CTNF 18/934,861 CTNF 95573 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/01/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification 06-14 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure. A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art. If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives. Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps. Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length . See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 5 and 12-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5 lines 7-8, “the high voltage bus” should be –the voltage bus--. Similar correction is required in claim 16. Claim 12 line 1, “The method” should be –The computer-implemented method--. Similar corrections are required in claims 13-20 . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 5-7, 9-11, 15-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1) and 102(a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Eliassen (US 20210041507 A1) . Regarding claim 1 , Eliassen teaches a computer system ([0032], a data processing unit) comprising processing circuitry ([0032], ground fault detector may be provided by the current transformer 43 of FIG. 2 together with a data processing unit, typically part of the system controller 44) configured to: detect an isolation fault ([0032], When a ground fault is detected 30) of an electrical energy storage system (i.e. energy storage system, figs.2-3) comprising multiple electrical energy storage packs (i.e. cabinets 1, containing energy storage modules 10, figs.2-3) connectable to a voltage bus ([0031], Multiple cabinets 1 are connected in parallel by DC buses 41, 42) for providing power to an electric load ([0031], cabinets are still connected to the system and able to supply energy); determine a subset of at least one of electrical energy storage pack that can be disconnected from the voltage bus without violating present power requirements for the electric load ([0031], The controller is able to open or close the circuit breakers in each cabinet one at a time to disconnect that cabinet. Meanwhile all other cabinets are still connected to the system and able to supply energy), wherein the following steps are repeated for each subset of at least one electrical energy storage pack until an isolation fault is detected in an electrical energy storage pack of the electrical energy storage system ([0032], may be disconnected, one at a time … ground fault has been successfully located 37 and the specific cabinet whose disconnection caused the ground fault to be removed is left disconnected), or until all subsets of at least one electrical energy storage pack have been tested ([0032], may be disconnected, one at a time … the ground fault detector indicates 36 that there is no longer a ground fault present): disconnect a present subset of at least one electrical energy storage pack from the voltage bus ([0032], Starting from the first of n cabinets 1, cabinet n=1 is disconnected 31); perform isolation fault check on the disconnected subset of at least one electrical energy storage pack while the other subsets of at least one electrical energy storage pack remain connected to the voltage bus ([0032], A test 32 is made to see whether or not the ground fault is still present), and provide a control message indicating the outcome of the isolation fault test ([0032], indicates 36 that there is no longer a ground fault present … successfully located 37 and the specific cabinet whose disconnection caused the ground fault to be removed is left disconnected). Regarding claim 5 , Eliassen teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: if an isolation fault is detected in one electrical energy storage pack in the one subset of at least one electrical energy storage pack, setting the one electrical energy storage pack in an error state ([0032], the ground fault has been successfully located 37 and the specific cabinet whose disconnection caused the ground fault to be removed is left disconnected), if no isolation fault is detected in one electrical energy storage pack in the one subset of electrical energy storage packs, re-connecting the one electrical energy storage pack to the voltage bus ([0032], then that cabinet is reconnected 34 by closing the circuit breaker). Regarding claim 6 , Eliassen teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: disconnect the present subset from the voltage bus and perform isolation fault tests while the remaining electrical energy storage packs provide energy to the electric load ([0031], Meanwhile all other cabinets are still connected to the system and able to supply energy). Regarding claim 7 , Eliassen teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the subset comprises more than one electrical energy storage pack ([0023], Each energy storage module 10 comprises a plurality of energy storage devices). Regarding claim 9 , Eliassen teaches an electrical energy storage system comprising the computer system of claim 1 (i.e. energy storage system, figs.2-3). Regarding claim 10 , Eliassen teaches a vehicle comprising the electrical energy storage system of claim 9 ([0003], Stored electrical energy may also be used to provide peak shaving in systems otherwise supplied from the grid, or from various types of power generation system, including diesel generators, gas turbines, or renewable energy sources. Aircraft, vehicles). Regarding claim 11 , Eliassen substantially teaches the limitations as stated above in claim 1. Eliassen further teaches a computer-implemented method ([0032], The ground fault detector may be provided by the current transformer 43 of FIG. 2 together with a data processing unit, typically part of the system controller 44) ([0017], FIG. 3 is a flow diagram illustrating a method according to the present invention). Regarding claim 15 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 5. Regarding claim 16 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 5. Regarding claim 17 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 6. Regarding claim 19 , Eliassen teaches a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by the processing circuitry, the method of claim 11 ([0032], The process may be automated by using programmable logic controller (PLC) circuit breakers). Regarding claim 20 , Eliassen teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform the method of claim 11 ([0032], ground fault detector may be provided by the current transformer 43 of FIG. 2 together with a data processing unit, typically part of the system controller 44) ([0035], The method of the present invention may be implemented without requiring additional hardware, enabling automatic localization of a ground fault in an energy storage system without the need for current transformers on each battery pack. A circuit breaker controlled via a programmable logic controller or other similar device installed) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-4, 8, 12-14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eliassen (US 20210041507 A1), and further in view of Whitney (US 20210066761 A1) . Regarding claim 2 , Eliassen teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine an electrical energy storage state for each of the subsets ([0032], test 32 is made to see whether or not the ground fault is still present. If the ground fault is still present 33 after that cabinet 1 has been disconnected, then that cabinet is reconnected 34 by closing the circuit breaker, in response to an instruction from the controller. The next cabinet, n=n+1, is selected 35 and then disconnected 31 in the same way. This process is repeated). Eliassen does not teach, determine the order of disconnecting the subsets based on the determined electrical energy storage states. Whitney teaches in a similar field of endeavor of battery module with smart electronic isolation systems, determine an electrical energy storage state for each of the subsets (abstract, An electronic control system is operable to obtain a comparisons between a state of charge, state of health, temperature and power of the battery module and an electrical device), and determine the order of disconnecting the subsets based on the determined electrical energy storage states (abstract, The electronic isolation system connects or disconnects the battery pack to the first set of power contacts based on a positive or a negative result respectively of the connect determination). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optionally included the determine the order of disconnecting the subsets based on the determined electrical energy storage states in Eliassen, as taught by Whitney, as it provides the advantage of optimizing battery connection for purposes of power supply to a load. Regarding claim 3 , Eliassen and Whitney teach the computer system of claim 2, wherein the electrical energy storage state is one of state of charge and state of health (Whitney, abstract, An electronic control system is operable to obtain a comparisons between a state of charge, state of health, temperature and power of the battery module and an electrical device). Regarding claim 4 , Eliassen and Whitney teach the computer system of claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: disconnect the subsets in the order of falling amount of available energy in the subsets determined from the electrical energy storage state (Whitney, [0031], The electronic isolation system 110 may connect the battery pack 106 to the first set of power contacts 102 based on a positive result of the comparison of the parameter to the predetermined value). Regarding claim 8 , it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claims 1, 2, 5 and 6. Regarding claim 12 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 2. Regarding claim 13 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 3. Regarding claim 14 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 4. Regarding claim 18 , the method is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 8. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SREEYA SREEVATSA whose telephone number is (571)272-8304. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm ET. 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, Thienvu V Tran can be reached at (571) 270-1276. 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. /SREEYA SREEVATSA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838 05/20/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 2 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 3 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 4 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 5 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 6 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 7 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 8 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 10 Art Unit: 2838 Application/Control Number: 18/934,861 Page 11 Art Unit: 2838
Prosecution Insights