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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) abstract idea as discussed below. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because of the reasons discussed below. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because of the reasons discussed below.
Step 1 - Statutory Category: Step 1 of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine if the claims are to one of the statutory categories of invention. Applied to the present application, claims 1-6 are directed to a machine (device/system) and claims 7-12 a process (method). Accordingly, claims 1-12 fall within at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is reproduced below with the abstract idea underlined.
Claim 1: A state of charge (SOC) estimation system for a battery system of an electrified vehicle, the SOC estimation system comprising: a first SOC estimator comprising a first Kalman filter and configured to estimate a first SOC of a first string of battery cells of the battery system having a first current flowing therethrough and that collectively form a first battery pack rated at a first direct current (DC) voltage; a second SOC estimator comprising a second Kalman filter and configured to estimate a second SOC of a second string of battery cells of the battery system having a second current flowing therethrough and that collectively form a second battery pack rated at the first DC voltage; and a control system configured to: in parallel, determine the first and second estimated SOCs using the first and second SOC estimators, respectively; determine a final SOC for the battery system based on the first and second estimated SOCs; and generate an output based on the determined final SOC for the electrified vehicle.
Under Step 2A, Prong 1, Claim 1’s underlined limitations recite estimators comprising Kalman filters to calculate states of charge and determine a final SOC based on those filters. The mathematical equations underpinning a Kalman filter constitute mathematical concepts which are recognized judicial exceptions (Abstract Idea). Furthermore, the step of determining a final SOC is a mathematical step that can be performed as mental process. Accordingly, claim 1 recites a judicial exception in the form of mathematical concepts and mental process.
Step 2A, Prong 2: examiner needs to determine if the claim(s) recite additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. The additional elements in the claim have been left in normal font. Claim 1 does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because of the following reasons:
Claim 1 additional elements recite an electrified vehicle battery system which is merely a field of use. The final step of the claim recites generating output based on the determined final SOC, which is a post-solution activity. The control system is a generic computer component, running calculations in parallel simply speeds up the math; it does not physically alter the structure of battery cells or improve the underlying computer processing architecture itself. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Claim 7 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 1, the Section 101 eligibility analysis set forth in detail under claim 1 apply to independent claim 7 too.
Step 2A, Prong 1 for dependent claims: claims 2-6 and 8-12 are dependent from claim 1 and 7, respectively and have the same abstract idea as claim 1 and claim 7.
Accordingly claims 2-6 and 8-12 recites a judicial exception in the form of mathematical concepts and mental process.
Step 2A, Prong 2 for dependent claims: claims 2-4 and 8-10 recite the BEV, motors, battery packs, and drive axels as additional elements but the additional elements merely define a field of use for the performance of the abstract idea. Claims 5, 6, 11, and 12 recited additional elements (connecting the batteries in series or parallel) is considered extra solution activity.
Accordingly, the additional elements in claims 2-6 and 8-12 do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B: Claims 1-12: the additional elements, considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons set forth with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2. Additionally, claims 5, 6, 11, and 12 additional elements (connecting the batteries in series or parallel) is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity. Li et al. (US 20210078429 A1), ¶[5], discloses a multi-pack battery system featuring first and second battery packs that are connectable in either series or parallel. Wang et al. (US 20200070667 A1), Abstract, discloses a rechargeable energy storage system (RESS) built from a pair of battery packs. It features switches that selectively connect or disconnect the packs to or from each other to achieve series or parallel mode.
Accordingly, the additional elements in claims 2-6 and 8-12 do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Araujo Xavier et al. (US 20230356623 A1) hereinafter Araujo Xavier, and further in view of Fedorova et al.(US 20240248144 A1) hereinafter Fedorova.
Regarding claim 1, Araujo Xavier teaches a state of charge (SOC) estimation system for a battery system of an electrified vehicle (discloses a state of charge estimation system for a traction battery system of an electrified vehicle comprising a controller (BECM (33)), Abstract and ¶ [1] & fig. 2), the SOC estimation system comprising (BECM 33 includes computation routine 146 which is configured to generate a soc of battery (24) ¶ [43]): a first SOC estimator comprising a first filter (the BECM 33 is programmed to implement a first filter 142a, ¶ [43] and fig. 4) and configured to estimate a first SOC (generate SOC value for array 144a, ¶ [38 & 42]) of a first string of battery cells (array 144a,fig. 4) of the battery system (battery system (24), fig. 4) having a first current flowing therethrough (array current (54) of the first cell arrays 144a, fig. 3) and that collectively form a first battery pack (array 144a, fig. 4) rated at a first direct current (DC) voltage (discloses that battery (24) provides high voltage direct current output, ¶ [20], and BECM 33 is programmed to monitor the characteristic of each physical array which includes array voltage (56), ¶ [29]. Because each array consists of a defined number of cells connected in series/parallel to output DC power, each array operates at and is rated for defined direct voltage.).
Araujo Xavier further teaches a second SOC estimator comprising a second filter (the BECM is programmed to implement a first filter 142n, ¶ [43] and fig. 4) and configured to estimate a second SOC (generate SOC value for array 144n, ¶ [38 & 42]) of a second string of battery cells (array 144n,fig. 4) of the battery system (battery system (24), fig. 4) having a second current flowing therethrough (array current (54) of the first cell arrays 144n, fig. 3) and that collectively form a second battery pack rated at the first DC voltage(discloses that battery (24) provides high voltage direct current output, ¶ [20], and BECM 33 is programmed to monitor the characteristic of each physical array which includes array voltage (56), ¶ [29]. Because each array consists of a defined number of cells connected in series/parallel to output DC power, each array operates at and is rated for defined direct voltage.).
Araujo Xavier further teaches a control system (BECM 33, fig. 2) configured to: in parallel (BECM 33 employs multiple instances of the filter to model corresponding arrays of traction battery (24), and the array has its cell state estimation performed just like as if it was a separate battery pack,¶ [44]. Block diagram 144 in fig. 4 illustrates these filters operating side-by-side as parallel software threads. ), determine the first and second estimated SOCs using the first and second SOC estimators, respectively (BECM 33 may generate a SOC value for array 144a using the filter 142a and may generate a SOC value for array 144n using the filter 142n, ¶ [42]).
Araujo Xavier further teaches how to determine a final SOC for the battery system based on the first and second estimated SOCs (BECM 33 includes computation routine 146 which is configured to generate a soc of battery (24) based at least in part on the SOC values of arrays 144a, 144b,¶ [43]) and generate an output based on the determined final SOC for the electrified vehicle (BECM controls the operation of vehicle 12 and/or traction battery 24 based on SOC,… of the traction battery ¶ [43].).
Araujo Xavier notes that the underlying array level filters can utilize standard Kalman filtering algorithms, ¶[33], but focuses its detailed disclosure on a bar-delta filter configuration. Araujo Xavier does not disclose implementing separate Kalman filters to estimate SOC.
Fedorova teaches a battery management apparatus configured to determine individual cell-level SOCs for a plurality of battery cells utilizing a Kalman filter for each of the cell estimators, ¶ [34 & 71].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute bar-delta filters, as taught by Araujo Xavier, by Kalman filters taught by Fedorova because Fedorova discloses that Kalman filters are effective in producing SOC estimates.
Claim 7 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 1, claim 7 is rejected for the same reason as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 1.
Claims 2-6 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova as applied to claim 1 and claim 7 above, and further in view of Li et al. (US 20210078429 A1) hereinafter Li.
Regarding claim 2, Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova teaches the SOC estimation system of claim 1 as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 1. Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova further teaches the electrified vehicle is a battery electric vehicle (BEV) (Araujo Xavier, ¶ [18]). Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova further teaches that vehicle (12) has a traction battery (24) that includes the first battery pack (first array of battery cells 144a, (Araujo Xavier, fig. 4) ) and the second battery pack (second array of battery cells 144n, (Araujo Xavier, fig. 4)).
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova discloses that the vehicle (12) is propelled by one or more electric machine(s) (14) powered by the traction battery (24), but describes the vehicle drivetrain as containing a transmission (16) and a single drive shaft (20) connected to drive wheels (22), (Araujo Xavier, fig 1 and ¶ [19]). Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova is silent on a dual-axle BEV layout where each cell array (pack) is dedicated to powering a separate motor on a separate axle.
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova does not teach the BEV having a first electric motor configured to be powered by the first battery pack and to provide drive torque to a first axle and a second electric motor configured to be powered by the second battery pack and to provide drive torque to a different second axle.
Li teaches a battery electric vehicle (BEV) (fig. 1) having a first electric motor (a front electric motor (45), ¶ [29] & fig.2) configured to be powered by the first battery pack (pack (12A), ¶ [29] & fig. 2) and to provide drive torque to a first axle (provides drive torque to a front drive axle (14AF), fig. 1 & ¶ [29])) and a second electric motor (rear motor (145), fig. 2 & ¶ [29]) configured to be powered by the second battery pack (pack (12B), ¶ [29] & fig. 2) and to provide drive torque to a different second axle (provides drive torque to a different rear drive axle (14AR), ¶ [29] & fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the electrified vehicle, taught by Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova, by implementing the physical dual-motor, dual axle AWD powertrain layout taught by Li. By configuring the vehicle with two independent motor and pack drive systems, the vehicle gains critical limp-home capability. If a thermal or electrical fault disables one battery pack or motor, the remaining healthy battery pack and motor can continue to safely propel the vehicle via the other axle.
Claim 8 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 2, claim 8 is rejected for the same reason as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li teaches the SOC estimation system of claim 2 as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 2.
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li teaches number of arrays (N) and number of cells (j) in each array, (Araujo Xavier, fig. 4), j and N represent arbitrary integers rather than fixed numbers.
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova does not teach that the first DC voltage is approximately 400V and the battery system is rated at a second DC voltage of approximately 800V.
Li teaches that the first DC voltage is approximately 400V (the battery packs are connectable in a parallel configuration to establish a nominal first DC voltage of approximately 400V for propulsion, ¶ [5]) and the battery system is rated at a second DC voltage of approximately 800V (and are connectable in a series configuration to establish a nominal second DC voltage of approximately 800V, ¶ [5]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the traction battery of Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova by scaling the arbitrary series cell count j per array to approximately 100 cells (for example, each cell having voltage of 3.7V to 4V) per array (total of two arrays for N=2) to establish a nominal pack level direct current voltage of approximately 400V, and further configuring these nominal 400V arrays/packs in the reconfigurable series-parallel battery at 400V and 800V architecture taught by Li. Because operating battery packs in parallel at a nominal 400V is highly optimal for propulsion as it allows the powertrain to directly interface with standard, cost effective, and highly reliable 400V traction inventers and motor generators.
Furthermore, connecting these packs to series connected 800V state achieves the predictable benefit of enabling compatibility with high-power DC fast charging stations while halving the charging current. This results in reducing resistive thermal losses and protecting the battery pack from localized degradation.
Claim 9 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 3, claim 9 is rejected for the same reason as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li teaches the SOC estimation system of claim 3 as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 3.
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li further teaches that the first and second battery packs are also connectable in series (Araujo Xavier, discloses an example traction battery 3P96S in which arrays are connected in series¶ [26]).
Claim 10 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 4, claim 10 is rejected for the same reason as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li teaches the SOC estimation system of claim 4 as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 4.
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li does not disclose that connecting battery packs in series is to provide increased energy output to one of the first and second electric motors to provide increased torque at a respective one of the first and second axles.
Li teaches that the control system is further configured to connect the first and second battery packs in series to provide increased energy output to one of the first and second electric motors (a series propulsion mode (PV2-s) that the first and second battery packs are connected in series at a higher voltage level for higher-voltage propulsion, (¶ [12 & 42]). Li teaches that this is to energize one or both of the electric machines at the second voltage level, wherein the series propulsion mode torque from one or both of the rotary electric machines propels the mobile platform (last two paragraphs of claim 18)) to provide increased torque at a respective one of the first and second axles (Energizing a single electric motor with the series connected packs at the higher voltage (800V) level rather than parallel (400V) level allows that motor to output increased drive torque to its respective front or rear axle)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the dual-pack system of Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li to connect in series to power a single selected axle motor for torque boosting purposes because doing so allows the vehicle to temporarily maximize tractive effort at a single axle (such as during heavy acceleration, climbing, or towing) without requiring both powertrain axles to continually operate at high-voltage which improves system efficiency.
Claim 11 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 5, claim 11 is rejected for the same reason as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 5.
Regrading claim 6, Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li teaches the SOC estimation system of claim 4 as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 4.
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li further teaches that the control system is further configured to connect the first and second battery packs in series (Araujo Xavier, discloses an example traction battery 3P96S in which arrays are connected in series¶ [26])
Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li does not teach that connecting the battery arrays/packs in series is to perform recharging of the battery system via an 800V DC fast charging station.
Li teaches that connecting the battery packs in series is to perform recharging of the battery system via an 800V DC fast charging station ( S-connected configuration enabling nominal 800V charging. The disclosed multi-pack architecture also enables flexible use of a DC fast-charging (“DCFC”) station.¶ [5]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the S-connected battery packs, as taught by Araujo Xavier in view of Fedorova and Li, to perform recharging via an 800V DC fast charging station as taught by Li. Because connecting the packs in series to accept 800V from the charging station doubles the overall charging voltage, which reduces battery replenishment times at the station without requiring bulkier, heavier wiring harnesses or creating excessive resistive thermal losses in vehicle’s high-voltage charging path.
Claim 12 is the method counterpart to independent system claim 6, claim 12 is rejected for the same reason as set forth with respect to rejection of claim 6.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Joe (US 20160252583 A1) discloses and extended Kalman filter state estimation system for a parallel battery pack.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAEEDE NAFOOSHE whose telephone number is (571)272-8629. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am -5:00pm.
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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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.
/SAEEDE NAFOOSHE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/LINA CORDERO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights