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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim(s) recite(s) a storage unit that stores claim 1 recites a first battery identifier associated with personal information in another system a second battery identifier not associated with personal information in the other system a control unit that selectively transmits one of the first battery identifier and the second battery identifier, together with battery information related to a status of the battery, to a predetermined information processing device.
Claim 3 recites control unit transmits the battery information together with the first battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device when the predetermined information processing device is a device related to a vehicle in which the battery system is installed and transmits the battery information together with the second battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device when the predetermined information processing device is a device not related to the vehicle in which the battery system is installed.
These are grouped as a Mental Process -concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion, etc. ).
These judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements, identifiers associated with…, (claim 1) a control unit that selectively transmits… (claim 1) are mere data gathering and soring that do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra solution activity.
Furthermore, the additional elements (claim 1) are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions amount to no more than using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Furthermore, the additional elements are post solution activity that do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity. All of which are considered not indicative of integration into a practical application (see "Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 4/ Monday, January 7, 2019 / Notices" - page 55, second column).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of the data gathering steps are mere data collect steps which fall under insignificant extra solution activity and deemed insufficient to qualify as "significantly more" - see MPEP 2106.05(g). The additional elements of the units and hardware processor are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and deemed insufficient to qualify as "significantly more" see MPEP 2106.05(f). 7. Dependent claims 2-5 when analyzed as a whole are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. $101 because the dependent claims fail to establish that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea as they are directed to mental processes and do not add significantly more to the abstract idea.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kato (US 2023/0011596)
Regarding claim 1 Kato teaches a battery system (see Fig. 1), comprising:
a battery (see BA1, Fig. 1);
a storage unit that stores (see 120; Fig. 3)
a first battery identifier associated with personal information in another system (see 121, Fig. 3), and
a second battery identifier not associated with personal information in the other system (see 122; Fig. 3); and
a control unit that selectively transmits one of the first battery identifier and the second battery identifier, together with battery information related to a status of the battery, to a predetermined information processing device (see 130, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, Kato teaches wherein the control unit transmits the battery information together with the first battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device when the battery is installed in a vehicle, and
transmits the battery information together with the second battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device when the battery is removed from the vehicle (see para [0014], [0026], [0040] and [0064]).
Regarding claim 3, Kato teaches wherein the control unit transmits the battery information together with the first battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device when the predetermined information processing device is a device related to a vehicle in which the battery system is installed (see para [0038], Fig. 3), and transmits the battery information together with the second battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device when the predetermined information processing device is a device not related to the vehicle in which the battery system is installed (see 100, Fig. 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.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato in view of Kawamura (US 2021/0192645)
Regarding claim 4, Kato teaches the battery system according to claim 1.
Yet does not disclose wherein the battery information includes travel distance information of a vehicle associated with the battery.
However, Kawamura in the same filed teaches that it is known to have wherein the battery information includes travel distance information of a vehicle associated with the battery (see para 0054).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kato with the teachings of Kawamura by having he battery information includes travel distance information of a vehicle associated with the battery in order to provides crucial information for planning journeys, assessing vehicle suitability for different needs, optimizing charging strategies, and understanding a vehicle's overall performance and potential operating costs.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the battery system according to claim 4.
However does not disclose when transmitting the second battery identifier to the predetermined information processing device, the control unit converts a value indicated by the travel distance information included in the battery information into an approximate number.
Yet, having the control unit converts a value indicated by the travel distance information included in the battery information into an approximate number (i.e. rounding).
However, Rounding or using an approximate number would have been obvious because a particular known technique of rounding numbers when storing in a data base was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination by having the travel distance information included in the battery information into an approximate number in order to reduces data size for storage and transmission, lowers processing and computation costs, and simplifies comparisons and analysis. It also provides a less precise but faster overall understanding of the distance, which can be sufficient for many common applications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIM ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7114. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:30pm.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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.
/ELIM ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836