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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDSes filed 3/18/24 and 6/18/24 have both been considered and placed of record. Two (2) initialed copies are attached herewith.
Specification
The disclosure should be carefully reviewed to ensure that any and all grammatical, idiomatic, and spelling or other minor errors are corrected.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer et al. (US 2019/0372179).
Re claims 1 and 9, the reference discloses a battery management apparatus (fig 1; abstract) having, inter alia, a temperature sensor 532 configured to measure a temperature of each zone of each battery cell 531 constituting a battery module 530; a thermal management module configured to heat or cool each battery cell or each zone thereof (para 3-4 and 49); and a processor configured to calculate a maximum inter-zone temperature difference of each battery cell (dCell1 to dCellN), calculate a maximum inter-cell deviation corresponding to a maximum temperature difference between the battery cells by subtracting the smallest temperature difference (min(dCell1 to dCellN)) from the largest temperature difference (max(dCell1 to dCellN)) among the calculated maximum inter-zone temperature differences, and perform temperature control or charging current control in a predetermined manner for a weak cell corresponding to a battery cell having the largest maximum inter-zone temperature difference if the maximum inter-cell deviation is greater than a predetermined lower threshold temperature (threshold_low). See para 49-51. Method steps of claim 9 mirrored the limitations in the structural claim 1. (Note: bolded limitations are not found the in the reference). The reference does not specifically disclose grouping the batteries into different zones and max and min temperatures are calculated. Official notice is taken of the fact that grouping a number of cells into separate zones would allow for a reduction of number of wirings and weight and sensors. Therefore, it would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have divided the batteries cells into different zones to reduce manufacturing costs.
Re claims 2 and 10, the reference further discloses upon performing charging current control in the predetermined manner, the processor performs current reduction control using a difference between the maximum inter-cell deviation and a predetermined upper threshold temperature (threshold_high). See para 5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8 and 11-16 are 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.
Art of record does not disclose or make obvious of, at least, if a weighted factor (weighted_factor) becomes equal to zero as a value calculated by subtracting the maximum inter-cell deviation from the upper threshold temperature (threshold_high) becomes equal to 1 during current reduction control, the processor stops charging without performing any further current reduction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication** should be directed to the Examiner at the listed number below. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571.273.8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800.786.9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571.272.1000.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087
**Communications after 10/31/2026 should be directed to SPE Drew Dunn at his number above.
Prosecution Insights