Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/687,412

SECONDARY BATTERY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 28, 2024
Priority
Aug 31, 2021 — JP 2021-141791 +1 more
Examiner
MIKELS, MATTHEW
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
1070 granted / 1320 resolved
+21.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1337
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
47.4%
+7.4% vs TC avg
§102
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§112
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1320 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claims 1-14 are pending. 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. Claims 1-3, 5 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim, et al. (EP 3,829,018, herein Lim) in view of Gupta (GB 2,584,290).1 2 Regarding claims 1-3, Lim teaches a secondary battery management system comprising: a first circuit which is configured to measure a voltage of the secondary battery (paragraph 0131: voltage measuring unit 50); a second circuit which is configured to measure a current of the secondary battery (paragraph 0131: current measuring unit 60); and a control circuit to which information on voltage from the first circuit and information on current from the second circuit is input (paragraph 0131), wherein the control circuit starts charging to the secondary battery (paragraph 0132), wherein the control circuit performs arithmetic operation3 of data showing battery characteristics on the basis of a value input from the first circuit or the second circuit (paragraph 0132), wherein the control circuit detects a local maximum value of the data (paragraph 0148), and wherein the control circuit stops the charging when detecting the local maximum value (paragraph 0148). Lim does not explicitly teach a secondary battery that is charged and discharged at higher than or equal to -50 °C and lower than or equal to 0 °C. Gupta teaches a secondary battery that is charged and discharged at higher than or equal to -50 °C and lower than or equal to 0 °C (page 4, bullet point 2: -40 Celsius to 65 Celsius).4 It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teachings of Lim and Gupta, because such a combination aids in charging and discharging batteries in extreme temperatures (page 4 of Gupta). Regarding claims 5 and 9-10, Lim further teaches the charging is performed with a constant current (paragraph 0139). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 6-8, and 11-14 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW MIKELS whose telephone number is (571)270-5470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 7:30 AM ET - 5:00 PM ET, Friday 7:30 AM ET - 9:30 AM ET, the Examiner is on central time.5 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. /MATTHEW MIKELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876 1 A copy of each reference is attached to this Office Action. 2 In addition to the cited portions of each reference, please see also the associated figures. 3 The dt/dV operation of claim 3 is seen in paragraph 0083. 4 In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Here, the claimed range is -50 to 0 Celsius, while Gupta discloses -40 to 0 Celsius. These ranges overlap; thus, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. 5 The Examiner can also be reached at matthew.mikels@uspto.gov.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 28, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749066
MULTIPLEXING-BASED VALIDATION VIA A PROXY CARD AT A TERMINAL DEVICE
1y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12737777
System Providing Self-Service Access to Locked Merchandise
1y 5m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12731467
PLATE STABILITY FOR A DEPOSIT AND DISPENSE MODULE
1y 6m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12730997
DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING THROUGHPUT OF SCANNERS CAPTURING IMAGES OF ITEMS POTENTIALLY HAVING MULTIPLE LABELS
1y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12730994
COUNTER PAD FOR JEWELRY
1y 2m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.2%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1320 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