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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7 June and 27 November 2024 are being considered by the examiner.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Okubo, et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0045430).
For claim 1, Okubo discloses a vehicle comprising: a battery pack; an electric machine; and a control system including one or more controllers (see Fig. 1), the control system configured to discharge power using the electric machine to increase operation loss of the electric machine based on a setting obtained from a drive input and a desired surplus loss limit (see paras. 0020, 0019, input; 0021-0022, loss limit) in response to detecting at least one of a temperature deficiency or an excessive electric power characteristic of the battery pack (see para. 0016).
Regarding claim 2, Okubo further teaches wherein the drive input includes at least one of a normalized speed and a torque (see para. 0016).
With reference to claim 3, Okubo further discloses wherein the temperature deficiency includes at least one: a temperature of the battery pack being less than or equal to a temperature threshold, or a temperature of a passenger cabin being less than or equal to a desired cabin temperature (see para. 0016).
Pertaining to claim 9, Okubo further teaches a power electronic system including an inverter to control power to the electric machine in accordance with the setting (see para. 0012).
Referring to claim 11, Okubo teaches a method for controlling a vehicle having an electric machine and a battery pack (see Fig. 1), comprising: charging the battery pack using the electric machine during a regenerative braking operation (see Abstract); and discharging power using the electric machine based on a setting obtained from a drive input and a desired surplus loss limit (see paras. 0020, 0019, input; 0021-0022, loss limit) in response to detecting at least one of a temperature deficiency or an excessive electric power characteristic of the battery pack (see para. 0016).
Claim 12 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 2. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 2.
Claim 13 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 3. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 3.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7, 8, 10 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo, et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0045430).
With reference to claim 7, Okubo discloses the setting is obtained using a loss-current correlation that associates a current reference setting with the drive input and the desired surplus loss (see para. 0010, drive input; paras. 0011, 0013, surplus loss; paras. 0016-0017, current reference setting), and the loss-current correlation is configured to define the setting using a high surplus current reference (SCR) setting associated with a high surplus loss limit (see para. 0021).
Okubo does not explicitly disclose a low SCR setting with a low surplus loss limit. However, as Okubo teaches a high surplus reference and a high loss limit, incorporating a low SCR setting and low surplus loss limit would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art when motivated to establish a range of acceptable values to facilitate loss in the system. It would have been obvious at the effective date of filing to modify Okubo to include a low SCR setting with a low surplus limit and a range of values based on an expectation of success and the motivation to improve a controller, for a given operating point of the electric machine, may schedule a method of commutation for switches of the inverter during presence of a negative wheel torque request according to a charge rate corresponding to the negative wheel torque request, temperatures of the electric machine and/or inverter, and/or a battery state of charge (see abstract).
Continuing with the claim, Okubo does not explicitly disclose the last limitation. However, because it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to establish a range having a high and low SCR setting with associated loss limits, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of filing that loss limit would fall between the high and low loss limits based on the motivation to improve a controller, for a given operating point of the electric machine, may schedule a method of commutation for switches of the inverter during presence of a negative wheel torque request according to a charge rate corresponding to the negative wheel torque request, temperatures of the electric machine and/or inverter, and/or a battery state of charge (see abstract).
With regards to claim 8, Okubo does not explicitly disclose the claimed limitation. However, interpolation is a concept that is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of filing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to interpolate the high and low SCR setting based on the motivation to improve a controller, for a given operating point of the electric machine, may schedule a method of commutation for switches of the inverter during presence of a negative wheel torque request according to a charge rate corresponding to the negative wheel torque request, temperatures of the electric machine and/or inverter, and/or a battery state of charge (see abstract).
With reference to claim 10, Okubo does not explicitly disclose the first limitation. However, a teaching from Okubo teaches that each current reference or loss correlations should associate with different values of drive inputs and other data (see paras. 0013-0015). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that there should be one current loss correlation for each loss limit based on the teachings of Okubo and the motivation to improve a controller, for a given operating point of the electric machine, may schedule a method of commutation for switches of the inverter during presence of a negative wheel torque request according to a charge rate corresponding to the negative wheel torque request, temperatures of the electric machine and/or inverter, and/or a battery state of charge (see abstract).
Continuing with the claim, Okubo further teaches wherein the drive inputs include a torque and a normalized speed (see para. 0016).
Claim 17 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 7. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 7.
Claim 18 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 8. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 8.
Claim 19 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 10. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 10.
Claim 20 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claims 1 and 7. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claims 1 and 7.
Claims 4, 5, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo, et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0045430), as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Turudic (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2025/0214394).
With regards to claim 4, Okubo does not disclose the claimed limitations. A teaching from Turudic discloses a thermal control system configured to provide fluid to the battery pack and the electric machine to control a temperature of the electric machine and the battery pack (see para. 0058), wherein the control system is configured to increase operation loss of the electric machine to increase temperature of the electric machine (see para. 0022) in response to, as the temperature deficiency, a temperature of the battery pack being less than or equal to a temperature threshold to cause the thermal control system to increase the temperature of the battery pack using heat generated by the electric machine (see paras. 0058-0059). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of filing to modify Okubo to include the teachings of Turudic based on an expectation of success and the motivation to improve electrically propelled vehicles (“EV”), more specifically heating of electrically propelled vehicles, and operation of traction inverters and onboard chargers, and drivers for traction inverters and onboard chargers (see para. 0002).
Regarding claim 5, Turudic further discloses a thermal control system configured to provide fluid to the electric machine to control a temperature of the electric machine (see para. 0058); and a climate control system configured to transfer heat from the fluid to air to be supplied to a passenger cabin of the vehicle (see para. 0022), wherein: the control system is configured to increase operation loss of the electric machine to increase temperature of the electric machine (see para. 0022) in response to, as the temperature deficiency, a temperature of the passenger cabin being less than or equal to a desired cabin temperature to cause the climate control system to increase the temperature of the passenger cabin using heat generated by the electric machine (see paras. 0058-0059).
Claim 14 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 5. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 5.
Claim 15 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 4. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 4.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo, et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0045430), as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Modak, et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0226922).
With reference to claim 6, Okubo does not explicitly disclose the claimed limitation. A teaching from Modak discloses wherein the desired surplus loss limit is defined based on a derate loss ratio and a temperature measurement (see para. 0092). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of filing to modify Okubo to include the teachings of Modak based on an expectation of success and the motivation to improve determining a fraction of total energy being supplied by the power inverter module(s) during braking that needs to be dissipated (e.g., as heat) to maintain consistent vehicle performance during braking. (see para. 0092).
Claim 16 defines substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 6. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected based on the citations and reasoning provided above for claim 6.
Conclusion
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire cited reference, as well as any secondary teaching reference(s), are considered to provide relevant disclosure relating to the claimed invention. Applicant is herein considered to have implicit knowledge of all teachings of the prior art of record.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D TISSOT whose telephone number is (571)270-3439. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at (571) 272-1206. 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.
/ADAM D TISSOT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663