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 § 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)(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.
(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.
Claims 1 and 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schaffnit (US 20110012558 A1).
For the sake of clarity, the limitations of claim 1 are listed below, followed in each instance by a discussion of how the prior art teaches the claimed invention.
A method for controlling a fuel cell and a battery, comprising:
Schaffnit teaches at paragraphs 0013 and 0014:
“[0013] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an electrical system 10 for a fuel cell hybrid vehicle. The system 10 includes a split fuel cell stack 12 electrically coupled to high voltage bus lines 14 and 16 through contactors 18 and 20, respectively. A high voltage battery 22 is also electrically coupled to the high voltage bus lines 14 and 16 where the battery 22 includes battery cells 24 electrically coupled in series. A bidirectional DC/DC converter (BDC) 26 is provided in the bus lines 14 and 16 to charge and discharge the battery 22, which is operating at a different voltage level that the fuel cell stack 12. The electrical system 10 includes a power management and distribution (PMD) device 28 electrically coupled to the bus lines 14 and 16 that connects additional system loads to the bus lines 14 and 16, such as an air compressor 30.
[0014] The electrical system 10 also includes a power inverter module (PIM) 32 electrically coupled to the bus lines 14 and 16 and an AC traction motor 34 that is part of an electric traction system (ETS). The PIM 32 converts the DC voltage on the bus lines 14 and 16 to an AC voltage suitable for the traction motor 34. The traction motor 34 provides the traction power to operate the vehicle.”
Thus, there is a system that includes both a fuel cell and a battery that work together to provide power to a vehicle in a managed way.
controlling current of the battery using current of the fuel cell, wherein the current of the battery is controlled by an integral controller on a time-averaged basis;
Schaffnit teaches at claim 10:
“10. A method for equalizing the charge of battery cells in a battery in a fuel cell hybrid vehicle including a fuel cell stack, said method comprising: monitoring the state of charge of the battery cells in the battery; measuring the actual current of the battery; determining a maximum charge current limit of the battery; comparing the actual battery current and the maximum charge current limit in a proportional-integral controller; modifying the maximum charge current limit based on the comparison between the actual battery current and the maximum charge current limit by adding a value to the maximum charge current limit; converting the modified maximum charge current limit to a power charge limit using a battery model; and overcharging the battery using the power charge limit and power from the fuel cell stack so that all of the cells in the battery become fully charged.”
Thus an integral controller is used to control the current that goes the battery from the fuel cell to recharge it. An integral controller is by definition time-averaged since it takes the integral of the difference between the actual battery current and the charge limit over time, and increasing the charge limit by the average difference amount to maintain the battery charge.
and controlling a target battery state of charge using an actual state of charge of the battery, wherein the target battery state of charge is controlled by a controller using continuous modulation.
An integral controller (see claim 10 above) which is used to control the flow of power from the fuel cell to the battery is continually modulated because the integral controller is taking in continuous difference data to obtain a continuously updating integral over time. Thus in Schaffnit, the value of the allowed current from fuel cell to battery is always changing and updating.
Re claim 10: See Schaffnit, paragraph 0004. The claimed vehicle systems use regenerative braking in addition to the regular tractive (normal forward propulsion) mode.
The integral controller should take into account the current flow to/from the battery in different modes (traction and regenerative), because it is a cumulative value over time.
The battery will support operation in these different modes while the fuel cell with the integral control will the battery charge as needed for these changing conditions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 and 11 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.
Claims 12-19 are allowed.
The prior art has no teaching or suggestion of drawing a distinction between an inner loop integrating controller and an outer loop controller in the manner claimed in the context of an integrating controller managing the flow of power from a fuel cell to a battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2392. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 9 AM to 5 PM.
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, Thomas K. Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/DANIEL A HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
