery storage system [implicitly battery capacities vary from one another since they cannot be perfectly identical and therefore when given two or more batteries some have to be above and some below the average]. With respect to claim 3, Trezise further discloses wherein the at least one relay is an internal relay attached to each of the one or more batteries [see Figs. 1 and 2]. With respect to claim 4, Trezise further discloses wherein the one (two) of (or) more batteries having less capacity relative to the average capacity are disconnected from the system through the internal relay [par. 0030, 0053, 0101, 0113-0118]. With respect to claims 5-6, Trezise further discloses wherein the batteries with less capacity are disconnected, the battery storage system is cycled, after which time the batteries with less capacity are reconnected to the system when voltage and state of charge readings match that of the system [Fig. 6; par. 0061; additionally note the process is restarted after battery disconnect and update of status, see also par. 0072-0076]. With respect to claim 7, Trezise discloses a battery storage system that allows connection of batteries of different charge states without having to first match their states of charge through at least one external component selected from the group consisting of external charger and external load [Fig. 1; i.e. switches/relays 114/112 allow connection of batteries with different charge states to the load]. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0275195 to Hara additionally discloses batteries of different capacities being selectively connected to a load/power supply through switching devices and therefore additionally reads on all the claimed limitations. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL R PELTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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. /NATHANIEL R PELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 08, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749909
METHOD FOR TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRIC ENERGY, SUPPLY FACILITY, HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE AND SYSTEM
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12749908
CHARGING DOCK AND CHARGING DEVICE THEREWITH
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12746840
ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION IDENTIFICATION
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12744415
WIRELESS CHARGING SYSTEM, METHOD OF REMOVING FOREIGN OBJECT IN WIRELESS CHARGING SYSTEM, AND COMPUTING DEVICE FOR PERFORMING THE METHOD
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12734913
AUTOMATED STORAGE SYSTEM WITH A CONTAINER VEHICLE AND A CHARGING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+19.0%)
2y 9m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 753 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month