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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. A subject matter eligibility analysis is set forth below. See MPEP 2106.
Under step 1, claim 1 belongs to a statutory category, namely it is a method claim. Likewise, claims 14 is a non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim and claim 15 is an apparatus claim.
Under step 2A, prong 1: this part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception as explained in MPEP 2106.4, subsection II, a claim recites a judicial exception when the judicial exception is set forth or described in the claim.
Claims 1, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. “mathematical relationships/algorithms/concepts” which the court has identified as abstract) without significantly more. Claims 1, 14 and 15 are directed to the abstract idea of estimating, based on the time-series and on a moisture diffusion model of the energy storage device, the consumed lifetime of the energy storage device. These limitations fall under mathematical concepts. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the only additional elements are measuring a time-series of the environmental relative humidity and the temperature of the energy storage device; which is mere data gathering recited at a high level of generality and a humidity sensor, temperature sensor, a memory, and a computing unit, which are conventional or generic equipment which do not add anything significant to the judicial exception because these instruments are needed in order to estimate the consumed lifetime of the energy storage device. The claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
The generic data gathering and processing steps are recited so generically (no details whatsoever are provided other than e.g., “estimating, based on the time-series and on a moisture diffusion model of the energy storage device, the consumed lifetime of the energy storage device”) that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exceptions on a computer. It can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exceptions to the technological environment of a computer. Noting MPEP 2106.04(d)(I): “It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) ("The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point")”.
Thus, under Step 2A, prong 2 of the analysis, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claims are directed to the judicial exception. No specific practical application is associated with the claimed method/apparatus. For instance, nothing is done with the estimated consumed lifetime of the energy storage device.
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as described above, merely amount to a general purpose computer system that attempts to apply the abstract idea in a technological environment, limiting the abstract idea to a particular field of use.
Dependent claims 2-12 merely expand upon the abstract idea further defining the abstract steps of claim 1 and therefore stand rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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.
Claim 13 is 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.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the capacitor" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin et al. CN113311265, hereinafter Li.
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a method for estimating a consumed lifetime of an energy storage device, the method comprising the steps of:
measuring a time-series of an environmental relative humidity and a related temperature of the energy storage device (see para. 0027); and
estimating, based on the time-series and on a moisture diffusion model of the energy storage device, the consumed lifetime of the energy storage device (see para. 0026, 0031, 0040, 0052 and 0079).
Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the moisture diffusion model considers a spatial distribution of moisture inside the energy storage device (see para. 0035).
Regarding claim 3, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the moisture diffusion model considers a diffusion of moisture into and inside the energy storage device (see para. 0035 and 0052).
Regarding claim 4, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the moisture diffusion model considers a temperature inside the energy storage device (see para. 0059).
Regarding claim 5, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the moisture diffusion model estimates the temperature inside the energy storage device (see para. 0040).
Regarding claim 6, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the parameters of the moisture diffusion model are obtained by doing aging tests for specific conditions (see opara. 0027).
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consumed lifetime is a function of an amount of water present in an inner part of the energy storage device (see para. 0082).
Regarding claim 8, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the consumed lifetime and/or the amount of water is stored as one single variable or distribution function (see para. 0082 and 0085).
Regarding claim 9, Li discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the distribution function is based on a 3D, 2D or 1D model of the energy storage device (see figure 2)..
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein each measurement of the time-series is performed on demand and/or periodically, with a period of one minute, one hour, or one day (see para. 0027).
Regarding claim 11, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the time-series of measurements is stored for one week, one month, or one year (see para. 0038).
Regarding claim 12, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the energy storage device is a film capacitor having a film, the film comprising polypropylene (PP), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polycthylene naphthalate (PEN), polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), polycarbonate (PC), functionally enhanced sub-variants including nanostructured materials, another polymer, and/or a combination of these materials (see para. 0022).
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the capacitor comprises at least one internal barrier (see para. 0048).
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a program stored therein, which, when executed on a computing unit, instructs the computing unit to perform a method for estimating a consumed lifetime of an energy storage device, the method comprising:
measuring a time-series of an environmental relative humidity and a related temperature of the energy storage device (see para. 0027); and
estimating, based on the time-series and on a moisture diffusion model of the energy storage device, the consumed lifetime of the energy storage device (see para. 0026, 0031, 0040, 0052 and 0079).
Regarding claim 15, Li discloses an apparatus for estimating a consumed lifetime of an energy storage device, the apparatus comprising:
a humidity sensor configured for measuring an environmental relative humidity of the energy storage device (see para. 00027);
a temperature sensor configured for measuring a temperature of the energy storage device (see para, 0027);
a memory configured for storing a time-series of humidity and temperature measurements of the energy storage device and/or an amount of water present in an inner part of the energy storage device (see para. 0038 and 0110); and
a computing unit configured for estimating and storing values that estimate a consumed lifetime of the energy storage device (see para. 0038) by:
measuring a time-series of the environmental relative humidity and the temperature of the energy storage device (see para. 0027); and
estimating, based on the time-series and on a moisture diffusion model of the energy storage device, the consumed lifetime of the energy storage device (see para. 0026, 0031, 0040, 0052 and 0079).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL A RIVERA VARGAS whose telephone number is (571)270-7870. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Shelby Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MANUEL A RIVERA VARGAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights