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 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:
The “units” in claims 1-14. One having ordinary skill in the art would have understood the corresponding structure to take the form of general-purpose computer components and/or programming modules in light of Paragraphs [0097] and [0139] of the instant Specification.
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.
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 § 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 1-16 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 mathematical and/or mental activity algorithm for evaluating the state of a vehicle battery pack using battery parameters and battery parameter profiles.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because no improvement to the functioning of the battery pack and/or vehicle is realized through performance of the algorithm.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the recited apparatus/units amount to the recitation of a general-purpose computer and general-purpose computer elements and do amount to serve to significantly more than the recitation of the abstract idea itself (see Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014)). The step of “acquiring” the profile subject to the algorithm amounts to generic and necessary data gathering and amounts to the recitation of extra-solution activity. The recited battery pack and vehicle amounts to the recitation of mere field-of-use limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 1, 2, and 5-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsujiko et al. (US 20110012604 A1)[hereinafter “Tsujiko”] and Baek et al. (US 20150340885 A1)[hereinafter “Baek”].
Regarding Claims 1 and 15, Tsujiko discloses a battery diagnosing apparatus/method [Abstract – “Provided is a secondary battery system which can accurately detect a state of a secondary battery system (such as a secondary battery state and a secondary battery system failure). The secondary battery system (6) includes dV/dQ calculation means which calculates a dV/dQ value as a ratio of a change amount dV of a battery voltage V of a secondary battery (100) against a change amount dQ of an accumulation amount Q when the accumulation amount Q of the secondary battery (100) is changed. The secondary battery system (6) detects the state of the secondary battery system (6) by using the dV/dQ value.”See the computer in Fig. 11 and Paragraph [0083].] comprising:
a profile acquisition unit configured to acquire a differential profile for a capacity and a voltage of a battery [See Figs. 8-10.Paragraph [0114] – “FIG. 9 shows a Q-dV/dQ curve K representing a relationship between the storage amount value Q and the dV/dQ value in the secondary battery 100. This Q-dV/dQ curve K is obtained by differentiating the battery voltage V by the corresponding storage amount Q with respect to a function shown in FIG. 8 of the storage amount Q and the battery voltage V.”]; and
a control unit configured to determine a target peak in the profile [See points A, B, and C in Fig. 9. Specifically point B being the “target peak” in the “profile” of curve K.Paragraph [0122] – “In step S7, it is determined whether or not each secondary battery 100 has reached the state corresponding to one of the characteristic points A, B, and C in the Q-dV/dQ curve K.”], and diagnose a state of the battery based on a behavior of the determined target peak [See the subtraction of the calculated dV/dQ for points A, B, and C from the corresponding values in the reference dV/dQ curve K to produce an absolute value representing the difference in Paragraphs [0124]-[0126].Paragraph [0041] – “In one of the secondary battery systems, preferably, the secondary battery system comprises the determining means for determining, based on the dV/dQ value, whether or not the secondary battery has reached the state corresponding to the characteristic point appearing in the V-dV/dQ curve, the deterioration detecting means includes resistance increase detecting means for detecting an increase in internal resistance of the secondary battery, the resistance increase detecting means compares a reference difference value of the secondary battery in an initial state, the reference difference value being a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve and being stored in advance in the secondary battery system with an actual difference value that is a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve determined by the determining means, and determines that the internal resistance of the secondary battery has been increased when the actual difference value is larger than the reference difference value.”].
Tsujiko fails to disclose a profile correction unit configured to determine a target C-rate (current rate) corresponding to the differential profile, and correct the differential profile based on an overvoltage profile corresponding to the target C-rate, thereby generating a corrected profile; and using a peak to make the diagnosis using the corrected profile.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 2, Tsujiko discloses that the profile acquisition unit is configured to acquire a first differential profile representing a correspondence between the capacity and a differential voltage of the battery [See Figs. 8-10.Paragraph [0114] – “FIG. 9 shows a Q-dV/dQ curve K representing a relationship between the storage amount value Q and the dV/dQ value in the secondary battery 100. This Q-dV/dQ curve K is obtained by differentiating the battery voltage V by the corresponding storage amount Q with respect to a function shown in FIG. 8 of the storage amount Q and the battery voltage V.”].
Tsujiko fails to disclose that the profile correction unit is configured to correct the first differential profile based on a first overvoltage profile, to generate a first corrected profile.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 5, Tsujiko discloses that the profile acquisition unit is configured to acquire a second differential profile representing a correspondence between the voltage and a differential capacity of the battery [Paragraph [0068] – “FIG. 14 is a graph showing a Q-dV/dQ curve of the secondary battery in an initial state”Paragraph [0067] – “FIG. 13 is a graph showing a Q-dV/dQ curve of the secondary battery whose capacity has been decreased”], but fails to disclose that the profile correction unit is configured to correct the second differential profile based on a second overvoltage profile, to generate a second corrected profile.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curves of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 6, Tsujiko discloses that the control unit is configured to determine, a plurality of target peaks, the plurality of target peaks excluding a maximum point with a largest corresponding voltage among maximum points included in the second corrected profile [See points A, B, and C in Fig. 9, which do not include the tops of curve on the very left and very right sides.], and diagnose the state of the battery based on a behavior change of the plurality of determined target peaks [See the subtraction of the calculated dV/dQ for points A, B, and C from the corresponding values in the reference dV/dQ curve K to produce an absolute value representing the difference in Paragraphs [0124]-[0126].Paragraph [0041] – “In one of the secondary battery systems, preferably, the secondary battery system comprises the determining means for determining, based on the dV/dQ value, whether or not the secondary battery has reached the state corresponding to the characteristic point appearing in the V-dV/dQ curve, the deterioration detecting means includes resistance increase detecting means for detecting an increase in internal resistance of the secondary battery, the resistance increase detecting means compares a reference difference value of the secondary battery in an initial state, the reference difference value being a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve and being stored in advance in the secondary battery system with an actual difference value that is a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve determined by the determining means, and determines that the internal resistance of the secondary battery has been increased when the actual difference value is larger than the reference difference value.”].
Regarding Claim 7, Tsujiko discloses that the control unit is configured to diagnose that an ohmic resistance of the battery has increased [Paragraph [0041] – “In one of the secondary battery systems, preferably, the secondary battery system comprises the determining means for determining, based on the dV/dQ value, whether or not the secondary battery has reached the state corresponding to the characteristic point appearing in the V-dV/dQ curve, the deterioration detecting means includes resistance increase detecting means for detecting an increase in internal resistance of the secondary battery, the resistance increase detecting means compares a reference difference value of the secondary battery in an initial state, the reference difference value being a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve and being stored in advance in the secondary battery system with an actual difference value that is a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve determined by the determining means, and determines that the internal resistance of the secondary battery has been increased when the actual difference value is larger than the reference difference value.”], when an amount of change in voltage corresponding to each of the plurality of target peaks falls within a preset first threshold range, and an amount of change in differential capacity corresponding to each of the plurality of target peaks falls within a preset second threshold range, even though a charging and discharging cycle of the battery progresses [See the subtraction of the calculated dV/dQ for points A, B, and C from the corresponding values in the reference dV/dQ curve K to produce an absolute value representing the difference in Paragraphs [0124]-[0126]. Step S9 determines whether the change in dV/dQ is within a specified range that corresponds to both parameters.].
Regarding Claims 8 and 16, Tsujiko discloses that the profile acquisition unit is configured to further acquire a battery profile corresponding to the capacity and the voltage of the battery, and the control unit is configured to calculate an amount of voltage drop according to an internal resistance of the battery in the battery profile, and diagnose the state of the battery based on the corrected profile when the calculated amount of voltage drop increases as a charging and discharging cycle of the battery progresses [Paragraph [0041] – “In one of the secondary battery systems, preferably, the secondary battery system comprises the determining means for determining, based on the dV/dQ value, whether or not the secondary battery has reached the state corresponding to the characteristic point appearing in the V-dV/dQ curve, the deterioration detecting means includes resistance increase detecting means for detecting an increase in internal resistance of the secondary battery, the resistance increase detecting means compares a reference difference value of the secondary battery in an initial state, the reference difference value being a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve and being stored in advance in the secondary battery system with an actual difference value that is a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve determined by the determining means, and determines that the internal resistance of the secondary battery has been increased when the actual difference value is larger than the reference difference value.”].
Regarding Claim 9, Tsujiko fails to disclose that the profile correction unit is configured to calculate a difference between the differential profile and the overvoltage profile to generate the corrected profile.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 10, Tsujiko fails to disclose that the overvoltage profile is pre-stored for each of a plurality of C-rates, and the profile correction unit is configured to select an overvoltage profile corresponding to the target C-rate from a plurality of pre-stored overvoltage profiles.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 11, Tsujiko fails to disclose that the overvoltage profile is preset based on a reference differential profile of a reference battery for a reference C-rate and a target differential profile of the reference battery for the target C-rate.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 12, Tsujiko fails to disclose that the overvoltage profile is preset to represent a difference between the reference differential profile and the target differential profile.
However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Regarding Claim 13, Tsujiko discloses a battery pack comprising the battery diagnosing apparatus [Paragraph [0097] – “The secondary battery system 6 in the first embodiment is placed in the vehicle body 2 of the hybrid electric vehicle 1 and connected to the front motor 4 and the rear motor 5 through the cable 7. This secondary battery system 6 includes as shown in FIG. 2 an assembled battery 10 in which a plurality of secondary batteries 100 (cells) are electrically connected in series to each other, a voltage detector 40, a current detector 50, and a battery controller 30. The battery controller 30 has a ROM 31, a CPU 32, a RAM 32, and others.”].
Regarding Claim 14, Tsujiko discloses a vehicle comprising the battery diagnosing apparatus [Paragraph [0097] – “The secondary battery system 6 in the first embodiment is placed in the vehicle body 2 of the hybrid electric vehicle 1 and connected to the front motor 4 and the rear motor 5 through the cable 7. This secondary battery system 6 includes as shown in FIG. 2 an assembled battery 10 in which a plurality of secondary batteries 100 (cells) are electrically connected in series to each other, a voltage detector 40, a current detector 50, and a battery controller 30. The battery controller 30 has a ROM 31, a CPU 32, a RAM 32, and others.”].
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsujiko et al. (US 20110012604 A1)[hereinafter “Tsujiko”], Baek et al. (US 20150340885 A1)[hereinafter “Baek”], and Ying (US 20140266060 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Tsujiko discloses that the control unit is configured to determine, as the target peak, a minimum point [See points A, B, and C in Fig. 9. Specifically point B being the “target peak” in the “profile” of curve K.], and
diagnose the state of the battery based on a behavior change of the determined target peak [Paragraph [0041] – “In one of the secondary battery systems, preferably, the secondary battery system comprises the determining means for determining, based on the dV/dQ value, whether or not the secondary battery has reached the state corresponding to the characteristic point appearing in the V-dV/dQ curve, the deterioration detecting means includes resistance increase detecting means for detecting an increase in internal resistance of the secondary battery, the resistance increase detecting means compares a reference difference value of the secondary battery in an initial state, the reference difference value being a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve and being stored in advance in the secondary battery system with an actual difference value that is a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve determined by the determining means, and determines that the internal resistance of the secondary battery has been increased when the actual difference value is larger than the reference difference value.”].
Tsujiko fails to disclose that the minimum point is one with a largest corresponding capacity among minimum points included in the first corrected profile.
However, Ying discloses that such a region of a dV/dQ curve is useful in evaluating battery SOC and SOH [Paragraph [0027] – “FIG. 2-4 shows the data of FIG. 2-1 associated with charging the representative sample of the battery 25 at different states of health, with the analyzed data including the derivative of the voltage response with respect to the charge input dV/dQ (V/A-h) 206 on the vertical axis plotted in relation to the battery charge capacity Q (Amp-hours) 204 during the low current charging event. … These results demonstrate a shift in the differential voltage peaks relative to the charge capacity, i.e., the second peak 237 and the final peak 241, shift in relation to the battery charge capacity Q 204 and the extent of the charge capacity associated with the flat region 239 decreases as the battery ages. Both sets of data provide repeatable indicators for the present charge capacity, which can be used to determine a state of charge (SOC) and a state of health (SOH) of the battery.”]. It would have been obvious to subject the highest Q minimum point of Tsujiko to the state analysis (after correcting in light of Baek) because doing so would have been useful in evaluating the state of the battery.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsujiko et al. (US 20110012604 A1)[hereinafter “Tsujiko”], Baek et al. (US 20150340885 A1)[hereinafter “Baek”], Ying (US 20140266060 A1), and Jeong et al. (US 20230280403 A1)[hereinafter “Jeong”].
Regarding Claim 4, Tsujiko discloses that the control unit is configured to diagnose that a diffusion resistance of the battery has increased [Paragraph [0041] – “In one of the secondary battery systems, preferably, the secondary battery system comprises the determining means for determining, based on the dV/dQ value, whether or not the secondary battery has reached the state corresponding to the characteristic point appearing in the V-dV/dQ curve, the deterioration detecting means includes resistance increase detecting means for detecting an increase in internal resistance of the secondary battery, the resistance increase detecting means compares a reference difference value of the secondary battery in an initial state, the reference difference value being a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve and being stored in advance in the secondary battery system with an actual difference value that is a difference value of the battery voltage V between the two characteristic points in the V-dV/dQ curve determined by the determining means, and determines that the internal resistance of the secondary battery has been increased when the actual difference value is larger than the reference difference value.”], but fails to disclose doing so when a capacity and a differential voltage corresponding to the target peak decreases as a charging and discharging cycle of the battery progresses.
However, Jeong discloses that changes in dV/dQ can reflect changes in battery internal resistance [Paragraph [0117] – “the internal resistance of the battery cell B increases due to the degradation of the battery cell B.”] and that dV/dQ values for minimum peaks can decline with increasing charge/discharge cycles [See Fig. 8, PF2 having a decreased minimum peak:
PNG
media_image1.png
419
499
media_image1.png
Greyscale
]. It would have been obvious to determine indicated changes in battery internal resistance relative to the absolute value differences determined in Tsujiko because doing so would have allowed for determining the state of the battery in such a situation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image2.png
773
784
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
556
778
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner agrees that one having ordinary skill in the art would have understood the corresponding structure to take the form of general-purpose computer components and/or programming modules in light of Paragraphs [0097] and [0139] of the instant Specification.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image4.png
259
784
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The corresponding rejections under 35 USC 112 are hereby withdrawn.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image5.png
164
787
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The recited “acquiring” is any manner of “getting” the data needed for the algorithm, does not require any particular measurement scheme or sensors, and amounts to mere data gathering for implementing the algorithm through use of a general-purpose computer. For example, merely receiving an email containing the profile would read on this limitation.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image6.png
488
789
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
Applicant’s argument is not convincing as no use of C-rate control or charging/discharging of the battery is recited in the instant claims so no advantage in the use of any particular C-rates during charging/discharging is realized.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image7.png
118
784
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
208
784
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
168
781
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
216
787
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The recitation of correcting the differential profile is a step in the battery state determination algorithm and part of the recitation of the abstract idea itself. No improvement in measuring data from the battery is realized as no measurements taken from a battery are recited.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image11.png
624
784
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
164
784
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
Applicant’s argument is not convincing as no use of the algorithm results are recited in the instant claims.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image13.png
118
784
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
528
784
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
483
786
media_image15.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image16.png
575
784
media_image16.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image17.png
347
784
media_image17.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner agrees that Baek does not disclose using an overvoltage profile based on a target C-rate to correct a differential profile. However, Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. It would have been obvious to correct the dV/dQ curve K of Tsujiko based on the known impact caused by varying the C-rate to a target C-rate prior to performing the diagnosis because doing so would have made the diagnosis more accurate.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image18.png
74
785
media_image18.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image19.png
481
782
media_image19.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Tsujiko discloses diagnosing the state of a battery and Baek discloses that different C-rates impact the dV/dQ curve for a battery [See Fig. 3] and also that changes in such curves reflect overvoltage (i.e., amounting to an “overvoltage profile”)[Paragraph [0079] – “In the initial section of FIG. 3 where the SOC is about 0% to about 15%, it may be seen that the voltage capacity ratio changes rapidly. This is due to an increase in overvoltage as the charge C-rate is applied to the battery 10.”]. Taking into account the known impacts of C-rates on dV/dQ curves for a battery would have been obvious for the purpose of optimizing the state determination of Tsujiko.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20220413058 A1 – APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING DEGRADATION STATE OF BATTERY, BATTERY PACK AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE
US 20160061908 A1 – SECONDARY BATTERY CAPACITY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM AND SECONDARY BATTERY CAPACITY MEASUREMENT METHOD
US 20230366949 A1 – BATTERY DEVICE, DETECTION METHOD THEREOF, AND SCREENING METHOD AND DEVICE OF BATTERY UNIT
US 20200408846 A1 – Battery Diagnostic Device And Method
US 20220404430 A1 – ELECTROCHEMICAL METHODS FOR IDENTIFICATION OF CELL QUALITY
US 20180203071 A1 – CHARGE STATE ESTIMATION METHOD FOR LITHIUM ION BATTERY AND CHARGE STATE ESTIMATION DEVICE FOR LITHIUM ION BATTERY
US 20210104782 A1 – METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CHARGING BATTERY
US 20230314523 A1 – RESISTANCE CALCULATION DEVICE, RESISTANCE CALCULATION METHOD, AND PROGRAM
US 20240069116 A1 – METHOD, SYSTEM, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR DETERMINING PERFORMANCE OF POWER BATTERY
US 20130314050 A1 – CHARGE CONTROL DEVICE FOR SECONDARY BATTERY, CHARGE CONTROL METHOD FOR SECONDARY BATTERY, CHARGE STATE ESTIMATION DEVICE FOR SECONDARY BATTERY, CHARGE STATE ESTIMATION METHOD FOR SECONDARY BATTERY, DEGRADATION DEGREE ESTIMATION DEVICE FOR SECONDARY BATTERY, DEGRADATION DEGREE ESTIMATION METHOD FOR SECONDARY BATTERY, AND SECONDARY BATTERY DEVICE
US 20210344212 A1 – BATTERY MANAGEMENT APPARATUS AND METHOD USING NON-DESTRUCTIVE RESISTANCE ANALYSIS
Ovejas et al., Effects of cycling on lithium-ion battery hysteresis and overvoltage, Scientific Reports, 2019
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT QUIGLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4879. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM 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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at (571) 272-2619. 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.
/KYLE R QUIGLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights