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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Figures 2-4 the axis labels should be translated to English; i.e., Zeit [s] should be replaced with Time [s]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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 Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 11, line 5, “andwith” should be replaced with --and with--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 12, 21, and 28 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.
A broad limitation together with a narrow limitation that falls within the broad limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 12, 21, and 28 recite the broad recitation “a voltage value of the specified voltage is increased or decreased by a specified voltage value”, and the claim also recites “in particular the voltage value of the specified voltage is periodically increased or decreased by the specified voltage value” which is the narrower statement of the limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 11, 12, 14, 16, 19-21, 23, 25, 28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Barth et al. (US 2017/0153281, IDS filed 6/12/2024).
Regarding claim 11, Barth et al. discloses a method for evaluating an electric connection of an electric energy storage device (element 2, Fig. 1) to an onboard electrical system (element 6, Fig. 1) of an at least partially electrically operated vehicle (element 12, Fig. 2), wherein the onboard electrical system is supplied with electric energy by the electric energy storage device, and with a voltage converter (element 5, Fig. 1) of the onboard electrical system, which is connected to the electric energy storage device, at least one component of the onboard electrical system is supplied with an output voltage of the voltage converter, the method comprising: changing a specified voltage of the voltage converter, by which the output voltage can be specified, in a specified time interval (see pars. [0029-0034]), whereby a battery voltage and a battery current of the electric energy storage device can be influenced (see pars. [0029-0034]); detecting the battery voltage of the electric energy storage device within the time interval (see par. [0029]); detecting the battery current of the electric energy storage device within the time interval (see par. [0029]); comparing a time curve of the battery voltage and a time curve of the battery current (determining the ratio of voltage to current; i.e., the resistance); and evaluating the electric connection of the electric energy storage device to the onboard electrical system depending on the compared time curves of the battery voltage and of the battery current (see pars. [0029-0034]).
Regarding claim 12, Barth et al. discloses a method, wherein the specified voltage is changed in the time interval such that a voltage value of the specified voltage is increased or decreased by a specified voltage value, in particular the voltage value of the specified voltage is periodically increased or decreased by the specified voltage value (see pars. [0029-0034]).
Regarding claim 14, Barth et al. discloses a method, wherein by changing the specified voltage, a determination of an internal resistance of the electric energy storage device is excited (see par. [0030]).
Regarding claim 16, Barth et al. discloses a method, wherein the change of the specified voltage is effected depending on a specified switching frequency (see par. [0032]).
Regarding claim 19, Barth et al. discloses an electronic battery evaluating system (see Fig. 1) with a processor (element 10, Fig. 1) and at least one detector (elements 7, 8, Fig. 1), wherein the electronic battery evaluating system is configured for: changing a specified voltage of a voltage converter (element 5, Fig. 1), by which an output voltage can be specified, in a specified time interval, whereby a battery voltage and a battery current of an electric energy storage device can be influenced; detecting the battery voltage of the electric energy storage device within the time interval (see par. [0029]); detecting the battery current of the electric energy storage device within the time interval (see par. [0029]); comparing a time curve of the battery voltage and a time curve of the battery current (determining the ratio of voltage to current; i.e., the resistance); and evaluating an electric connection of the electric energy storage device to an onboard electrical system depending on the compared time curves of the battery voltage and of the battery current (see pars. [0029-0034]).
Regarding claim 20, Barth et al. discloses a vehicle (element 12, Fig. 1) with an electronic battery evaluating system (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 21, Barth et al. discloses an electronic battery evaluating system, wherein the specified voltage is changed in the time interval such that a voltage value of the specified voltage is increased or decreased by a specified voltage value, in particular the voltage value of the specified voltage is periodically increased or decreased by the specified voltage value (see pars. [0029-0034]).
Regarding claim 23, Barth et al. discloses an electronic battery evaluating system, wherein by changing the specified voltage, a determination of an internal resistance of the electric energy storage device is excited (see par. [0030]).
Regarding claim 25, Barth et al. discloses an electronic battery evaluating system, wherein the change of the specified voltage is effected depending on a specified switching frequency (see par. [0032]).
Regarding claim 28, Barth et al. discloses a vehicle, wherein the specified voltage is changed in the time interval such that a voltage value of the specified voltage is increased or decreased by a specified voltage value, in particular the voltage value of the specified voltage is periodically increased or decreased by the specified voltage value (see pars. [0029-0034]).
Regarding claim 30, Barth et al. discloses a vehicle, wherein by changing the specified voltage, a determination of an internal resistance of the electric energy storage device is excited (see par. [0030]).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Abu Qahouq (US 2018/0059191) discloses a system for measuring impedance spectrum of a battery based on the respective frequency components of the AC current ripple and the AC voltage ripple. Din et al. (US 2017/0160348) discloses a method for characterizing electrical impedance of an energy storage device.
Allowable Subject Matter
No art has been found for a prior art rejection of claims 13, 15, 17, 18, 22, 24, 26, 27, and 29 at this time.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILTON GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7914. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, WALTER LINDSAY can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/M.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
12/23/2025