DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
2. Claims 1-10 are pending in Instant Application.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 12/11/2024 has been received and considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Examiner’s Note
5. Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all of part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“storage unit” – in claim 7-8
“external device” in claims 1 and 8
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The following are the interpreted corresponding structures found within the specification for some of the above limitations:
“storage unit” – memory 320, see Fig. 1
“external device” – server, see description
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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 non-obviousness.
9. Claims 1, 4-5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya (US 20210170902) in view of Shin (WO 2019142550).
Regarding Claim 1, Tsuchiya discloses A controller that controls power transmission including at least one of charging a battery and discharging the battery, comprising: (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the vehicle includes a control unit (ECU) that carries out charging control and discharging control of battery 130)
a communication unit for the controller, that communicates with an external device; (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the ECU controls communication with outside the vehicle. Also see [0089-0092] wherein the ECU communicates with server 30.)
and a processor that performs a process to obtain identification information of the battery, wherein the external device includes an external server that stores parameter information for a parameter for the power transmission conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information, (Tsuchiya, see at least [0092] wherein the vehicle includes a monitoring module that monitors a state of the battery 130 and outputs results of the monitored data to the ECU. Also see at least [0089] wherein the server 30 obtains information from each of the vehicles (ON/OFF status, connection of the charging cable, state of the battery, charging schedules, condition for charging, and more) and stores this information. The information is used to indicate whether or not battery 130 is to be charged.)
the processor obtains the parameter information conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information from the external server through the communication unit for the controller, (Tsuchiya, see at least [0092] wherein the ECU receives a demand response from server 30 based on battery information stored.)
Tsuchiya does not explicitly disclose and the processor uses the obtained parameter information to control the power transmission for the battery.
However Shin, in which is directed to a secondary battery system for a vehicle discloses and the processor uses the obtained parameter information to control the power transmission for the battery. (Shin, see at least [0026] wherein the vehicle control unit can send commands to control the inverter and the charger using information obtained regarding the battery)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Tsuchiya with the teachings of Shin to include the capability of using the obtained information to control the power for the battery. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle battery.
Regarding Claim 4, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses The controller according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Tsuchiya further discloses wherein the controller is mounted on a vehicle, and the processor performs the process to obtain the identification information when the vehicle has an ignition power supply turned on. (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the vehicle includes a control unit (ECU) that carries out charging control and discharging control of battery 130. Also see [0092] wherein the vehicle includes a monitoring module that monitors a state of the battery 130 and outputs results of the monitored data to the ECU. Also see at least [0089] wherein the server 30 obtains information from each of the vehicles (ON/OFF status, connection of the charging cable, state of the battery, charging schedules, condition for charging, and more) and stores this information. The information is used to indicate whether or not battery 130 is to be charged.)
Regarding Claim 5, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses The controller according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Tsuchiya further discloses wherein the controller is mounted on a vehicle, and when the processor is connected to a terminal connectable to the vehicle, and receives a signal from the terminal to request the identification information, the processor responsively performs the process to obtain the identification information. (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the vehicle includes a control unit (ECU) that carries out charging control and discharging control of battery 130. Also see [0092] wherein the vehicle includes a monitoring module that monitors a state of the battery 130 and outputs results of the monitored data to the ECU. Also see at least [0089] wherein the server 30 obtains information from each of the vehicles (ON/OFF status, connection of the charging cable, state of the battery, charging schedules, condition for charging, and more) and stores this information. The information is used to indicate whether or not battery 130 is to be charged.)
Regarding Claim 7, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses A server provided outside the controller according to claim 1, comprising: (see rejection above)
a communication unit for the server, that receives identification information of the battery; (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the ECU controls communication with outside the vehicle. Also see [0089-0092] wherein the ECU communicates with server 30.)
and a storage unit that stores parameter information for a parameter for the power transmission conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information, wherein the communication unit for the server sends to the controller the parameter information conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information received. (Tsuchiya, see at least [0092] wherein the vehicle includes a monitoring module that monitors a state of the battery 130 and outputs results of the monitored data to the ECU. Also see at least [0089] wherein the server 30 obtains information from each of the vehicles (ON/OFF status, connection of the charging cable, state of the battery, charging schedules, condition for charging, and more) and stores this information. The information is used to indicate whether or not battery 130 is to be charged.)
Regarding Claim 8, Tsuchiya discloses A control system comprising: a controller that controls power transmission including at least one of charging a battery and discharging the battery; (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the vehicle includes a control unit (ECU) that carries out charging control and discharging control of battery 130)
and a server provided outside the controller, the controller comprising: a communication unit for the controller, that communicates with an external device; (Tsuchiya, see at least [0060] wherein the ECU controls communication with outside the vehicle. Also see [0089-0092] wherein the ECU communicates with server 30.)
and a processor that performs a process to obtain identification information of the battery, wherein the external device includes an external server that stores parameter information for a parameter for the power transmission conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information, (Tsuchiya, see at least [0092] wherein the vehicle includes a monitoring module that monitors a state of the battery 130 and outputs results of the monitored data to the ECU. Also see at least [0089] wherein the server 30 obtains information from each of the vehicles (ON/OFF status, connection of the charging cable, state of the battery, charging schedules, condition for charging, and more) and stores this information. The information is used to indicate whether or not battery 130 is to be charged.)
the processor obtains the parameter information conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information from the external server through the communication unit for the controller, (Tsuchiya, see at least [0092] wherein the ECU receives a demand response from server 30 based on battery information stored.)
the server comprising: a communication unit for the server, that receives identification information of the battery; (Tsuchiya, see at least [0089] wherein server 30 obtains information from the vehicle regarding the state of the battery.)
and a storage unit that stores parameter information for a parameter for the power transmission conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information, wherein the communication unit for the server sends to the controller the parameter information conforming to the battery corresponding to the identification information received. (Tsuchiya, see at least [0092] wherein the ECU receives a demand response from server 30 based on battery information stored. Also see Fig. 2 in which shows element server 30, in which contains storage 32.)
Tsuchiya does not explicitly disclose and the processor uses the obtained parameter information to control the power transmission for the battery,
and the processor uses the obtained parameter information to control the power transmission for the battery,
However Shin, in which is directed to a secondary battery system for a vehicle discloses and the processor uses the obtained parameter information to control the power transmission for the battery. (Shin, see at least [0026] wherein the vehicle control unit can send commands to control the inverter and the charger using information obtained regarding the battery)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Tsuchiya with the teachings of Shin to include the capability of using the obtained information to control the power for the battery. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle battery.
As per claim 9, the claim is directed towards a control method of a controller for controlling power transmission including at least one of charging a battery and discharging the battery that recites similar limitations performed by the controller that controls power transmission including at least one of charging a battery or discharging the battery of claim 1. The cited portions of Tsuchiya and Shin used in the rejection of claim 1 teach the same system limitations of claim 9. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected under the same rationales used in the rejections of claim 1 as outlined above.
10. Claims 2-3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya (US 20210170902) in view of Shin (WO 2019142550) in further view of Haardt (US 20210091583).
Regarding Claim 2, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses The controller according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Tsuchiya does not explicitly disclose wherein the battery includes a battery using, as an active material, lithium manganese iron phosphate produced by recycling lithium-iron phosphate having been used as an active material, and the parameter information includes information of a parameter used in the power transmission, that is preset based on a ratio between manganese and iron in the active material. (Haardt, see at least [Claim 2-3] wherein material configuration data associated with a material used to produce the battery is provided by a decentral computing node. Also see at least [0235] wherein the condition data associated with a battery includes and affects data related to charging/discharging process of a battery or state variables (battery temperatures).)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Tsuchiya with the teachings of Haardt to include the technique of utilizing condition data associated with the battery as this would allow for the system in Tsuchiya to utilize material configuration data for a battery to further determine a battery’s charging/discharging conditions. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle battery.
Regarding Claim 3, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses The controller according to claim 2, (see rejection above)
Shin further discloses wherein the parameter information includes information of the preset parameter based on the ratio and an amount of impurities contained in the battery. (Shin, see at least [0029-0033] wherein the temperature detection unit measures or estimates temperature of batteries in the cell group and uses the information to detect the state of the cell, the cell group or the battery pack. The analyzing of various information on the battery cell that includes information on the battery cell so that the charging/discharging is controlled to ensure a desired power is being supplied. ** battery cells are the materials of the battery that consist of several components, including electrodes and electrolyte. The materials used in the battery cells can vary, and facilitate the chemical reactions necessary for energy stored/released.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Tsuchiya with the teachings of Shin to include the technique of utilizing condition data associated with the battery as this would allow for the system in Tsuchiya to utilize material configuration data for a battery to further determine a battery’s charging/discharging conditions. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle battery.
Regarding Claim 10, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses The control method according to claim 9, (see rejection above)
Tsuchiya does not explicitly disclose wherein the battery includes a battery using, as an active material, lithium manganese iron phosphate produced by recycling lithium-iron phosphate having been used as an active material, and the parameter information includes information of a parameter used in the power transmission, that is preset based on a ratio between manganese and iron in the active material.
However, Haardt discloses wherein the battery includes a battery using, as an active material, lithium manganese iron phosphate produced by recycling lithium-iron phosphate having been used as an active material, and the parameter information includes information of a parameter used in the power transmission, that is preset based on a ratio between manganese and iron in the active material. (Haardt, see at least [Claim 2-3] wherein material configuration data associated with a material used to produce the battery is provided by a decentral computing node. Also see at least [0235] wherein the condition data associated with a battery includes and affects data related to charging/discharging process of a battery or state variables (battery temperatures). ** material configuration data of a battery can be utilized (type of material of the battery is a design choice) to better determine battery parameters as a recycled battery product varies with power transmissions compared to a non-recycled battery product.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Tsuchiya with the teachings of Haardt to include the technique of utilizing condition data associated with the battery as this would allow for the system in Tsuchiya to utilize material configuration data for a battery to further determine a battery’s charging/discharging conditions. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle battery.
11. Claims 1, 4-5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya (US 20210170902) in view of Shin (WO 2019142550) in further view of Kamijima (US 20210091583).
Regarding Claim 6, Tsuchiya in view of Shin discloses The controller according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Tsuchiya does not explicitly disclose wherein when the identification information obtained is changed identification information, the communication unit for the controller sends the changed identification information to the external server.
However, Kamijima discloses wherein when the identification information obtained is changed identification information, (Kamijima, see at least [0064] wherein information processing device updates the information based on received battery information.)
the communication unit for the controller sends the changed identification information to the external server. (Kamijima, see at least [0045] wherein information processing device collects battery information on the battery and transmits the battery information to the management server. Also see at least Fig. 1-5.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Tsuchiya with the teachings of Kamijima to include the technique of utilizing updating identification data associated with the battery as this would allow for the system in Tsuchiya further determine a battery’s charging/discharging conditions based on updated changes. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle battery.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20160254680 – A power storage system according to the present technology includes: a parameter detector that detects a parameter of a secondary battery; a table storage unit that stores a table indicating a correspondence between a parameter of the secondary battery and a charging condition; and a charging control unit configured to refer to, based on the detected parameter, a corresponding charging condition from the table and make control to charge the secondary battery in this charging condition.
US 20210146785 – A method performed by an information terminal is provided. Profile information of an electrical device connected to a storage battery pack is received from the storage battery pack. The profile information includes device identification information of the electrical device and an item of state information indicating a state of the electrical device. A value of the item of state information of the electrical device is received from the storage battery pack. When a first instruction that causes the item of state information and the value of the item of state information to be displayed is received, a first display screen is displayed on the display of the information terminal. The first display screen depicts the item of state information and the value of the item of state information by using the received profile information and the received value of the item of state information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI whose telephone number is (571) 272-2052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 8AM-5PM.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664