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 .
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-14, and 16-23 have been examined.
Claims 3, 5 and 15 have been canceled.
Claims 21-23 have been added.
P = paragraph e.g. P[0001] = paragraph[0001]
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/07/2026 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding Claim 1, the limitation “the auxiliary ESS configured to selectively provide higher voltage and power than the main HV battery to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode” does not require that the “power boost mode” of the step “initiate the power boost mode” actually provides “higher voltage and power than the main HV battery to the electric traction motor”.
In other words, the limitation “initiate the power boost mode, when one or more conditions are satisfied, by supplying power from the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor” requires only “supplying power from the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor”, and does not require the “auxiliary ESS” to provide “higher voltage and power than the main HV battery to the electric traction motor”, as the configuration of “configured to selectively provide” is not a step that is performed.
Therefore, the “power boost mode” only requires “supplying power from the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor”, where the claim encompasses the supplied power and voltage being lower than or equal to the “main HV battery” supplied power and voltage, as the configuration of “configured to selectively provide” does not require any step to be performed and does not exclude the “power boost mode” comprising using the “auxiliary ESS” to provide power and voltage being lower than or equal to the “main HV battery”.
Furthermore, the limitation “to enable the electric traction motor to operate with a higher power than what is available during the normal operating conditions with the main HV battery” is directed to an intended use that does not further limit the claim.
Regarding Claim 12, the limitation “the auxiliary ESS configured to selectively provide higher voltage and power to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode” does not require that the “power boost mode” of the step “initiating, by the controller, the power boost mode” actually provides “higher voltage and power to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode”, as no method step of providing “higher voltage and power” is claimed.
Also, the claim does not define the limitation “higher” relative to any other “voltage and power”, meaning “higher” encompasses higher than zero.
Furthermore, the limitation “to enable the electric traction motor to operate with a higher power than what is available during the normal operating conditions with the main HV battery” is directed to an intended use that does not further limit the claim.
Regarding Claim 21, the limitation “the auxiliary ESS configured to selectively provide higher voltage and power to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode” does not require that the “power boost mode” of the step “initiate the power boost mode” actually provides “higher voltage and power to the electric traction motor”.
Also, the claim does not define the limitation “higher” relative to any other “voltage and power”, meaning “higher” encompasses higher than zero.
Furthermore, the claim does not require that the “boost converter” is actually operated or performs any step to “boost voltage” at any time, including during the “power boost mode”.
Furthermore, the limitation “to enable the electric traction motor to operate with a higher power than what is available during the normal operating conditions with the main HV battery” is directed to an intended use that does not further limit the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-14, and 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As per Claim 2, the limitation “the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor for approximately 10 to 30 seconds” is unclear. Specifically, a capacity is not measured in the same units as an output power, and it is then nonsensical to claim that the “additional power” is “above a full capacity of the main HV battery”, as the “additional power” and “full capacity” are not measured or defined in the same units.
Furthermore, it is unclear how the “additional power” can be above the “full capacity”, as power is not equivalent to capacity.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 8, the claim recites “wherein the controller is further programmed to deactivate the power boost mode and disconnect the auxiliary ESS from the electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed”.
It is unclear how the “power boost mode” is deactivated as per the “deactivate the power boost mode” limitation, and it is unclear what process is required to be performed in order to perform the “deactivate the power boost mode” limitation, as Claim 1 does not recite any activation or step to activate the “power boost mode”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 9, the claim recites “wherein the controller is further programmed to deactivate the power boost mode if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time after the driver selected command is detected”.
It is unclear how the “power boost mode” is deactivated as per the “deactivate the power boost mode” limitation, and it is unclear what process is required to be performed in order to perform the “deactivate the power boost mode” limitation, as Claim 1 does not recite any activation or step to activate the “power boost mode”.
If Claim 9 is implying that the “initiate the power boost mode” step of Claim 1 must first take place before the “power boost mode” can be deactivated as per the “deactivate” step of Claim 9, this would contradict Claim 1, as the “initiate the power boost mode” step of Claim 1 occurs “when one or more conditions are satisfied”, and the “deactivate” step of Claim 9 occurs “if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time”, meaning the “deactivate” step of Claim 9 cannot occur after the “initiate the power boost mode, when one or more conditions are satisfied” step of Claim 1, as the “one or more conditions” have already been satisfied.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 13, the limitation “the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor” is unclear. Specifically, a capacity is not measured in the same units as an output power, and it is then nonsensical to claim that the “additional power” is “above a full capacity of the main HV battery”, as the “additional power” and “full capacity” are not measured or defined in the same units.
Furthermore, it is unclear how the “additional power” can be above the “full capacity”, as power is not equivalent to capacity.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 17, the claim recites “deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode and disconnecting the auxiliary ESS from the electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed”.
It is unclear how the “power boost mode” is deactivated as per the “deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode” limitation, and it is unclear what process is required to be performed in order to perform the “deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode” limitation, as Claim 12 does not recite any activation or step to activate the “power boost mode”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 18, the claim recites “deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time after the driver selected command is detected”.
It is unclear how the “power boost mode” is deactivated as per the “deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode” limitation, and it is unclear what process is required to be performed in order to perform the “deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode” limitation, as Claim 12 does not recite any activation or step to activate the “power boost mode”.
If Claim 18 is implying that the “initiating, by the controller, the power boost mode” step of Claim 12 must first take place before the “power boost mode” can be deactivated as per the “deactivating” step of Claim 18, this would contradict Claim 12, as the “initiating, by the controller, the power boost mode” step of Claim 12 occurs “when one or more conditions are satisfied”, and the “deactivating” step of Claim 18 occurs “if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time”, meaning the “deactivate” step of Claim 18 cannot occur after the “initiating, by the controller, the power boost mode when one or more conditions are satisfied” step of Claim 12, as the “one or more conditions” have already been satisfied.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 21, the limitation “the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS at the higher nominal voltage” is unclear.
Specifically, it is unclear how “recharging” of the “auxiliary ESS” is “at the higher nominal voltage”, and it is unclear what is meant by or required by this limitation.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
As per Claim 22, the limitation “the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor for a limited duration of approximately 10 to 30 seconds” is unclear. Specifically, a capacity is not measured in the same units as an output power, and it is then nonsensical to claim that the “additional power” is “above a full capacity of the main HV battery”, as the “additional power” and “full capacity” are not measured or defined in the same units.
Furthermore, it is unclear how the “additional power” can be above the “full capacity”, as power is not equivalent to capacity.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Furthermore as per Claim 22, the claim recites “deactivate the power boost mode if the throttle does not exceed the predetermined threshold before the timeout timer expires”.
It is unclear how the “power boost mode” is deactivated as per the “deactivate the power boost mode” limitation, and it is unclear what process is required to be performed in order to perform the “deactivate the power boost mode” limitation, as Claim 21 does not recite any activation or step to activate the “power boost mode”.
If Claim 22 is implying that the “initiate the power boost mode” step of Claim 21 must first take place before the “power boost mode” can be deactivated as per the “deactivate” step of Claim 22, this would contradict Claim 21, as the “initiate the power boost mode” step of Claim 21 occurs “when the throttle exceeds a predetermined threshold”, and the “deactivate” step of Claim 22 occurs “if the throttle does not exceed the predetermined threshold before the timeout timer expires”, meaning the “deactivate” step of Claim 22 cannot occur after the “initiate the power boost mode, when the throttle exceeds a predetermined threshold” step of Claim 21, as the “throttle” has already exceeded the “predetermined threshold”.
Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the driver selected power boost mode" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the driver selected power boost mode" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A).
Regarding Claim 1, Li et al. teaches the claimed electrified vehicle, comprising:
an electric traction motor configured to generate drive torque (“The electric machine 14 is configured to be operable as a motor during a driving mode of the vehicle 10”, see col.3, particularly lines 39-57);
a high voltage (HV) battery system including a main HV battery for powering the electric traction motor under normal operating conditions (“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16);
an auxiliary energy storage system (ESS) having a higher nominal voltage than the main HV battery, the auxiliary ESS configured to selectively provide higher voltage and power than the main HV battery to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode…(“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16 and “The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43, and see “The nominal voltage of the high power battery pack 24 and the high energy battery pack 26 need not be the same, and they could have a different end of charge voltage (Vmax) and/or a different end of discharge voltage (Vmin)”. see col.6, particularly lines 37-49, which shows that Li et al. fully supports either one of the battery packs “having a higher nominal voltage” than the other); and
a control system including a controller (“…electronic controller 23…”, see col.4, particularly lines 17-26 and “…electronic controller 23…”, see col.9, particularly lines 28-43) programmed to:
detect a driver selected command to enable the vehicle to operate (“The vehicle motive power demand is the amount of electrical power required by the one or more electric machines 14 to meet vehicle operator speed and acceleration commands. For example, depression or lifting of an accelerator pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the pedal, depression or lifting of a braking pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the braking pedal, and wheel speed data may be used by the electronic controller 23 to determine the vehicle motive power demand”, see col.8, particularly lines 39-62);
in response to detecting the driver selected power boost mode, electrically connect the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43); and
initiate the power boost mode, when one or more conditions are satisfied, by supplying power from the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor to enable the electric traction motor to operate with a higher power than what is available during the normal operating conditions with the main HV battery (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip”, see col.9, particularly lines 28-43).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed
wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor.
However, Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) teaches the use of an ultracapacitor or supercapacitors” (Zhao et al.; see P[0013]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Zhao et al., and wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor, as rendered obvious by Zhao et al., in order to provide a “power-type energy source” (Zhao et al.; see P[0013]).
Regarding Claim 6, Li et al. teaches the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a power router switch configured to selectively electrically connect the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43).
Regarding Claim 7, Li et al. teaches the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, wherein the one or more conditions comprises a throttle of the vehicle exceeding a predetermined threshold (“The vehicle motive power demand is the amount of electrical power required by the one or more electric machines 14 to meet vehicle operator speed and acceleration commands. For example, depression or lifting of an accelerator pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the pedal, depression or lifting of a braking pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the braking pedal, and wheel speed data may be used by the electronic controller 23 to determine the vehicle motive power demand”, see col.8, particularly lines 39-62). The Examiner notes for the record P[0025] of the specification of the present application which recites “control determines if the vehicle throttle (e.g., accelerator pedal) exceeds a predetermined threshold (e.g., accelerator pedal fully depressed)”, which clearly shows that the claimed “throttle of the vehicle exceeding a predetermined threshold” encompasses an amount of depression of an accelerator pedal.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Razi Kamanaj Olia (2023/0347763), further in view of Wu et al. (2023/0299609), further in view of Lukes (WO2022018226A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Li et al. teaches the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, wherein the main HV battery has a first voltage, and the auxiliary ESS has a second voltage that is higher than the first voltage (“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16 and “The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43, and see “The nominal voltage of the high power battery pack 24 and the high energy battery pack 26 need not be the same, and they could have a different end of charge voltage (Vmax) and/or a different end of discharge voltage (Vmin)”. see col.6, particularly lines 37-49, which shows that Li et al. fully supports either one of the battery packs having a “voltage that is higher” than the other).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed
wherein the first voltage is approximately 800V and the second voltage is approximately 900V, and
wherein in the boost mode, the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor for approximately 10 to 30 seconds.
However, electric vehicle energy storage device ratings of 800V and 900V are conventional and well-known in the art, as seen in Razi Kamanaj Olia (2023/0347763) (Razi Kamanaj Olia; “Today’s EVs are beginning to implement HV battery systems rated at much higher voltages, such as ~800 or 1200 V”, see P[0004] and “…the HV battery system 108 is rated at a high enough voltage (e.g., 800 V or 1200 V)…”, see P[0019]).
Also, Wu et al. (2023/0299609) teaches the use of a capacitor device using the same claimed “first voltage” and “second voltage” values (Wu et al.; “…the capacitor device 108 may be configured to output voltages ranging from 0 V up to the highest voltage generated by the motor system 106. This highest voltage may be 800 V, 900 V, or 1000 V, among others”, see P[0030]).
Furthermore, Lukes (WO2022018226A1) teaches the use of a battery and a supercapacitor, where the supercapacitor is capable of providing “between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery” for “approximately 10 to 30 seconds” (Lukes; see P[0046] and “A nominal voltage of 400 volts and a current of 500 amps are sufficient to provide such power. The battery must be sized to operate with such values. The supercapacitor 60 must be sized for a much higher voltage value, for example 1000 volts”, see P[0053] and “…the supercapacitor 60 to supply 500 amps for about twelve seconds before the voltage Vc of the supercapacitor 60 drops to around the voltage V<sub>B</sub>of the battery 50”, see P[0057], and see P[0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Razi Kamanaj Olia, Wu et al. and Lukes, and wherein the first voltage is approximately 800V and the second voltage is approximately 900V, and wherein in the boost mode, the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor for approximately 10 to 30 seconds, as rendered obvious by Razi Kamanaj Olia, Wu et al. and Lukes, in order to provide a “direct current (DC) boost charging (DCBC) system for a high voltage (HV) battery” (Razi Kamanaj Olia; see Abstract), and in order to “quickly store large amounts of energy” (Wu et al.; see Abstract), and in order to provide for “alternating between strong accelerations and strong decelerations” (Lukes; see P[0008]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Le et al. (9,527,401).
Regarding Claim 4, Li et al. teaches the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, further comprising:
a regenerative braking system configured to generate electrical power with the electric traction motor operating as a generator (“…regenerative braking energy is used to charge the high energy battery pack 26”, see col.10, particularly lines 8-14 and “…regenerative braking in which the high power battery pack 24 and/or the high energy battery pack 26 may be charged…”, see col.8, particularly lines 11-30); and
a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS…(“…regenerative braking energy is used to charge the high energy battery pack 26”, see col.10, particularly lines 8-14 and “…regenerative braking in which the high power battery pack 24 and/or the high energy battery pack 26 may be charged…”, see col.8, particularly lines 11-30).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS.
However, Le et al. (9,527,401) teaches a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from a regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging an auxiliary ESS (Le et al.; “…as regenerative power is generated, the alternator 64 outputs a constant 13.3 volts. To charge the NMC battery 32 with the constant 13.3 volts, the battery control unit 34 may control the DC/DC converter 410B to step up the voltage to the second battery voltage 424 (e.g., between 13.3-16.6 volts)”, see col.38, particularly lines 33-56 and “…boosting, using a DC/DC converter, the first voltage to a second voltage during regenerative braking to charge a second battery using the second voltage…”, see Claim 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Le et al., and the electrified vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS, as rendered obvious by Le et al., in order to provide “improved power storage and power distribution efficiency for battery systems in vehicular contexts” (Le et al.; see col.48, lines 34-38).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Wu (2019/0009688).
Regarding Claim 8, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to deactivate the power boost mode and disconnect the auxiliary ESS from the electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed.
However, Wu (2019/0009688) teaches deactivating a power boost mode and disconnecting an auxiliary ESS from an electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed (Wu; “When it is determined at 708 that the timer T2 has expired, a timer T3 is set to expire after a certain third time interval at 710. During the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 contribute to powering the traction electric motor 116 at 718. Thus, during the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 are switched on, and both batteries discharge simultaneously to power the motor 116. When it is determined at 710 that the timer T3 has expired, the method 700 repeats at 702”, see P[0066] and FIG. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Wu, and wherein the controller is further programmed to deactivate the power boost mode and disconnect the auxiliary ESS from the electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed, as rendered obvious by Wu, in order to provide “efficient power management for either continuous or intermittent high-performance operation, using a boost stage and an on-board charging circuit” (Wu; see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 9, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to deactivate the power boost mode if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time after the driver selected command is detected.
However, Wu (2019/0009688) teaches deactivating a power boost mode and disconnecting an auxiliary ESS from an electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed (Wu; “When it is determined at 708 that the timer T2 has expired, a timer T3 is set to expire after a certain third time interval at 710. During the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 contribute to powering the traction electric motor 116 at 718. Thus, during the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 are switched on, and both batteries discharge simultaneously to power the motor 116. When it is determined at 710 that the timer T3 has expired, the method 700 repeats at 702”, see P[0066] and FIG. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Wu, and wherein the controller is further programmed to deactivate the power boost mode if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time after the driver selected command is detected, as rendered obvious by Wu, in order to provide “efficient power management for either continuous or intermittent high-performance operation, using a boost stage and an on-board charging circuit” (Wu; see Abstract).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Botts et al. (2020/0130511).
Regarding Claim 10, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 1, wherein the electric traction motor
wherein the electrified vehicle further includes a second electric traction motor configured to drive a second set of vehicle wheels.
However, Botts et al. (2020/0130511) teaches a first electric traction motor configured to drive a first set of vehicle wheels, and a second electric traction motor configured to drive a second set of vehicle wheels (Botts et al.; “…the drive motor(s) 220 may include a first drive motor 222 and a second drive motor 224. The first drive motor 222 and the second drive motor 224 may be configured to impart motion to one or more of the wheel(s) 102 of the electric vehicle 100”, see P[0083]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Botts et al., and wherein the electric traction motor comprises a first electric traction motor configured to drive a first set of vehicle wheels, and wherein the electrified vehicle further includes a second electric traction motor configured to drive a second set of vehicle wheels, as rendered obvious by Botts et al., in order to “impart motion to one or more wheels of the electric vehicle” (Botts et al.; see P[0040]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Botts et al. (2020/0130511), further in view of Li et al. (2024/0051386).
Regarding Claim 11, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 10, wherein during the power boost mode, the main HV battery powers the first electric traction motor, and the auxiliary ESS powers the second electric traction motor.
However, Li et al. (2024/0051386) (which will also be referred to as “Li et al. ‘386) teaches based on torque requirements or a torque load according to a driver’s input (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0031]), a total torque load is distributed between a front motor and a rear motor (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0032]), where a front battery provides power to a front motor and a rear battery provides power to a rear motor (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0020]-P[0021]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Li et al. ‘386, and wherein during the power boost mode, the main HV battery powers the first electric traction motor, and the auxiliary ESS powers the second electric traction motor, as rendered obvious by Li et al. ‘386, in order to provide for “improving a range of an electric vehicle” (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0001]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661).
Regarding Claim 12, Li et al. teaches the claimed method of operating an electrified vehicle having an electric traction motor (“The electric machine 14 is configured to be operable as a motor during a driving mode of the vehicle 10”, see col.3, particularly lines 39-57), a main high voltage (HV) battery for powering the electric traction motor under normal operating conditions (“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16), and an auxiliary energy storage system (ESS) having a higher nominal voltage than the main HV battery, the auxiliary ESS configured to selectively provide higher voltage and power to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode…(“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16 and “The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43, and see “The nominal voltage of the high power battery pack 24 and the high energy battery pack 26 need not be the same, and they could have a different end of charge voltage (Vmax) and/or a different end of discharge voltage (Vmin)”. see col.6, particularly lines 37-49, which shows that Li et al. fully supports either one of the battery packs “having a higher nominal voltage” than the other), the method comprising:
detecting, by a controller, a driver selected command…, to enable the vehicle to operate (“The vehicle motive power demand is the amount of electrical power required by the one or more electric machines 14 to meet vehicle operator speed and acceleration commands. For example, depression or lifting of an accelerator pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the pedal, depression or lifting of a braking pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the braking pedal, and wheel speed data may be used by the electronic controller 23 to determine the vehicle motive power demand”, see col.8, particularly lines 39-62);
in response to detecting the driver selected power boost mode, electrically connecting, by the controller, the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43); and
initiating, by the controller, the power boost mode when one or more conditions are satisfied, by supplying power from the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor to enable the electric traction motor to operate with a higher power than what is available during the normal operating conditions with the main HV battery (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip”, see col.9, particularly lines 28-43).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
and wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor.
and
detecting, by a controller, a driver selected command, via a vehicle button.
However, Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) teaches the use of an ultracapacitor or supercapacitors” (Zhao et al.; see P[0013]).
Furthermore, Masterson et al. (7,801,661) teaches wherein the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode is initiated via a button on at least one of a dash, a steering wheel, and a touchscreen of the vehicle (Masterson et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 39-56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Zhao et al. and Masterson et al., and wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor, and detecting, by a controller, a driver selected command, via a vehicle button, as rendered obvious by Zhao et al. and Masterson et al., in order to provide a “power-type energy source” (Zhao et al.; see P[0013]), and in order to “facilitate selective activation of the power boost system” (Masterson et al.; see col.2, lines 48-51).
Regarding Claim 16, Li et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 12, wherein the one or more conditions comprises a throttle of the vehicle exceeding a predetermined threshold (“The vehicle motive power demand is the amount of electrical power required by the one or more electric machines 14 to meet vehicle operator speed and acceleration commands. For example, depression or lifting of an accelerator pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the pedal, depression or lifting of a braking pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the braking pedal, and wheel speed data may be used by the electronic controller 23 to determine the vehicle motive power demand”, see col.8, particularly lines 39-62). The Examiner notes for the record P[0025] of the specification of the present application which recites “control determines if the vehicle throttle (e.g., accelerator pedal) exceeds a predetermined threshold (e.g., accelerator pedal fully depressed)”, which clearly shows that the claimed “throttle of the vehicle exceeding a predetermined threshold” encompasses an amount of depression of an accelerator pedal.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661), further in view of Lukes (WO2022018226A1).
As per Claim 13, Li et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 12, wherein the main HV battery has a first voltage, and the auxiliary ESS has a second voltage that is higher than the first voltage (“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16 and “The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43, and see “The nominal voltage of the high power battery pack 24 and the high energy battery pack 26 need not be the same, and they could have a different end of charge voltage (Vmax) and/or a different end of discharge voltage (Vmin)”. see col.6, particularly lines 37-49, which shows that Li et al. fully supports either one of the battery packs having a “voltage that is higher” than the other).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed
and wherein in the boost mode, the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor.
However, Lukes (WO2022018226A1) teaches the use of a battery and a supercapacitor, where the supercapacitor is capable of providing “between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery” (Lukes; see P[0046] and “A nominal voltage of 400 volts and a current of 500 amps are sufficient to provide such power. The battery must be sized to operate with such values. The supercapacitor 60 must be sized for a much higher voltage value, for example 1000 volts”, see P[0053] and “…the supercapacitor 60 to supply 500 amps for about twelve seconds before the voltage Vc of the supercapacitor 60 drops to around the voltage V<sub>B</sub>of the battery 50”, see P[0057], and see P[0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Lukes, and wherein in the boost mode, the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor, as rendered obvious by Lukes, in order to provide for “alternating between strong accelerations and strong decelerations” (Lukes; see P[0008]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661), further in view of Le et al. (9,527,401).
Regarding Claim 14, Li et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 12, wherein the electrified vehicle further comprises:
a regenerative braking system configured to generate electrical power with the electric traction motor operating as a generator (“…regenerative braking energy is used to charge the high energy battery pack 26”, see col.10, particularly lines 8-14 and “…regenerative braking in which the high power battery pack 24 and/or the high energy battery pack 26 may be charged…”, see col.8, particularly lines 11-30);
a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS…(“…regenerative braking energy is used to charge the high energy battery pack 26”, see col.10, particularly lines 8-14 and “…regenerative braking in which the high power battery pack 24 and/or the high energy battery pack 26 may be charged…”, see col.8, particularly lines 11-30); and
a power router switch configured to selectively electrically connect the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS.
However, Le et al. (9,527,401) teaches a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from a regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging an auxiliary ESS (Le et al.; “…as regenerative power is generated, the alternator 64 outputs a constant 13.3 volts. To charge the NMC battery 32 with the constant 13.3 volts, the battery control unit 34 may control the DC/DC converter 410B to step up the voltage to the second battery voltage 424 (e.g., between 13.3-16.6 volts)”, see col.38, particularly lines 33-56 and “…boosting, using a DC/DC converter, the first voltage to a second voltage during regenerative braking to charge a second battery using the second voltage…”, see Claim 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Le et al., and wherein the electrified vehicle further comprises a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS, as rendered obvious by Le et al., in order to provide “improved power storage and power distribution efficiency for battery systems in vehicular contexts” (Le et al.; see col.48, lines 34-38).
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661), further in view of Wu (2019/0009688).
Regarding Claim 17, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 12, further comprising:
deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode and disconnecting the auxiliary ESS from the electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed.
However, Wu (2019/0009688) teaches deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode and disconnecting an auxiliary ESS from an electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed (Wu; “When it is determined at 708 that the timer T2 has expired, a timer T3 is set to expire after a certain third time interval at 710. During the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 contribute to powering the traction electric motor 116 at 718. Thus, during the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 are switched on, and both batteries discharge simultaneously to power the motor 116. When it is determined at 710 that the timer T3 has expired, the method 700 repeats at 702”, see P[0066] and FIG. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Wu, and deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode and disconnecting the auxiliary ESS from the electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed, as rendered obvious by Wu, in order to provide “efficient power management for either continuous or intermittent high-performance operation, using a boost stage and an on-board charging circuit” (Wu; see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 18, Li et al. teaches the claimed method of claim 12, further comprising:
deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time after the driver selected command is detected.
However, Wu (2019/0009688) teaches deactivating a power boost mode and disconnecting an auxiliary ESS from an electric traction motor after a predetermined period of time has elapsed (Wu; “When it is determined at 708 that the timer T2 has expired, a timer T3 is set to expire after a certain third time interval at 710. During the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 contribute to powering the traction electric motor 116 at 718. Thus, during the third time interval, both the boost battery 502 and the main battery 302 are switched on, and both batteries discharge simultaneously to power the motor 116. When it is determined at 710 that the timer T3 has expired, the method 700 repeats at 702”, see P[0066] and FIG. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Wu, and deactivating, by the controller, the power boost mode if the one or more conditions are not satisfied with a predetermined amount of time after the driver selected command is detected, as rendered obvious by Wu, in order to provide “efficient power management for either continuous or intermittent high-performance operation, using a boost stage and an on-board charging circuit” (Wu; see Abstract).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661), further in view of Botts et al. (2020/0130511).
Regarding Claim 19, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 12, wherein the electric traction motor comprises a first electric traction motor configured to drive a first set of vehicle wheels; and
wherein the electrified vehicle further includes a second electric traction motor configured to drive a second set of vehicle wheels.
However, Botts et al. (2020/0130511) teaches a first electric traction motor configured to drive a first set of vehicle wheels, and a second electric traction motor configured to drive a second set of vehicle wheels (Botts et al.; “…the drive motor(s) 220 may include a first drive motor 222 and a second drive motor 224. The first drive motor 222 and the second drive motor 224 may be configured to impart motion to one or more of the wheel(s) 102 of the electric vehicle 100”, see P[0083]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Botts et al., and wherein the electric traction motor comprises a first electric traction motor configured to drive a first set of vehicle wheels, and wherein the electrified vehicle further includes a second electric traction motor configured to drive a second set of vehicle wheels, as rendered obvious by Botts et al., in order to “impart motion to one or more wheels of the electric vehicle” (Botts et al.; see P[0040]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661), further in view of Li et al. (2024/0051386).
Regarding Claim 20, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed method of claim 12, further comprising:
powering the first electric traction motor with the main HV battery during the power boost mode; and
powering the second electric traction motor with the auxiliary ESS during the power boost mode.
However, Li et al. (2024/0051386) (which will also be referred to as “Li et al. ‘386) teaches based on torque requirements or a torque load according to a driver’s input (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0031]), a total torque load is distributed between a front motor and a rear motor (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0032]), where a front battery provides power to a front motor and a rear battery provides power to a rear motor (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0020]-P[0021]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Li et al. ‘386, and powering the first electric traction motor with the main HV battery during the power boost mode, and powering the second electric traction motor with the auxiliary ESS during the power boost mode, as rendered obvious by Li et al. ‘386, in order to provide for “improving a range of an electric vehicle” (Li et al. ‘386; see P[0001]).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Syouda (2018/0062519) further in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A), further in view of Tabata (JP2001224105A).
Regarding Claim 21, Li et al. teaches the claimed electrified vehicle, comprising:
an electric traction motor configured to generate drive torque (“The electric machine 14 is configured to be operable as a motor during a driving mode of the vehicle 10”, see col.3, particularly lines 39-57);
a high voltage (HV) battery system including a main HV battery for powering the electric traction motor under normal operating conditions (“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16);
an auxiliary energy storage system (ESS) having a higher nominal voltage than the main HV battery, the auxiliary ESS configured to selectively provide higher voltage and power to the electric traction motor during a power boost mode (“The hybrid battery pack 12 is part of an energy management system 22 and may be referred to as a “hybrid” battery pack as it integrates both a relatively high power (i.e., high power density) first battery pack 24 (referred to as a high power battery pack 24 or a power battery pack 24), and a relatively high energy (i.e., high energy density) second battery pack 26 (referred to as a high energy battery pack or an energy battery pack 26)”, see col.3, particularly lines 65-67 and col.4, particularly lines 1-16 and “The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43, and see “The nominal voltage of the high power battery pack 24 and the high energy battery pack 26 need not be the same, and they could have a different end of charge voltage (Vmax) and/or a different end of discharge voltage (Vmin)”. see col.6, particularly lines 37-49, which shows that Li et al. fully supports either one of the battery packs “having a higher nominal voltage” than the other), wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor;
a regenerative braking system configured to generate electrical power with the electric traction motor operating as a generator (see col.7, particularly lines 51-67 and col.8, particularly lines 1-3);
a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS at the higher nominal voltage (“…a DC/DC converter may be used in this instance to modify the voltage and current level from the regenerative braking current to the high power battery pack 24”, see col.11, particularly lines 22-46 and “The method 100 then moves to step 149 and closes the energy battery switch S.sub.E. The method 100 then continues to charge the high energy battery pack 26…”, see col.11, particularly lines 22-46); and
a control system including a controller programmed to:
detect a driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode (“The vehicle motive power demand is the amount of electrical power required by the one or more electric machines 14 to meet vehicle operator speed and acceleration commands. For example, depression or lifting of an accelerator pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the pedal, depression or lifting of a braking pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the braking pedal, and wheel speed data may be used by the electronic controller 23 to determine the vehicle motive power demand”, see col.8, particularly lines 39-62);
display a notification on a vehicle display indicating that the power boost mode is enabled;
electrically connect the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip” (emphasis added), see col.9, particularly lines 28-43);
monitor a throttle of the vehicle (“The vehicle motive power demand is the amount of electrical power required by the one or more electric machines 14 to meet vehicle operator speed and acceleration commands. For example, depression or lifting of an accelerator pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the pedal, depression or lifting of a braking pedal, the rate of depression or lifting of the braking pedal, and wheel speed data may be used by the electronic controller 23 to determine the vehicle motive power demand”, see col.8, particularly lines 39-62); and
initiate the power boost mode, when the throttle exceeds a predetermined threshold, by supplying power from the auxiliary ESS to the electric traction motor to enable the electric traction motor to operate with a higher power than what is available during the normal operating conditions with the main HV battery (“If in step 110 the electronic controller 23 determines that the state-of-charge of the high power battery pack 24 is not greater than the predetermined minimum state-of-charge, then the high power battery pack 24 will be unable to meet the vehicle motive power demand, and the method 100 moves to step 116 to determine whether the second switch S.sub.E is in the closed position and the first switch S.sub.P is in the open position. If the second switch S.sub.E is not in the closed position or the first switch S.sub.P is not in the open position, the method 100 moves to step 118 to close the second switch S.sub.E and/or open the first switch S.sub.P as needed. The energy battery pack 26 is thus now operatively connected to the electric machine 14 and discharged to the electric machine 14 through the power inverter 32 by powering the electric machine 14 as a motor to meet vehicle power demand for the remainder of the vehicle trip”, see col.9, particularly lines 28-43).
Li et al. does not expressly recite the bolded portions of the claimed
a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS at the higher nominal voltage
and
wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor.
and
display a notification on a vehicle display indicating that the power boost mode is enabled.
However, regarding the claimed “boost converter”, Syouda (2018/0062519) teaches a converter that boosts a regenerative voltage and uses the boosted voltage to charge a secondary battery (Syouda; see P[0014]-P[0025]).
Furthermore, regarding the claimed Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A) teaches the use of an ultracapacitor or supercapacitors” (Zhao et al.; see P[0013]).
Additionally, Tabata (JP2001224105A) teaches display a notification on a vehicle display indicating that the power boost mode is enabled (Tabata; “When Sport mode is selected, it will be displayed on the instrument panel inside the car”, see P[0107]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Syouda, Zhao et al. and Tabata, and to provide a boost converter electrically coupled between the electric traction motor and the auxiliary ESS, the boost converter configured to boost voltage from the regenerative braking system to a higher voltage for recharging the auxiliary ESS at the higher nominal voltage as rendered obvious by Syouda, and wherein the auxiliary ESS is a supercapacitor as rendered obvious by Zhao et al., and display a notification on a vehicle display indicating that the power boost mode is enabled as rendered obvious by Tabata, in order to “properly boost a regenerative voltage even if the regenerative voltage is relatively low” (Syouda; see P[0005]), and in order to provide a “power-type energy source” (Zhao et al.; see P[0013]), and so that a selected mode “will be displayed on the instrument panel inside the car” (Tabata; see P[0107]).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Syouda (2018/0062519) further in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A), further in view of Tabata (JP2001224105A), further in view of Kaewert et al. (2024/0006901), further in view of Lukes (WO2022018226A1).
Regarding Claim 22, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 21, wherein the controller is further programmed to:
start a timeout timer in response to detecting the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode; and
deactivate the power boost mode if the throttle does not exceed the predetermined threshold before the timeout timer expires, wherein the main HV battery has a first voltage, and the auxiliary ESS has a second voltage that is higher than the first voltage, and wherein in the boost mode, the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor for a limited duration of approximately 10 to 30 seconds.
However, Kaewert et al. (2024/0006901) teaches start a timeout timer in response to detecting the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode, and deactivate the power boost mode if the throttle does not exceed the predetermined threshold before the timeout timer expires (Kaewert et al.; “…if the output current/power demanded by the battery is below the boost-start threshold at 226, the charger may remain in boost mode. If the output power demanded by the battery falls below a boost-end threshold to remain in boost mode at 230, the “dynamic boost counter” that began incrementing at 242 may begin to decrement at 234 from the maximum time value it reached after incrementing, as described above. The next pass through the state flowchart will be through the boost mode path, beginning at 218. When the output power demanded by the battery is below the boost-end threshold, and the dynamic boost counter has reached 0, or decremented to a predetermined fraction of the time that the dynamic boost counter had been incrementing, at 238, the operating state may shift into float mode at 250”, see P[0120]).
Furthermore, Lukes (WO2022018226A1) teaches the use of a battery and a supercapacitor, where the supercapacitor is capable of providing “between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery” for “approximately 10 to 30 seconds” (Lukes; see P[0046] and “A nominal voltage of 400 volts and a current of 500 amps are sufficient to provide such power. The battery must be sized to operate with such values. The supercapacitor 60 must be sized for a much higher voltage value, for example 1000 volts”, see P[0053] and “…the supercapacitor 60 to supply 500 amps for about twelve seconds before the voltage Vc of the supercapacitor 60 drops to around the voltage V<sub>B</sub>of the battery 50”, see P[0057], and see P[0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Kaewert et al. and Lukes, and wherein the controller is further programmed to start a timeout timer in response to detecting the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode, and deactivate the power boost mode if the throttle does not exceed the predetermined threshold before the timeout timer expires, wherein the main HV battery has a first voltage, and the auxiliary ESS has a second voltage that is higher than the first voltage, and wherein in the boost mode, the auxiliary ESS provides between approximately 30 kW and approximately 50 kW of additional power above a full capacity of the main HV battery to the electric traction motor for a limited duration of approximately 10 to 30 seconds, as rendered obvious by Kaewert et al. and Lukes, in order to provide a process that “maximizes system life” (Kaewert et al.; see Abstract), and in order to provide for “alternating between strong accelerations and strong decelerations” (Lukes; see P[0008]).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (10,814,743) in view of Syouda (2018/0062519) further in view of Zhao et al. (JP2015084638A), further in view of Tabata (JP2001224105A), further in view of Masterson et al. (7,801,661).
Regarding Claim 23, Li et al. does not expressly recite the claimed electrified vehicle of claim 21, wherein the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode is initiated via a button on at least one of a dash, a steering wheel, and a touchscreen of the vehicle.
However, Masterson et al. (7,801,661) teaches wherein the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode is initiated via a button on at least one of a dash, a steering wheel, and a touchscreen of the vehicle (Masterson et al.; see col.2, particularly lines 39-56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Masterson et al., and wherein the driver selected command to operate the vehicle in the power boost mode is initiated via a button on at least one of a dash, a steering wheel, and a touchscreen of the vehicle, as rendered obvious by Masterson et al., in order to “facilitate selective activation of the power boost system” (Masterson et al.; see col.2, lines 48-51).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ISAAC G SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-9593. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at 571-270-3832. 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.
/ISAAC G SMITH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
