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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the word, “suppling” is a typo. The correct word is, “supplying.” Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
Figures 7 – 11B should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites, “a feedback control is added to feed back a difference between a long-term average value of an output DC-DC converter and a target value.” It is unclear what constitutes the recited “feedback control,” where the feedback control is “added” and to what component or portion of the claimed vehicle power supply device the recited difference is fed back. Thus, the claim fails to clearly define the relationship control and the other elements of the claimed vehicle power supply device.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites, “long-time average value of the feedback control is a longer time average than an I (integral control) of the PID control.” It is unclear what is meant by “long-time average value of the feedback control” and how the recited long-time average is determined to be “longer” than the “I (integral control) control.” In particular, the claim does not identify a time period, averaging interval, time constant, or other parameter associated with the integral control against which the claimed long-time average can be compared. Therefore, the scope of the limitation cannot be reasonably ascertained.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites that, “the feedback control adds the difference between the long-time average value of the output of the DC-DC converter and the targe value to an input side of the DC-DC converter.” It is unclear what is meant by “adds the difference…to an input side of the DC-DC converter.” In particular, the claim does not specify whether the difference is added to a power input, a control input, a feedback input, or another input of the DC-DC converter nor does the claim otherwise identify the signal parameter to which the difference is added. Therefore, the scope of the limitation cannot be reasonably ascertained.
Regarding claim 6, the claim recites that the “long-time average value is obtained by an arithmetic process.” It is unclear what constitutes the claimed, “arithmetic process” and therefore, what limitation is imposed by this language. The claim does not specify the arithmetic operation or operation performed to obtain the long-time average value. Therefore, the scope of the limitation cannot be reasonably ascertained.
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.
Claims 1 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Duan (US 20200055405).
Regarding claim 1, Duan teaches a vehicle power supply device (figure 1 item 12 defined in paragraph [0029] as a battery pack for vehicle item 11), comprising:
a battery divided into an upper battery on a high voltage side and a lower battery on a low voltage side (figure 1 shows batteries item 12 which can be split into an upper level with the first two and a lower level with the remaining two as lower battery) ; and
a DC-DC converter for suppling power to the upper battery and the lower battery within preset output limits(Figure 1 show item 17 DCDC converter);
wherein a feedback control is added to feed back a difference between a long-term average value of an output of the DC-DC converter and a target value (paragraphs [0030] – [0033] and figure 1 discloses wherein sensor item 23 brings the output voltage value of the DCDC in input to a feedback controller and the value is compared with a target voltage. The value brought back is a long-term average value due to the sampling time period of the output voltage).
Regarding claim 2, Duan teaches the vehicle power supply device according to Claim 1, wherein the DC-DC converter supplies the power by P (proportional control) I (integral control) D (derivative control) control; the long-time average value of the feedback control is a longer time average than an I (integral control) control of the PID control (figure 4 shows wherein the converter supplied the power by P (proportional control) I (integral control) D (derivative control) control; the long-time average value of the feedback control is a longer time average than an I (integral control) control of the PID control
Regarding claim 3, Duan teaches the vehicle power supply device according to Claim 2, wherein the upper battery is connected to the high voltage side and the lower battery is connected to a ground side (figure 1 shows wherein the upper battery is connected to the high voltage side wherein the battery is connected to a high voltage load and low voltage load);
the DC-DC converter supplies the power between the high voltage side and a connection point of the upper battery and the lower battery, and between the connection point and the ground side (figure 1 shows wherein the DCDC converters item 17, supplies the power between upper and lower batteries); and the feedback control adds the difference between the long-time average value of the output of the DC-DC converter and the target value to an input side of the DC- DC converter (paragraphs [0048]-[0050] discloses wherein a difference is determined and between an average and a target value are input into DCDC converters
Regarding claim 4, Duan teaches the vehicle power supply device according to Claim 1, wherein a voltage of the upper battery is approximately equal to a voltage of the lower battery (paragraph [0029] discloses a battery 12 with a plurality of battery units 13, thus the batteries are of equal voltage).
Regarding claim 5, Duan teaches the vehicle power supply device according to claim 1, wherein a voltage of the upper battery is higher than a voltage of the lower battery (paragraphs [0033] – [0034] discloses wherein the batteries have a low voltage and high voltage output).
Regarding claim 6, Duan teaches the vehicle power supply device according to claim 5, the long-time average value is obtained by an arithmetic process (defined in paragraph [0032] wherein the average is obtained by arithmetic including determining a sum).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Us 20250083566 A1 Balancing Control System Hong; Sung Min Et Al.
Us 20240391353 A1 Vehicle Power Supply Device Yamanoue; Koichi Et Al.
Us 20200185931 A1 Bilevel Equalizer Stuart; Thomas A.
Us 9694707 B2 Electric Vehicle Battery Systems Shrinkle; Louis J.
Us 11063460 B2 Battery System Hofer; Maximilian Et Al.
Us 10131245 B2 Electrified Vehicle Dc Power Conversion Hand, Iii; Michael J. Et Al.
Us 8775003 B2 Controlling A Proportional Integrator Jang; Seok-Joo Et Al.
Us 8059378 B2 Methods Of Improving The Lightning Immunity Liu; Zhenning Et Al.
Us 9886233 B2 Audio Content Diagnostics Innes; David Et Al.
Us 9994118 B2 Optimizing Vehicle Recharging Williams; Nate Et Al.
Us 9692242 B2 Charging Battery Modules Butzmann; Stefan
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXIS B PACHECO whose telephone number is (571)272-5979. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:30.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
ALEXIS BOATENG PACHECO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/ALEXIS B PACHECO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights