Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/047,527

APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING BATTERY ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 06, 2025
Examiner
NGHIEM, MICHAEL P
Art Unit
2857
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
624 granted / 926 resolved
-0.6% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
986
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§103
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§102
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§112
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 926 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . The amendment filed on February 25, 2026 has been considered. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 25, 2026 has been entered. 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. Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2023/0194620) in view of Yoon et al. (US 2026/0016541). Regarding claims 1 and 8, Choi et al. discloses a method and apparatus (Abstract) for diagnosing a battery assembly (battery module, paragraph 0056, lines 5-7) including a battery bank (plurality of battery cells in parallel, paragraph 0056, lines 5-7) comprising a plurality of battery cells connected in parallel with each other (paragraph 0056, lines 5-7), the method comprising: a second differential profile generating unit for generating a second differential profile (paragraph 0143, lines 1-3) representing a relationship between a second differential capacity (Abstract, lines 4-5), which is obtained by taking a second derivative (obtaining second differential profile 300b, paragraph 0143, lines 1-3) of a capacity of the battery bank with respect to a voltage of the battery bank (obtain a differential profile of the voltage and the capacity from the voltage profile, Abstract, lines 4-5, where the differential profile can be a second differential profile, paragraph 0143, lines 1-3), and the voltage of the battery bank (Abstract, lines 4-5); and a diagnosing unit configured for detecting a target peak (determining 310b, 320b; paragraph 0147, lines 1-4) located in a predetermined voltage section among a plurality of peaks of the second differential profile (Fig. 7) and diagnosing a state of the battery bank based on a second differential capacity value of the target peak (paragraph 0150). a battery management unit (controller) configured to control a charging condition that charges the battery bank to control a charging condition and/or a discharging condition of the battery module according to a result of diagnosing the state of the battery (paragraph 0025), wherein generating the second differential profile (paragraph 0143, lines 1-3) includes; generating a profile representing the relationship between the voltage and the capacity of the battery bank (Abstract, lines 4-5); generating a first differential profile by differentiating the profile with respect to the voltage of the battery bank (paragraph 0143, lines 1-3; Abstract, lines 4-5); and generating the second differential profile (paragraph 0143, lines 1-3). It is noted that the battery management unit configured to control a cooling device that cools the battery bank according to a result of diagnosing the state of the battery is not a required limitation because it is recited in the alternative form. Choi et al. does not disclose generating the second differential profile by differentiating, with respect to the voltage of the battery bank, the first differential profile. Yoon et al. discloses generating the second differential profile (paragraph 0035, lines 9-11) by differentiating, with respect to the voltage of the battery bank (paragraph 0035, lines 9-11, 1-4), the first differential profile (paragraph 0035, lines 7-9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide Choi et al. (‘620) with differentiating, with respect to the voltage of the battery bank, the first differential profile as disclosed by Yoon et al. for the purpose of generating a second differential profile. Regarding claim 4 and 9, Choi et al. discloses diagnosing the state of the battery bank includes comparing the second differential capacity value (differential profile for the voltage and capacity from the voltage profile, paragraph 0030, lines 5-7) of the target peak (peak from the differential profile, lines 7-10) with a predetermined threshold value (reference peaks, paragraph 0030, lines 13-19), and diagnosing the state of the battery bank as an abnormal state when the second differential capacity value is less than a threshold value (diagnosing the battery based on the difference between peak(s) and the reference peak(s), paragraph 0030, lines 16-19, where the peak(s) are less than the reference peak(s), Fig. 5, i.e., the peaks are not equal to the reference peak(s)). Regarding claim 6 and 11, Choi et al. discloses the battery assembly includes a plurality of battery banks (battery module including a plurality of battery cells in parallel, paragraph 0056, lines 5-7), wherein the method further comprises generating a plurality of second differential profiles respectively corresponding to the plurality of battery banks included in the battery assembly (obtaining battery second differential profile, paragraph 0143, lines -13), and diagnosing a state of each of the plurality of battery banks as a normal state or an abnormal state based on the plurality of second differential profiles (diagnosing a state of a battery based on a plurality of battery differential profiles, paragraph 0141, lines 5-8). Regarding claim 13, Choi et al. discloses a battery pack comprising the apparatus for diagnosing the battery assembly (paragraph 0028). Regarding claim 14, Choi et al. discloses a vehicle comprising the apparatus for diagnosing the battery assembly (paragraph 0029). Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (‘620) in view of Yoon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi et al. (US 2023/0333174). Regarding claim 2, Choi et al. (‘620) discloses generating the second differential profile includes (obtaining second differential profile 300b, paragraph 0144, lines 1-10): generating the second differential profile using the voltage values (obtaining differential profiles from voltage profiles, paragraph 0139, lines 1-3) while the battery bank is being charged or discharged (obtaining differential profiles while charging/discharging, paragraph 0144, lines 1-10). Choi et al. (‘620) as modified by Yoon et al. does not disclose repeatedly measuring a voltage value and a current value of the battery bank using at least one electrical sensor while the battery bank is being charged or discharged; and generating the second differential profile using the voltage values and the current values measured while the battery bank is being charged or discharged. Choi et al. (‘174) discloses repeatedly measuring a voltage value and a current value of the battery bank using at least one electrical sensor (paragraph 0173, lines 1-9) while the battery bank is being charged or discharged (paragraph 0056, lines 1-6); and generating the second differential profile (paragraph 0059, lines 1-3) using the voltage values and the current values measured while the battery bank is being charged or discharged (paragraph 0056, lines 1-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide Choi et al. (‘620) as modified with a sensor for measuring a voltage value and a current value of the battery as disclosed by Choi et al. (‘174) for the purpose of generating a second differential profile. Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (‘620) in view of Yoon et al. as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Ueda (JP 2024082349) and Jee et al. (US 20230039356). Regarding claims 5 and 10, Choi et al. (‘620) discloses diagnosing the state of the battery bank includes diagnosing the state of the battery bank as an abnormal state when the second differential capacity value of the target peak is less than a predetermined threshold value (diagnosing the battery based on the difference between peak(s) and the reference peak(s), paragraph 0030, lines 16-19, where the peak(s) are less than the reference peak(s), Fig. 5, i.e., the peaks are not equal to the reference peak(s)). However, Choi et al. (‘620) as modified by Yoon et al. does not disclose diagnosing the state of the battery bank includes diagnosing the state of the battery bank as an abnormal state in which the plurality of battery cells are unevenly deteriorated, when a number of peaks located in the predetermined voltage section exceeds a predetermined reference number. Ueda discloses diagnosing the state of the battery bank includes diagnosing the state of the battery bank as an abnormal state (page 3, paragraph 2, lines 1-2) in which the plurality of battery cells are unevenly deteriorated (page 3, paragraph 2, lines 7-8), while Jee et al. discloses a number of peaks located in the predetermined voltage section exceeds a predetermined reference number (when the number of peaks exceeds 1, the available lithium of the battery is lost, paragraph 0092, lines 1-4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide Choi et al. (‘620) as modified with determining whether the plurality of battery cells are unevenly deteriorated as disclosed by Ueda and determining whether a number of peaks located in the predetermined voltage section exceeds a predetermined reference number as disclosed by Jee et al. for the purpose of diagnosing the state of the battery bank. Claims 7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (‘620) in view of Yoon et al. as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Ueda (JP 2024082349). Regarding claims 7 and 12, Choi et al. (‘620) discloses diagnosing the state of the battery bank includes diagnosing the state of the battery bank as an abnormal state when the second differential capacity value of the target peak is less than a predetermined threshold value (diagnosing the battery based on the difference between peak(s) and the reference peak(s), paragraph 0030, lines 16-19, where the peak(s) are less than the reference peak(s), Fig. 5, i.e., the peaks are not equal to the reference peak(s)). Choi et al. (‘620) as modified by Yoon et al. does not disclose diagnosing the state of a battery bank including controlling a charger that charges the battery bank to reduce a voltage at an end of charging of the battery bank or reduce a current rate of a current that charges the battery bank, when the state of the battery bank is diagnosed as an abnormal state. Ueda discloses “the electrode 201 of the secondary battery 200 deteriorates unevenly depending on the method of use such as rapid charging” (page 3, paragraph 2, lines 7-8). Accordingly, it would have been obvious in view of Ueda to control a charger to reduce a current rate of a current that charges the battery bank, when the state of the battery bank is diagnosed as an abnormal state. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide Choi et al. (‘620) as modified with reducing a current rate of a current that charges the battery bank as disclosed by Ueda for the purpose of preventing further uneven/abnormal battery deterioration. It is noted that diagnosing the state of a battery bank including controlling a charger that charges the battery bank to reduce a voltage at an end of charging of the battery bank is an alternative limitation because it is recited in the alternative form. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed on February 25, 2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f) has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 USC 101 have been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the rejection(s) under USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections under USC 103 have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection under 35 USC 103 are made in view of Yoon et al., as discussed above. While Choi et al. does not disclose generating the second differential profile by differentiating, with respect to the voltage of the battery bank, the first differential profile, this limitation would have been obvious in view of Yoon et al.. Yoon et al. discloses generating the second differential profile (paragraph 0035, lines 9-11) by differentiating, with respect to the voltage of the battery bank (paragraph 0035, lines 9-11, 1-4), the first differential profile (paragraph 0035, lines 7-9). Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are traversed in view of the discussions above. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Nghiem whose telephone number is (571) 272-2277. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /MICHAEL P NGHIEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 March 6, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 06, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 29, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 22, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 22, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 25, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 17, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 17, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584972
BATTERY DIAGNOSIS APPARATUS AND BATTERY DIAGNOSIS METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578399
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MONITORING A THROUGH FAULT CURRENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558733
MULTIWIRE ELECTRIC DISCHARGE MACHINE AND MULTIWIRE ELECTRIC DISCHARGE MACHINING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12546646
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING THE TEMPERATURE OF A SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12541035
RANDOM NOISE ATTENUATION FOR SEISMIC DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+24.0%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 926 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month