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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1, 3, 6, and 10-11 are amended, submitted on 12/3/2025. Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
3. Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida (WO 2019111045 A1, IDS of 3/19/2024), in view of Arita (GB 2461350 B, IDS of 3/19/2024), further in view of Huang (US20060001429 A1, IDS of 3/19/2024), Liu (US 20160178706 A1, IDS of 3/19/2024), and Kimura (JP 2008182779 A, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 1, Machida discloses a detector (secondary battery system 2 ([0015] and FIG. 1) capable of appropriately protecting respective cells that are included in an assembled battery ([0005]) including a plurality of blocks that are connected in series to one another and each of the plurality of the blocks includes cells that are connected in parallel to one another (FIG.2), which reads on the claimed “A detector for detecting inhomogeneous cell performance of a battery system having a plurality of battery cells”. Machida further discloses the detector comprising a plurality of voltage sensors (211 to 21M [0025]) measuring an individual cell voltage of each of the plurality of battery cells, resulting in measured cell voltages, because the cells in each block are connected in parallel as shown in FIG. 2.
Machida further discloses a processor (the control device, [0006]) configured to determine a resistance ratio, by calculating a first internal resistance indicating an internal resistance of the first block as one of the plurality of the blocks and a second internal resistance indicating an internal resistance of the second block as another one of the plurality of the blocks. The control device is configured to calculate an internal resistance ratio obtained by dividing the higher one of the first internal resistance and the second internal resistance by the lower one of the first internal resistance and the second internal resistance ([0006]) and the way of calculating the internal resistance ratio (K=Rmax/Rmin) of the highest resistance Rmax to the lowest resistance Rmin ([0051] and FIGs. 6 and 7).
While Machida uses Rmax/Rmin for the calculation of the internal resistance ratio, Machida does not explicitly disclose a resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum resistance among resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average resistance of the plurality of battery cells.
Arita teaches a battery control method and its system for determining the deterioration of a battery and to realize accurate measurement of the battery state (Ln 12-15/P2). Arita further teaches by obtaining the deterioration rate (SOH: state of health) from the ratio of the central tendencies of the average values of multiple internal resistances, the effect of sensor error, computational error and error of the reference internal resistance table can be minimized and the accuracy can be improved, compared to the case of obtaining the average of deterioration rate per measurement point (Ln 1-9/P16); a central tendency per each temperature range is obtained by computing the average or performing a least square method of the plurality of resistance retained per temperature range (2101) in the measured internal resistance retention means 2100 (Ln 14-18/P15); and Expression 5 shows an expression for computing the average resistance value per temperature range of the computation in an estimated deterioration computation means 2200 (Ln 3-8/P14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the Rmin with an average resistance value as taught by Arita, in order to realize accurate measurement of the battery state through minimizing the effect of sensor error, computational error and error of the reference internal resistance and therefore, arrive at the claim limitation “a resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum resistance among resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average resistance of the plurality of battery cells”.
Modified Machida further discloses that an exemplary method of calculating the internal resistance R1 of the block 11, and in FIG. 5, the axis of abscissa represents the current IB, and the axis of ordinate represents the voltage V1 (a detection value of the voltage sensor 211) ([0042] and FIGs. 2 and 5), which reads on the claimed “based on the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells, an average cell voltage of the plurality of battery cells” because the cells in each block are connected in parallel as shown in FIG. 2.
While modified Machida shows open circuit value (OCV) in FIG. 5 for calculating the internal resistance R1 of the block 11 ([0042] and FIG. 5) and uses OCV for estimating the state of charge (SOC) ([0056]), modified Machida does not explicitly disclose “and based on an average open circuit voltage of the plurality of battery cells”.
Huang teaches a similar method of monitoring the electric power of a battery by selecting a warning value of internal resistance of the battery from a plurality of values, sampling voltage of the battery in a set sampling time, calculating an internal resistance of the battery by means of a coupled external load, comparing the internal resistance of the battery with one of the predetermined warning values of internal resistance of the battery so as to determine whether the former is equal to or larger than the predetermined warning value or not, and displaying a waring in multiple stage manner on a display if the determination is affirmative ([0008]) and the invention enables a driver to correctly know the condition of the battery in substantially real time while consuming a minimum amount of current (Abstract and FIG. 1). Huang further teaches the internal resistance (r) of the battery to be measured is calculated by the following equation. r=(Vol-Vil)/I ([0041]) wherein, Vol is the no load voltage ([0034]) and Vil is load voltage ([0036]) and the average values of no load voltage and load voltage are calculated and stored ([0034] and [0036]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the resistance ratio of Machida to be calculated based on the ratio of the (Vol-Vil) term since the current I has been canceled during calculating the ratio as taught by Huang, to provide a quick calculation method for the determining of the resistance ratio in order to enable a driver to correctly know the condition of the battery in substantially real time while consuming a minimum amount of current.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to determine a resistance ratio of a maximum resistance among resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average resistance of the plurality of battery cells of Machida, based on the ratio of a maximum ΔV (Vol-Vil) to an average ΔV (Vol-Vil), as taught by Huang, in order to enable a driver to correctly know the condition of the battery in substantially real time while consuming a minimum amount of current.
Further, Liu teaches a method and apparatus for detecting the states of a battery, which apply to second-use applications of batteries retired from motor-driven carriers ([0001]) and can detect the battery state quickly and comprehensively ([0011-0012]). The method provides calculating charging and discharging internal resistance-related SOH index by determining a charging resistance ratio (the ratio REND/RNEW=ϒ, [0040]) which is a ratio of used battery internal resistance to a new battery internal resistance ([0039-0040]). Liu further teaches the method comprising the steps of: measuring pulse response parameters of the battery, wherein the pulse response parameter include maximum voltage of charging pulse, minimum voltage of discharging pulse, and calculating average voltage parameters include average maximum voltage of charging pulse, average minimum voltage of discharging pulse and average OCV ([0013] [0037]), which reads on the claimed “to determine a resistance ratio based on the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells, an average cell voltage of the plurality of battery cells and an average open circuit voltage of the plurality of battery cells, resulting in a determined resistance ratio”.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to replace the Vol (no load voltage or OCV) in the resistance ratio of modified Machida with an average open circuit voltage of the plurality of battery cells, as taught by Liu, in order to provide a dynamic and quick calculation for the determining of the charging/discharging resistance ratio and explore the states of a battery comprehensively.
Modified Machida further discloses the processor (ECU 100 as a portion of the control device, [0023] FIG. 1) is further configured to determine whether at least one influence quantity (IB, TB, and VB of FIG. 1; and SOC [0065]) of the plurality of battery cells fulfills a limit condition (current IB [0021] and FIG. 1), the processor outputting a true signal (ECU 100 includes input/output ports for signals [0023]). Further Modified Machida discloses the PCU30 carries out bilateral electric power conversion in accordance with a control signal from the ECU 100 ([0022]), and the ECU 100 performs various processes for controlling the vehicle 1 to a desired state ([0023]), which means the ECU 100 sends control signals to the PCU 30 and performs processes for a desired state. Therefore, the ECU 100 inherently includes the function of sending a true signal informing a desired state which means indicating the at least one influence value fulfills the limiting condition.
Modified Machida further discloses the internal resistance of the assembled battery 10 increases as the assembled battery 10 become deteriorated ([0026]); the processor (the control device includes map MP and memory 102 as portions of the ECU 100, [0057] [0061]) is further configured to diagnose an ageing state of the plurality of battery cells (steps S340-S360, FIG. 7) based on the resistance ratio in response to outputting the true signal indicating the at least one influence value fulfills the limiting condition.
While modified Machida does not explicitly disclose that the processor outputting a fail signal indicating a degraded ageing state of the plurality of battery cells, the output of the processor resulting in a diagnosis output signal, modified Machida discloses when charge/discharge is continuously carried out with a relatively large current, “a high-rate deterioration” can be caused, and the ECU 100 can perform “high-rate deterioration suppression control” ([0062]), which inherently and necessarily means the ECU100 portion of the processor configured to output a fail signal indicating a diagnosed degraded ageing state (corresponding to “high-rate deterioration” of the embodiment of modified Machida), internally to another portion of ECU100 to perform controls, such as the CPU 101 (FIG. 1). Further since modified Machida discloses ECU 100 ([0023] FIG. 1) includes input/output ports for signals (Machida, [0023]), a skilled artisan would reasonably expect the ECU100 portion of the processor inherently and necessarily being configured to be able to send a fail signal indicating a diagnosed degraded ageing state to another portion of the ECU100, such as the CPU 101 (FIG. 1), internally within the ECU100, in order to perform “high-rate deterioration suppression control”.
While modified Machida mentions in the related art portion by referring to JP 2008182779A (Kimura) that the charging-discharging control of an assembled battery is stopped when it is determined based on an internal resistance of each of blocks that there is a cell in which a current interruption mechanism has operated (Machida [0003]), modified Machida does not explicitly disclose a switch to control charging and discharging of the plurality of battery cells based on the diagnosis output signal, the fail signal causing the switch to open and discontinue charging or discharging.
Kimura further teaches a power supply device comprising a battery cell group in which a number of battery cells each equipped with a current interruption mechanism, and a battery control unit that drives a switching element (9, FIG. 1) provided in the current path to stop charging and discharging of the battery pack when the determination unit determines that a battery cell with an activated current interruption mechanism is present ([0008] and FIG. 1), which teaches “a switch to control charging and discharging of the plurality of battery cells based on the diagnosis output signal”, because the determination unit determines that a battery cell with an activated current interruption mechanism corresponds to the control of charging and discharging being based on the diagnosis output signal in the claim.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to include a switch in the current path of the battery control unit of Modified Machida to stop charging and discharging of the battery pack based on the diagnosis output signal, thus arriving at the claimed “a switch to control charging and discharging of the plurality of battery cells based on the diagnosis output signal”, as taught by Kimura.
Further, since modified Machida includes the processor outputting the failed signal (Machida [0062]), and a battery control unit that drives a switching element provided in the current path (Kimura, [0008] FIG. 1), a skilled artisan would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the invention, to configure/connect the switch in a fashion taught by Kimura so that the fail signal causes the switch to open and discontinue charging or discharging of the plurality of battery cells.
Regarding claims 2 and 5, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Since Machida in view of Liu has rendered obvious determining a resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum resistance among resistance of the plurality of battery cells and an average resistance of the plurality of battery cells; Machida discloses the internal resistance of the assembled battery 10 increases as the assembled battery 10 become deteriorated ([0026]); and renders obvious diagnosing the state of health (SOH) of a battery system having a plurality of battery cells by comparing the resistance ratio to a threshold value, modified Machida renders thus obvious the claimed “determining the resistance ratio includes determining a charging resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum cell charging resistance among cell charging resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average cell charging resistance of the plurality of battery cells” (claim 2); and “determining the resistance ratio further includes determining a discharging resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum cell discharging resistance among cell discharging resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average cell discharging resistance of the plurality of battery cells, and diagnosing the ageing state of the plurality of battery cells further includes determining that the battery system is in a degraded ageing state if the discharging resistance ratio is above the threshold value” (claim 5).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. While modified Machida discloses calculating the charging/discharging resistance ratio with maximum voltage of charging pulse (VCi), minimum voltage of discharging pulse (VDi), and average OCV (Voc) (Liu [0034-0035]), modified Machida does not explicitly disclose determining the charging resistance ratio includes determining the charging resistance ratio using a ratio of a first difference, which is a difference between the average cell voltage and the average open circuit voltage, and a second difference, which is a difference between the average open circuit voltage and a maximum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells (claim 3); or determining the charging resistance ratio using a fraction (uCellMax - uOCV) / (uCellAvg - uOCV) (claim 4).
Since Huang teaches the internal resistance (r) of the battery to be measured is calculated by the following equation. r=(Vol-Vil)/I ([0041]) wherein, Vol is the no load voltage ([0034]) and Vil is load voltage ([0036]) and the average values of no load voltage and load voltage are calculated and stored ([0034] and [0036]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the resistance ratio of Machida to be calculated based on the ratio of the (Vol-Vil) term since the current I has been canceled during calculating the ratio as taught by Huang, in order to provide a quick calculation method for the determining of the charging/discharging resistance ratio.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, as taught by Huang, to arrive at the claim limitations of “determining the charging resistance ratio includes determining the charging resistance ratio using a ratio of a first difference, which is a difference between the average cell voltage and the average open circuit voltage, and a second difference, which is a difference between the average open circuit voltage and a maximum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells” (claim 3); and “determining the charging resistance ratio includes determining the charging resistance ratio using a fraction (uCellMax - uOCV) / (uCellAvg - uOCV), and wherein: uCellMax is the a maximum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells, uOCV is the average open circuit voltage, uCellAvg is the average cell voltage” (claim 4), in order to enable a driver to correctly know the condition of the battery in substantially real time while consuming a minimum amount of current, without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success. [MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding claims 6 and 7, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. While modified Machida discloses calculating the charging/discharging resistance ratio with maximum voltage of charging pulse (VCi), minimum voltage of discharging pulse (VDi), and average OCV (Voc) (Liu [0034-0035]), modified Machida does not explicitly disclose determining the discharging resistance ratio includes determining the discharging resistance ratio using a ratio of a third difference, which is a difference between the average cell voltage and the average open circuit voltage, and a fourth difference, which is a difference between the average open circuit voltage and a minimum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells (claim 6); or determining the discharging resistance ratio includes determining the discharging resistance ratio using a fraction (uOCV - uCellMin) / (uOCV - uCellAvg) (claim 7).
Since Huang teaches the internal resistance (r) of the battery to be measured is calculated by the following equation. r=(Vol-Vil)/I ([0041]) wherein, Vol is the no load voltage ([0034]) and Vil is load voltage ([0036]) and the average values of no load voltage and load voltage are calculated and stored ([0034] and [0036]), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the resistance ratio of Machida to be calculated based on the ratio of the (Vol-Vil) term since the current I has been canceled during calculating the ratio as taught by Huang, in order to provide a quick calculation method for the determining of the charging/discharging resistance ratio.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, as taught by Huang, to arrive at the claim limitations of “the determining the discharging resistance ratio includes determining the discharging resistance ratio using a ratio of a third difference, which is a difference between the average cell voltage and the average open circuit voltage, and a fourth difference, which is a difference between the average open circuit voltage and a minimum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells” (claim 6); and “determining the discharging resistance ratio includes determining the discharging resistance ratio using a fraction (uOCV - uCellMin) / (uOCV - uCellAvg), wherein: uOCV is the average open circuit voltage, uCellAvg is the average cell voltage, and uCellMin is a minimum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells” (claim 7), in order to enable a driver to correctly know the condition of the battery in substantially real time while consuming a minimum amount of current, without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 8, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Since Machida discloses the ECU 100 performs various processes for controlling the vehicle 1 to a desired state based on signals received from the respective sensors and the ECU 100 calculates internal resistances of the respective blocks in the assembled battery 10 ([0023]), and has rendered obvious diagnosing a degraded ageing state of the battery system by comparing the resistance ratio to a threshold value, the claimed limitation “the diagnosing the ageing state of the plurality of battery cells further includes determining that the battery system is in a non-degraded ageing state if none of the charging resistance ratio and the discharging resistance ratio is above the threshold value” is met by modified Mochida, because controlling the vehicle to a desired state based on signals received necessarily requires a further diagnosing step including determining the battery system is in a non-degraded ageing state when none of the charging resistance ratio and the discharging resistance ratio is above the threshold value.
Regarding claim 9, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Modified Machida further discloses a method of estimating the SOC from an OCV of the assembly battery 10 with reference to an OCV-SOC curve stored in the memory 102 after measuring the OCV may be used ([0056]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to replace the OCV and SOC in the OCV-SOC curve of Machida with the average OCV and the average state of charge, as set forth above in rejection to claim 1 (Liu [0037] and FIG. 3), and arrive at the claimed “determining the average open circuit voltage based on an average state of charge of the plurality of battery cells” in order to provide a dynamic and quick calculation for the determining of the charging/discharging resistance ratio and explore the states of a battery comprehensively.
Regarding claim 10, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses the processor is further configured to determine cell voltages (VB signal [0021] being transmitted to Memory, FIG. 1), the voltage sensor 211 detects a voltage V1 o of the blocks 11. The voltage sensor 212 detects a voltage V2 of the block 12. The same holds true for the other voltage sensors 213 to 21M ([0025]) and the individual cell in each block is connected in parallel and the voltage detected by the voltage sensor represents the voltage of the individual cell in the block (FIG. 2). Liu teaches the maximum cell voltage, the average cell voltage, and the minimum cell voltage ([0013]). Therefore, the claimed limitation “the processor is configured to determine the average cell voltage and the cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells based on the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells” is met.
Regarding claim 11, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses the monitoring unit 20 includes a voltage sensor 21, a current sensor 22 and a temperature sensor 23 ([0021]); the internal resistance has dependency on the temperature and dependency on the SOC ([0054]); and the ECU 100 acquires the temperature TB of the assembled battery 10 from the temperature sensor 23, and estimates the SOC of the assembled battery 10 ([0056]); and a map MP(not shown) showing a corresponding relationship among the internal resistance, temperature TB and SOC of each of the block is prepared through a preliminary test and stored in the memory 102 of the ECU 100. The ECU 100 obtains the internal resistance from the temperature TB and SOC of the assembled battery 10 by referring to the map MP (S304) ([0057]); and the respective cells are required to be protected by performing charge-discharge control for preventing an excessively large current from flowing through each of the cells or preventing the temperature of each of the cells from becoming excessively high ([0004]).
Thus, the claimed limitation “the processor is further configured to determine at least one influence quantity; and determine if the at least one influence quantity fulfills a limit condition” is met, because a map MP(not shown) showing a corresponding relationship among the internal resistance, temperature TB and SOC of each of the block is prepared through a preliminary test and stored in the memory 102 of the ECU 100; and “diagnose the degraded ageing state of the battery system is performed only if the at least one influence quantity fulfills the limit condition” is met, because temperature and SOC are apparently both influence quantities which have limit conditions to be fulfilled before determination of the resistance ratio followed by the determination of the SOH, which indicates if the battery system is in a degraded state.
Regarding claim 12, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses charge-discharge control of the assembly battery 10 is performed through the use of the protection current IBP ([0047]), the protection current IBP can be calculated according to the processing flow as described in ([0038-0053]), and the protection current IBp is a calculated value obtained by multiplying the current IB detected by the internal resistance ratio Kʼ ([0051-0053]),which includes the safety margin M ([0053]). Therefore, the claimed limitation “the at least one influence quantity includes an integrated charging current and/or an integrated discharging current of the plurality of battery cells, and the limit condition is fulfilled if the integrated charging current is equal to or above a limit and/or if the discharging current is equal to or below a limit” is met, because the protection current IBp corresponds to an integrated charging current and/or an integrated discharging current of the plurality of battery cells of the instant claim, and with the safety margin M incorporated in the calculation of IBp, IBp should have a threshold limit value to be fulfilled, being above or below, depending on the status of charging or discharging.
Regarding claim 13, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses a current sensor 22 detects a current IB that is input to and output from the assembled battery 10 ([0021]), and a current value of the assembled battery 10 is used for charge-discharge control of the assembled battery 10 (more specifically, “protection control” of the assembled battery) ([0023]), which reads on the claimed “the at least one influence quantity includes a charging current and/or a discharging current of the plurality of battery cells, and the limit condition is fulfilled if an absolute value of the charging current and/or the discharging current is between a lower current limit and an upper current limit.”
Regarding claim 14, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses a fixed value may be used as the safety margin M and it is therefore more preferable to use the safety margin M that assumes a value corresponding to the temperature of the assembled battery 10 and the state of charge (the SOC) thereof ([0054]) and a map showing a corresponding relationship among the internal resistance, temperature TB and SOC of each of the blocks ([0057]), and further Machida discloses the SOC of the assembled battery 10 is controlled within a certain SOC region including a center value determined in advance ([0065]), which reads on the claimed “the at least one influence quantity includes an average state of charge of the plurality of battery cells, and the limit condition is fulfilled if the average state of charge is between a lower state of charge limit and an upper state of charge limit” because the safety margin M means a certain condition needs to be fulfilled between a lower limit and an upper limit; SOC of each of the blocks means an average state of charge of the block, and modified Machida has rendered obvious to use average OCV to calculate internal resistance as set forth above, therefore, a map showing a corresponding relationship among the internal resistance, temperature TB and SOC of each of the blocks necessarily involves an average state of charge.
Regarding claim 15, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses a fixed value may be used as the safety margin M and it is therefore more preferable to use the safety margin M that assumes a value corresponding to the temperature of the assembled battery 10 and the state of charge (the SOC) thereof ([0054]) and a map showing a corresponding relationship among the internal resistance, temperature TB and SOC of each of the blocks ([0057]). The temperature sensor 23 detects a temperature TB of the assembled battery 10 ([0021] and FIG. 2), which means an average temperature. Therefore, the claimed limitation “the at least one influence quantity includes an average temperature of the plurality of battery cells, and the limit condition is fulfilled if the average temperature is between a lower temperature limit and an upper temperature limit” is met, because the safety margin M means a certain condition needs to be fulfilled between a lower limit and an upper limit.
Regarding claim 16, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Mochida further discloses referring to FIG. 4, in S110, the ECU 100 acquires the voltage V1 to Vm of the blocks 11 to 1M ([0040]). While Machida discloses in FIG. 5, the axis of ordinate represents the voltage of V1 ([0042]) showing charge, and/or discharge voltage and a OCV for block 11 and there are similar voltages from V2 to Vm for blocks 12 to 1M (FIG. 2), Machida does not explicitly disclose “a first voltage difference between a minimum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells and an average open circuit voltage upon charging, and/or a second voltage difference between an average open circuit voltage and a maximum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells upon discharging, and the limit condition is fulfilled when the first charging voltage difference is above a first voltage difference limit and/or the second voltage difference is above a second voltage difference limit.”
Liu teaches in step S04 calculating average voltage parameters which include average maximum voltage of charging pulse(Vc), average minimum voltage of discharging pulse (VD), and average OCV (Vocv) ([0035]) in order to enhance the precision of battery state evaluation and preclude evaluation deviation. Further in step S05, calculating the average voltage difference of charging pulse is ΔVC=VC-Voc and the average voltage differences of discharging pulse is ΔVD=Voc-VD, and following that, SOC is calculated ([0037]). Therefore, the claimed “the at least one influence quantity is: a first voltage difference between a minimum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells and an average open circuit voltage upon charging, and/or a second voltage difference between an average open circuit voltage and a maximum cell voltage among the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells upon discharging” is met. Further, the claimed limitation “and the limit condition is fulfilled when the first charging voltage difference is above a first voltage difference limit and/or the second voltage difference is above a second voltage difference limit” is also met, because SOC is used as one influence quantity and calculated based on the voltage differences as taught by Liu.
Regarding claim 17, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida discloses the general configuration of a vehicle that is mounted with a secondary battery system (FIG.1 and [0011]) which includes a control device that performs charge-discharge control ([0006]); and the secondary battery system according to the present disclosure can be mounted in any vehicle that generates a driving force through the use of an electric power that is supplied from the secondary battery system, the vehicle may be an electric vehicle or a fuel cell-powered vehicle ([0014]). Machida further discloses in FIG. 4 that the process steps S110-S150 are repeated, and thus, reads on the claimed, “wherein determining the resistance ratio is repeated at every drive cycle.”
Regarding claim 19, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses a battery system (secondary battery system 2 plus a power control unit (PCU)30, [0015] and FIG. 1), comprising: a plurality of battery cells (10, FIG. 1); and the detector (secondary battery system 2, FIG. 1) as claimed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, modified Machida discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Machida further discloses an electric vehicle ([0015], 1 of FIG. 1) comprising the battery system as claimed in claim 19 (secondary battery system 2, FIG.1 and [0011]).
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments regarding the 103 rejection to claim 1 have been fully considered but are not found persuasive.
Applicant argues that since the internal resistance and the reference internal resistance of Arita are kept in tables in temperature ranges of 10 degrees Celsius, Arita does not consider the resistance of each battery cell, for example, but groups of battery cells. Therefore, claim 1 recitation of “a processor configured to determine a resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum resistance among resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average resistance of the plurality of battery cells, based on the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells, an average cell voltage of the plurality of battery cells and an average open circuit voltage of the plurality of battery cells, resulting in a determined resistance ratio,” cannot be taught by the Arita reference. Applicant further submits that none of the other cited references remedies the noted shortcomings of the Arita reference.
Examiner fully acknowledges the fact that Arita computes the average value per temperature range to obtain the average resistance (Expression 5 on P14). However, Arita was cited solely to teach modifying the Rmin with an average resistance value in Machida’s calculation of the internal resistance ratio (K=Rmax/Rmin), in order to minimize the effects of sensor error, computational error and error of the reference internal resistance and improve the accuracy (Arita: Ln 1-9/P16). Therefore, Machida in view of Arita would guide a skilled artisan arriving at the claimed “a processor configured to determine a resistance ratio, which is a ratio of a maximum resistance among resistances of the plurality of battery cells and an average resistance of the plurality of battery cells,”.
Regarding the latter portion of the recited claimed limitation “based on the measured cell voltages of the plurality of battery cells, an average cell voltage of the plurality of battery cells and an average open circuit voltage of the plurality of battery cells, resulting in a determined resistance ratio”, it is rendered obvious by Machida in view of Huang and Liu, as detailed in the claim 1 rejection of this paper.
Conclusion
5. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAN LUO whose telephone number is (571)270-5753. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00AM -5:00PM ET.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached on (571)270-1292. 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.
/K. L./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
3/19/2026
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751