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 .
In response to amendment filed 12/01/2025, claims 1, 5, and 10 have been amended. Claims 3-4 have been canceled. Claim 11 is new. Previous claim objection to claims 5-6 and 35 USC 101 claim rejection to claims 1-3 and 5-10 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-2, 7-8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murawaka (US 9041348 B2) in view of Bell et al. (US 20180281773 A1), and further in view of Maury et al. (US 20220072962 A1)
In regards to claim 1, Murawaka teaches, A control device (11) for an electric vehicle (1) having a traction battery (12) and an energy output device (13) for providing electrical energy to an external consumer (2), wherein the control device (11) is configured: (See fig. 1, building 12, fig. 2, control portion 30, vehicle 22, col. 6, lines 28-42, The charge-discharge control portion 38 is connected to a vehicle side information communication portion 40, a vehicle-side power supply connecting portion 42, and the vehicular secondary battery 24)
- to determine the current state of charge of the traction battery (12), - to determine an energy requirement for a future route, (See fig. 3, 10, col. 7, lines 43-66, amount of electric power stored in, the vehicular secondary battery 24 by communicating with the charge-discharge control portion 38 via the building-side information communication portion 32 and the vehicle-side information communication portion 40, and calculate the amount of electric power required to drive to the destination (or travel the running distance) input with the controller 28.)
- to compare the state of charge of the traction battery (12) and the determined energy requirement for the future route, and - to use the comparison of the state of charge of the traction battery (12) and the determined energy requirement to control an energy output to the external load (2) and/or to output a signal. (See fig. 6A, steps 206-216, 218-220, in particular step 220, electric power other than that calculated amount of electric power is supplied to the building 12. The calculation of allowable electric power to the building 12 is performed where “current state of charge of the battery” is subtracted by “amount of electric power necessary to travel the running distance the next day”. Therefore, claimed “compare” is satisfied)
Murawaka discloses “difference between the state of charge of the traction battery (12) and the determined energy requirement for the future travel distance” which is simply a SoC level value allowable for external load. (See fig. 6A, steps 206-216, 218-220, in particular step 220, electric power other than that calculated amount of electric power is supplied to the building 12. The calculation of allowable electric power to the building 12 is performed where “current state of charge of the battery” is subtracted by “amount of electric power necessary to travel the running distance the next day”.), however, does not specifically teach, control device is configured to output a signal…if […value] falls below a first threshold value… control device is configured to deactivate an energy output to the external load…if […value] falls below a second threshold value.
Bell discloses control device is configured to output a signal…if […value] falls below a first threshold value. (See paragraph 39, when the SoC of HV battery 175 decreases below a charge-threshold, the controllers may adjust, reduce, … the power being delivered to external off-board electrical loads OBLs)
Bell also discloses control device is configured to deactivate an energy output to the external load…if […value] falls below a second threshold value. (See paragraph 39, when the SoC of HV battery 175 decreases below a charge-threshold, the controllers may … terminate the power being delivered to external off-board electrical loads OBLs)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the control device of Murawaka to further comprise control device taught by Bell because The controllers in Bell are configured to sustain and prevent depletion of the SoC while delivering electrical power to the external loads, such that undesirable degradation of battery life is prevented, which may result from repeated battery charge-discharge cycles otherwise arising from off-board power delivery (paragraph 4).
Murawaka-Bell teaches determining the claimed difference and deactivating an energy output and/or output a signal when the available battery energy falls below a threshold, however, does not specifically teach multi-threshold staged control scheme.
Maury discloses first/second threshold value (See paragraph 112, when the energy available for completion of a planned route falls below a first threshold, for instance 125% of the calculated energy needed to reach the planned vehicle destination might be feasible, as would setting a threshold of 120% or less of the energy required for completion of the planned trip, power conservation steps can be implemented. This can be done on a prioritized basis. In one example, in-cabin entertainment systems might be disabled, thereby reducing their power requirements to zero until it becomes clear to the system that the destination will be reached without exhausting the vehicles energy supply. However, disabling a vehicle system might not be feasible for higher priority systems, such as air conditioning. With air conditioning, it is possible to have a first energy reserve threshold, for instance 120% or less of the expected energy requirements, at which point the air conditioning system switches to a low power mode. Then, if vehicle operating conditions continue to deteriorate, perhaps dropping below a second threshold where the energy reserve drops to 110% or less of the energy required for completion of the planned trip, the air conditioning can be shut down…paragraph 115, illumination of dashboard displays can be reduced in response to the energy storage level falling below a first threshold, sensors for at least one of cabin temperature, windshield washer fluid level and automatic windshield wiper activation can be disabled in response to the energy storage level falling below a second threshold, and at least one of cabin heat, cabin air conditioning, interior lights, active suspension or cabin auxiliary power outlets can be disabled in response to energy storage level falling below a third threshold. Also see claim 14)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the control device of Murawaka-Bell to further comprise multi-threshold staged control scheme taught by Maury in order to provide graduated control of external electrical loads as the difference between available battery energy and required route energy decreases. The use of multiple thresholds to trigger different control actions represents a predictable and well-known design choice in battery and power management systems, allowing an earlier control signal to be generated prior to deactivating an external load, thereby improving system robustness and avoiding abrupt power interruption.
In regards to claim 2, Murawaka-Bell-Maury teaches the control device according to claim 1, wherein the control device (11) comprises a forecasting device (15) which is designed to determine a future travel route using a current position of the electric vehicle (1), a current time, historical usage data of the electric vehicle and/or a user input. (See col. 7, lines 46-55, fig. 3B, calculate the amount of electric power required to drive to the destination (or travel the running distance) input with the controller 28. Incidentally, the daily driving routine may be stored and the next destination may be obtained through learning.)
In regards to claim 7, Murawaka-Bell-Maury teaches the control device according to claim 1, wherein the external load (2) comprises an electrical load external to the electric vehicle (1). (See fig. 1, building 12, fig. 2, reference numbers 36, 16, 18)
Claim 8 is similar in scope to claim 1, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
Claim 10 is similar in scope to claim 1, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
In regards to claim 11, Murawaka-Bell-Maury teaches the control device according to claim 1, wherein the first threshold value is greater than the second threshold value. (See Maury paragraph 112, when the energy available for completion of a planned route falls below a first threshold, for instance 125% of the calculated energy needed to reach the planned vehicle destination might be feasible, as would setting a threshold of 120% or less of the energy required for completion of the planned trip, power conservation steps can be implemented. This can be done on a prioritized basis. In one example, in-cabin entertainment systems might be disabled, thereby reducing their power requirements to zero until it becomes clear to the system that the destination will be reached without exhausting the vehicles energy supply. However, disabling a vehicle system might not be feasible for higher priority systems, such as air conditioning. With air conditioning, it is possible to have a first energy reserve threshold, for instance 120% or less of the expected energy requirements, at which point the air conditioning system switches to a low power mode. Then, if vehicle operating conditions continue to deteriorate, perhaps dropping below a second threshold where the energy reserve drops to 110% or less of the energy required for completion of the planned trip, the air conditioning can be shut down…paragraph 115, illumination of dashboard displays can be reduced in response to the energy storage level falling below a first threshold, sensors for at least one of cabin temperature, windshield washer fluid level and automatic windshield wiper activation can be disabled in response to the energy storage level falling below a second threshold, and at least one of cabin heat, cabin air conditioning, interior lights, active suspension or cabin auxiliary power outlets can be disabled in response to energy storage level falling below a third threshold. Also see claim 14)
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murawaka (US 9041348 B2) in view of Bell et al. (US 20180281773 A1), in view of Maury et al. (US 20220072962 A1), and further in view of Kinomura (US 20150054466 A1)
In regards to claim 5, Murawaka-Bell-Maury teaches the control device according to claim 3.
Murawaka-Bell-Maury does not specifically teach, wherein the control device (11) is configured to adjust the first threshold value and/or the second threshold value using a user input, weather conditions, historical consumption values of the electric vehicle (1) and/or a health status of the traction battery (12).
Kinomura further discloses wherein the control device (11) is configured to adjust the first threshold value and/or the second threshold value using a user input, weather conditions, historical consumption values of the electric vehicle (1) and/or a health status of the traction battery (12). (See paragraph 97, the determination condition of step S110 may be set to be variable so as to lower the determination threshold value of the SOC in a high-temperature state depending on the temperature characteristics of the power storage device 110.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the control device of Murawaka-Bell -Maury to further comprise control device taught by Kinomura because degradation of battery is reduced and longevity is increased.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murawaka (US 9041348 B2) in view of Bell et al. (US 20180281773 A1) in view of Maury et al. (US 20220072962 A1), and further in view of Diamond et al. (US 20200286305 A1).
In regards to claim 6, Murawaka-Bell-Maury teaches the control device according to claim 1.
Murawaka-Bell-Maury does not specifically teach, wherein the control device (11) is configured to send a notification to a mobile terminal (100) if the first threshold value and/or the second threshold value is undershot.
Diamond further discloses wherein the control device (11) is configured to send a notification to a mobile terminal (100) if the first threshold value and/or the second threshold value is undershot. (See paragraph 71, transmitting an alert to a mobile device when a current SOC of the energy source is at or below an SOC threshold, the SOC threshold being measured as a function of the current SOC and a distance to a nearest charging station.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the control device of Murawaka-Bell-Maury to further comprise control device taught by Diamond because informing user quickly as possible can achieve faster response/action to efficiently manage battery output.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murawaka (US 9041348 B2) in view of Bell et al. (US 20180281773 A1) in view of Maury et al. (US 20220072962 A1), and further in view of Filippi et al. (US 20200076217 A1)
In regards to claim 9, Murawaka-Bell-Maury teaches the electric vehicle according to claim 8.
Murawaka-Bell-Maury does not specifically teach, wherein the energy output device (13) comprises a voltage converter designed to provide electrical energy to a low-voltage consumer or in a low-voltage network.
Filippi further discloses wherein the energy output device (13) comprises a voltage converter designed to provide electrical energy to a low-voltage consumer or in a low-voltage network. (See paragraphs 5, 11, 15, 32, 35, 37, 39, 48, The reconfigurable converter 202 may be configured to transfer power from the traction battery 106 to an electrical load external to the vehicle 102…paragraph 2, the traction battery may provide energy to low voltage loads. Lastly see paragraph 29)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the control device of Murawaka-Bell-Maury to further comprise control device taught by Filippi because power supportable devices can be increased by implementing voltage converter, thus allowing power supply to both low and high voltage consumers. Flexibility is thus improved.
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ arguments have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above necessitated by applicant’s amendment.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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, JAMES J LEE can be reached at (571)270-5965. 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.
/JUSTIN S LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668