DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Applicant's Application filed on 12/11/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-11, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamazaki (US20150134162A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yamazaki teaches A method for increasing operational efficiency of an energy conversion device of a vehicle comprising:
receiving, by one or more processors, a threshold value corresponding to an energy state of an energy storage device(Yamazaki: Para 28 “control strategies are provided in the controller 50 to maintain the state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery 20 within a preferred predetermined operating window. For example, it may be desirable to maintain the SOC of the battery 20 during operation within a window of 40% and 60% of full charge”);
receiving, by the one or more processors, an indication of the energy state of the energy storage device (Yamazaki: Para 30 “If the SOC approaches the higher end of the preferred operating window, the controller may command an electric-only operating mode by disconnecting the engine 14 from the M/G 18 (if the engine is not already disconnected)”) and an operational state of the energy conversion device(Yamazaki: Para 14 “the disconnect clutch 26 may be engaged and M/G 18 may operate as a generator to convert rotational energy provided by a crankshaft 28 and M/G shaft 30 into electrical energy to be stored in the battery 20”; Para 40 “the controller determines the status of the disconnect clutch 26 and/or the status of the engine 14”);
determining, by the one or more processors, if the indication of the energy state of the energy storage device exceeds the threshold value(Yamazaki: Para 30 “If the SOC approaches the higher end of the preferred operating window, the controller may command an electric-only operating mode by disconnecting the engine 14 from the M/G 18 (if the engine is not already disconnected)”); and
responsive to determining that the indication of the energy state of the energy storage device exceeds the threshold value and the energy conversion device is in a charging state, transmitting, by the one or more processors, a control signal to engage a clutch mechanism to decouple the energy conversion device from a shaft mechanically coupled to a drive mechanism of the vehicle(Yamazaki: Para 30 “If the SOC approaches the higher end of the preferred operating window, the controller may command an electric-only operating mode by disconnecting the engine 14 from the M/G 18 (if the engine is not already disconnected)”).
Regarding claim 2, Yamazaki teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving, by the one or more processors, a second threshold value corresponding to a second energy state of the energy storage device(Yamazaki: Para 28 “control strategies are provided in the controller 50 to maintain the state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery 20 within a preferred predetermined operating window. For example, it may be desirable to maintain the SOC of the battery 20 during operation within a window of 40% and 60% of full charge”);
determining, by the one or more processors, if the indication of the energy state of the energy storage device exceeds the second threshold value(Yamazaki: Para 29 “If the SOC approaches the lower end of the preferred operating window, then the controller may command the disconnect clutch 26 to engage and the engine 14 to start (if the engine is not already active). Engine power can then be used to both propel the vehicle and charge the battery 20 via the M/G 18 and power electronics 56”); and
responsive to determining that the indication of the energy state of the energy storage device does not exceed the threshold value and the energy conversion device is in a non-charging state, transmitting, by the one or more processors, a second control signal to the clutch mechanism to disengage the clutch mechanism to fluidly couple the energy conversion device to the shaft mechanically coupled to the drive mechanism of the vehicle(Yamazaki: Para 29 “If the SOC approaches the lower end of the preferred operating window, then the controller may command the disconnect clutch 26 to engage and the engine 14 to start (if the engine is not already active). Engine power can then be used to both propel the vehicle and charge the battery 20 via the M/G 18 and power electronics 56.”).
Regarding claim 3, Yamazaki teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the threshold value corresponds to a fully charged energy storage device(Yamazaki: Para 28 “control strategies are provided in the controller 50 to maintain the state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery 20 within a preferred predetermined operating window. For example, it may be desirable to maintain the SOC of the battery 20 during operation within a window of 40% and 60% of full charge”).
Regarding claim 4, Yamazaki teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors receive the indication of the energy state of the energy storage device at predetermined intervals during an operation of the vehicle(Yamazaki: Fig. 4 SOC graph; Para 28 “control strategies are provided in the controller 50 to maintain the state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery 20 within a preferred predetermined operating window. For example, it may be desirable to maintain the SOC of the battery 20 during operation within a window of 40% and 60% of full charge”).
As per claim 8, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same basis. Yamazaki further teaches an energy conversion device(Yamazaki: Fig. 1 Element electric motor/generator (M/G) 18”);
an energy storage device(Yamazaki: Fig. 1 Element associated traction battery 20”); and
processing circuitry, including one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by the one or more processors(Yamazaki: Para 19 “Controller 50 may include a microprocessor or central processing unit (CPU) in communication with various types of computer readable storage devices or media. Computer readable storage devices or media may include volatile and nonvolatile storage in read-only memory (ROM), random-access memory (RAM), and keep-alive memory (KAM), for example. KAM is a persistent or non-volatile memory that may be used to store various operating variables while the CPU is powered down. Computer-readable storage devices or media may be implemented using any of a number of known memory devices such as PROMs (programmable read-only memory), EPROMs (electrically PROM), EEPROMs (electrically erasable PROM), flash memory, or any other electric, magnetic, optical, or combination memory devices capable of storing data, some of which represent executable instructions, used by the controller in controlling the engine or vehicle”).
As per claim 9, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 2 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 10, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 3 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 11, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 4 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 15, it recites A system for increasing an efficiency of a work vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 8 and therefore is rejected on the same basis. Yamazaki further teaches the work vehicle(Yamazaki: Fig. 1; Para 3 “a vehicle comprises an engine, an electric machine connected to a battery, and at least one controller”);
an energy conversion device(Yamazaki: Fig. 1 Element electric motor/generator (M/G) 18”);
an energy storage device(Yamazaki: Fig. 1 Element associated traction battery 20”); and
processing circuitry, including one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by the one or more processors(Yamazaki: Para 19 “Controller 50 may include a microprocessor or central processing unit (CPU) in communication with various types of computer readable storage devices or media. Computer readable storage devices or media may include volatile and nonvolatile storage in read-only memory (ROM), random-access memory (RAM), and keep-alive memory (KAM), for example. KAM is a persistent or non-volatile memory that may be used to store various operating variables while the CPU is powered down. Computer-readable storage devices or media may be implemented using any of a number of known memory devices such as PROMs (programmable read-only memory), EPROMs (electrically PROM), EEPROMs (electrically erasable PROM), flash memory, or any other electric, magnetic, optical, or combination memory devices capable of storing data, some of which represent executable instructions, used by the controller in controlling the engine or vehicle”).
As per claim 16, it recites A system for increasing an efficiency of a work vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 2 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 17, it recites A system for increasing an efficiency of a work vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 3 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 18, it recites A system for increasing an efficiency of a work vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 4 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
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.
Claim 5-6, 12-13, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US20150134162A1) in view of Phillips (US6583599B1).
In regards to claim 5, Yamazaki teaches The method of claim 1.
Yet Yamazaki do not explicitly teach wherein the threshold value corresponds to a capacity of a starter motor operationally coupled to the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Phillips teaches wherein the threshold value corresponds to a capacity of a starter motor operationally coupled to the vehicle(Phillips: Col.3 Lines 48-58 “Another threshold greater than the engine running threshold is the boost off threshold (SOC_BOOST_OFF). When the energy storage device has a state of charge that is below the boost off threshold, the state of charge manager does not allow the starter/alternator 26 to act as a motor and boost the power output of the hybrid electric powertrain. The boost off threshold is set because if boost were provided from the energy storage device, the energy storage device would likely not have enough power after boosting to allow the engine to restart”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify The method of Yamazaki with the feature of wherein the threshold value corresponds to a capacity of a starter motor operationally coupled to the vehicle disclosed by Phillips. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “increasing the battery life of a hybrid electric vehicle” (Phillips: Col.1 Lines 57-58).
In regards to claim 6, Yamazaki teaches The method of claim 1, and Phillips further teaches wherein the energy storage device is electrically coupled to a starter motor that is operationally coupled to the vehicle(Phillips: Fig. 1 Element 34 and 26; Col. 3 Lines 8-12 “starter/alternator 26 is used as a starter during engine startup and as an alternator to supply power to recharge the batteries of the vehicle and to supply electrical loads. Clutch 28 also allows starter/alternator 26 to start the engine prior to engagement of the transmission”; Col.3 Lines 48-58 “Another threshold greater than the engine running threshold is the boost off threshold (SOC_BOOST_OFF). When the energy storage device has a state of charge that is below the boost off threshold, the state of charge manager does not allow the starter/alternator 26 to act as a motor and boost the power output of the hybrid electric powertrain. The boost off threshold is set because if boost were provided from the energy storage device, the energy storage device would likely not have enough power after boosting to allow the engine to restart”). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Yamazaki and Phillips as in Claim 5 above.
As per claim 12, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 5 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 13, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 6 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 19, it recites A system for increasing an efficiency of a work vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 5 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 20, it recites A system for increasing an efficiency of a work vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 6 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Claim 7, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US20150134162A1) in view of Chatroux (US20160325612A1).
In regards to claim 1, Yamazaki teaches The method of claim 1.
Yet Yamazaki do not explicitly teach wherein the vehicle is a tractor
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chatroux teaches wherein the vehicle is a tractor (Chatroux: Para 141 “The drive system can be used to drive a device other than an axle of an automobile vehicle; for example, it could be a transportable machine tool, worksite machinery, a tractor or other farm machinery. In the range of worksite and farm machinery, the invention makes it possible to run on battery energy for short term isolated operations, and the gasifier system can be started up for longer operations. The battery can also be recharged from the power outlet during storage phases”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify The method of Yamazaki with the feature of wherein the vehicle is a tractor disclosed by Chatroux. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “the battery supplies some of the energy shortage to satisfy the demand or absorbs some of the excess energy above the demand” (Chatroux: Para 14).
As per claim 14, it recites A vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 7 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Center (US20090112495A1) disclosed A hybrid powertrain system includes an electromechanical transmission operatively coupled to an internal combustion engine and an electric machine connected to an electrical energy storage device to transmit mechanical power to an output member. A method for estimating an operating life of the electrical energy storage device includes monitoring temperature, state-of-charge and electric current of the electrical energy storage device. A temperature factor and a state-of-charge factor based, respectively, upon the monitored temperature and monitored state-of-charge during a predetermined time interval are determined. A battery life metric during the predetermined time interval is determined based upon the temperature factor, the state-of-charge factor, and the electric current discharge, and a total battery life metric based on the calculated battery life metric. The remaining operating life of the electrical energy storage device is determined based upon the total battery life metric.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WENYUAN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/W.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
3/30/26