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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 22 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant Argues that Yamamoto (US 2011/0251745) fails to disclose “the backup power supply is connected to the drive system via the auxiliary machine system” with emphasis on the auxiliary machine system. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. It seems, as claimed, that the main power supply contains the auxiliary machine system as the main power supply includes a plurality of energy storage devices and a first device group which includes at least one energy storage device among the plurality of energy storage devices is a backup power supply configured to be connected to an auxiliary machine system. Then the backup power supply is connected to the drive system via the auxiliary machine system. So, one of the batteries (or group of batteries) is considered a backup power supply and supplies power to the drive system through the auxiliary machine system. The language of “via the auxiliary machine system” is very broad and does not have any specific meaning. It is merely considered to be a system/circuit that is different from a another power supply of a moving body. There are no components or if this supplies any device other than the drive system. It seems like a system in name only.
In interpreting claim 1, Yamamoto discloses two power supply circuits: a main power supply made up of a main batter connected through a main converter that can power a drive system [see Figure 1, (BA) to (12A) to (22) to (MG2)] and a second power supply made up of sub power batteries connected through a second converter that can power the drive system [see Figure 1, (BB1) and (BB2) to (12B) to (22) to (MG2)]. These are distinct power supply circuits that can be used to power the drive system as stated in paragraph 0064 “Inverter 22 receives direct current voltage from converters 12A and 12B, converts it to three-phase alternate current voltage, and outputs it to motor-generator MG2 driving wheel 2.”
In interpreting claim 7, one of the batteries BB1 and BB2 is considered the main power supply with the other being the backup power supply (see Figure 1). These each have distinct circuit components. As noted above, “the auxiliary machine system” is simply interpreted as a different circuit and the circuit components of battery BB1 and battery BB2 are distinct [see Figure 1, (SR1) and (SR2)].
Therefore, the rejection is maintained. It should be noted that adding some structure to define and separate “the auxiliary machine system” from the main power supply would be helpful for patentability. For instance, according to Figure 1, the main power supply (11) is connected between the motor (6) and the DC/DC converter (13). It is believed that the connection of (11) and (6) is what is considered as the main power supply system. Individually, groups of the main power supply can be connected via switches (161) to another area of the moving body from (11) to (161) to between the DC/DC converter (13) and other components (7), (8) and (9). It is further believed that Figure 8 shows what is intended to be claimed as the connection between the main power supply (11) is not able to provide power to the motor (6) between the motor (6) and the DC/DC converter (13). Therefore, the power is rerouted from the main power supply (11) through switches (161) to DC/DC converter (13) to the motor (6). This functionality is not present in the claim language of claims 1 and 7. However, newly added claim 12 does contain language that reasonably presents this configuration.
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 1-3, 7-8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0251745 by Yamamoto et al. (Yamamoto hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Yamamoto discloses a power supply system included in a moving body [see at least Abstract, “an electrically powered vehicle”], the power supply system comprising a main power supply [see at least Figure 1, (BA) to (12A)] including a plurality of energy storage devices [see at least Figure 1, (BA), (BB1) and (BB2)], the main power supply connected to a drive system for moving the moving body [see at least Figure 1, (22) to (MG2)], wherein a first device group [see at least Figure 1, (BB1) to (12B)], which includes at least one energy storage device [see at least Figure 1, (BB1)] among the plurality of energy storage devices [see at least Figure 1, (BA), (BB1) and (BB2)], is a backup power supply [see at least Figure 1, (12B)]; paragraph 0045, “sub power storage device”] configured to be connected to an auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (BB1) and (BB2) to (12B)] of the moving body [see at least Abstract, “an electrically powered vehicle”], and wherein the backup power supply is connected to the drive system via the auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (12B) separate from (12A); paragraph 0064, “Inverter 22 receives direct current voltage from converters 12A and 12B, converts it to three-phase alternate current voltage, and outputs it to motor-generator MG2 driving wheel 2”].
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto discloses the power supply system according to claim 1, wherein a second device group [see at least Figure 1, (BB2) to (12B)], which includes at least one energy storage device [see at least Figure 1, (BB2)] other than the energy storage devices included in the first device group among the plurality of energy storage devices [see at least paragraph 0045], is a backup power supply configured to be connected to the auxiliary machine system of the moving body [see at least Figure 1, (BB1) and (BB2) to (12B)].
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto discloses the power supply system according to claim 2, further comprising a determination unit [see at least Figure 1, (30)] configured to determine using one of the first device group and the second device group as a backup power supply based on a state of each of the first device group and the second device group [see at least paragraphs 0085-0088; paragraph 0045, “Voltage converter (12B) is connected selectively to one of the plurality of sub power storage devices (BB1, BB2) to convert voltage between the connected sub power storage devices and electric power feeding line PL2 bidirectionally.”; paragraph 0108, “selected sub power storage device BB is decreased in SOC, selected sub power storage device BB needs to be switched”].
Regarding claim 7, Yamamoto discloses a control method for a power supply system included in a moving body [see at least Abstract, “an electrically powered vehicle”], in which a main power supply [see at least Figure 1, (BB1)] including a plurality of energy storage devices [see at least Figure 1, (BB1) and (BB2)] is connected to a drive system [see at least Figure 1, (12B) to (22) to (MG2)] and a first device group [see at least Figure 1, (BB2) to (12B)] including at least one of the plurality of energy storage devices [see at least Figure 1, (BB2)] is a backup power supply configured to be connected to an auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (BB2), (SR1) and (SR2)], the control method comprising, when an abnormality has occurred in main supply of power to at least one of the auxiliary machine system and the drive system [see at least paragraph 0152, “in response to lowering the SOC of battery BB1”], supplying power from the backup power supply to a system, of the auxiliary machine system and/or the drive system, in which the abnormality has occurred [see at least paragraph 0155, “when the process for switching connection by means of the relay is completed and battery BB2 which is a newly selected sub power storage device is connected to converter 12B, converter 12B is restarted”; paragraph 0064, “Inverter 22 receives direct current voltage from converters 12A and 12B, converts it to three-phase alternate current voltage, and outputs it to motor-generator MG2 driving wheel 2”], wherein the backup power supply is connected to the drive system via the auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (BB2) to (SR2)].
Regarding claim 8, Yamamoto discloses the control method for the power supply system according to claim 7, wherein when an abnormality has occurred in supply of power from the main power supply, power is supplied from the backup power supply to the drive system [see at least paragraph 0155, “when the process for switching connection by means of the relay is completed and battery BB2 which is a newly selected sub power storage device is connected to converter 12B, converter 12B is restarted”; paragraph 0064, “Inverter 22 receives direct current voltage from converters 12A and 12B, converts it to three-phase alternate current voltage, and outputs it to motor-generator MG2 driving wheel 2”].
Regarding claim 11, Yamamoto discloses the control method for the power supply system according to claim 7, wherein the power supply system comprises a switch [see at least Figure 1, (SR2)] connected to the at least one of the energy storage devices and the auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (BB2) to (SR2)], and when the abnormality has occurred in the main supply of power to at least one of the auxiliary machine system and the drive system, to close the switch [see at least paragraph 0155, “when the process for switching connection by means of the relay is completed and battery BB2 which is a newly selected sub power storage device is connected to converter 12B, converter 12B is restarted”; paragraph 0064, “Inverter 22 receives direct current voltage from converters 12A and 12B, converts it to three-phase alternate current voltage, and outputs it to motor-generator MG2 driving wheel 2”].
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 nonobviousness.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0251745 by Yamamoto et al. (Yamamoto hereinafter) in view of US 2005/0035740 by Elder et al. (Elder hereinafter).
Regarding claim 6, Yamamoto discloses the power supply system according to claim 1.
Yamamoto fails to disclose wherein each of the plurality of energy storage devices includes two sets of positive electrode terminals and negative electrode terminals. However, Elder discloses a battery with multiple positive and negative terminals [see at least Figure 1, (310) and (320)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Yamamoto to utilize two sets of terminals to allow the battery to easily connect to two circuits. Thus, simplifying circuitry and eliminating the use of a single branch which could fail.
Claims 5 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0251745 by Yamamoto et al. (Yamamoto hereinafter) in view of US 2018/0201154 by Omura.
Regarding claim 5, Yamamoto discloses the power supply system according to claim 4, further comprising a sub-power supply [see at least Figure 1, (BB2) to (12B)] connected to the auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (BB1) and (BB2) to (12B)] and supplying power from either the backup power supply or the sub-power supply [see at least paragraph 0045, “Voltage converter (12B) is connected selectively to one of the plurality of sub power storage devices (BB1, BB2) to convert voltage between the connected sub power storage devices and electric power feeding line PL2 bidirectionally.”; paragraph 0108, “selected sub power storage device BB is decreased in SOC, selected sub power storage device BB needs to be switched”].
Yamamoto fails to disclose wherein when the backup power supply supplies power to the drive system, power is also supplied from the sub-power supply to the drive system via the auxiliary machine system. However, , Omura discloses a battery system [see at least Figure 3] which supplies power from multiple battery systems at the same time [see at least Figure 3, (21) and (22); paragraphs 0036, the battery systems are only disconnected in a collision or abnormality of the batteries].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Yamamoto to include another sub-battery to increase the amount of power available to the system. Thus, allowing maintaining the vehicle in an on state and increasing operation time.
Regarding claim 9, Yamamoto discloses the control method for the power supply system according to claim 7.
Yamamoto fails to disclose wherein when an abnormality has occurred in supply of power from each of the main power supply and a sub-power supply connected to the auxiliary machine system, power is supplied from the backup power supply to each of the auxiliary machine system and the drive system. However, Omura discloses an emergency battery system [see at least Figure 3, (24)] which supplies power when two normal battery systems [see at least Figure 3, (21) and (22)] have experienced failure [see at least paragraph 0039].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Yamamoto to include an emergency battery (sub-power supply) to provide power when other battery systems have failed in order to allow the vehicle to have enough power to operate for an amount of time. Thus, allowing the vehicle to move from a roadway and keeping the occupants safe from possible collision.
Regarding claim 10, Yamamoto discloses the power supply system according to claim 1.
Yamamoto discloses switches connected to the main power supply and the auxiliary machine system [see at least Figure 1, (SMR1), (SMR2) and (SMR3) to (12B)], but fails to disclose further comprising a switch connected to the at least one energy storage device and the auxiliary machine system, wherein the switch is configured to close when an abnormality is detected in the main power supply.
However, Omura discloses an emergency battery system [see at least Figure 3, (24)] which supplies power when two normal battery systems [see at least Figure 3, (21) and (22)] have experienced failure [see at least paragraph 0039].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Yamamoto to include an emergency battery (sub-power supply) to provide power when other battery systems have failed in order to allow the vehicle to have enough power to operate for an amount of time. Thus, allowing the vehicle to move from a roadway and keeping the occupants safe from possible collision.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: claims 12-14 are allowed as the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to disclose all of the limitations of the claims, especially a switch connected to the first device group and an auxiliary machine system of the moving body, a voltage of the auxiliary machine system being lower than that of the drive system, the auxiliary machine system and the drive system being connected via a DC/DC converter, wherein the switch is configured to close when supply of power from the main power supply to the drive system is interrupted, and the first device group is connected to the drive system via the auxiliary machine system and the DC/DC converter of independent claim 12.
Yamamoto et al. (US 2011/0251745) is considered the most relevant prior art as it discloses multiple energy storage devices with a main battery and auxiliary batteries wherein the auxiliary batteries can be connected/disconnected for driving of a vehicle. However, it does not disclose the above noted limitation.
Yamada et al. (US 11,001,162) and Erhart (US 2020/0079232) are also considered relevant prior art as each teaches aspects of controlling multiple batteries in vehicle electrical system. However, neither discloses the above noted limitations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Joel Barnett whose telephone number is (571)272-2879. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Menna Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
/JOEL BARNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2849
/Menatoallah Youssef/SPE, Art Unit 2849