DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Applicant's Application filed on 3/4/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/4/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because Claim 19 recites “A computer program product comprising program code” wherein the claimed system is software per se, as it is not tangibly embodied on any sort of physical medium or hardware. Accordingly, the claimed system is software per se and therefore non-statutory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1, 11-13, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogel (US20110317321A1) in view of Cruise (US20080304199A1).
In regards to claim 1, Vogel teaches A computer system comprising processing circuitry (Vogel: Fig. 1 Element 11 electronic, monitoring and control device 11) configured to:
determine a system energy threshold value in an energy storage system comprising a plurality of parallelly arranged battery packs connectable to a common traction voltage bus (Vogel: Fig. 8; Para 67 “The high-power battery system 51 comprises a plurality of battery strings 54, which are connected in parallel and are connected to the DC power supply system 55 via a respective connecting conductor 2 with a positive potential”),
determine a maximum allowed system peak current value, the maximum allowed system peak current value corresponding to that of the common traction voltage bus (Vogel: Para 14 “a monitoring and control device for monitoring the current through the switch and for opening the switch when the current through the switch exceeds a predetermined limit value”),
set an individual energy fuse trigger for each battery pack (Vogel: Para 49 “electronic, monitoring and control device 11 serves to monitor the current I through the switch 10 and to open the switch 10 when the current I through the switch 10 exceeds a limit value stored in the monitoring and control device 11”).
Yet Vogel do not explicitly teach the system energy threshold value corresponding to the product of the squared value of a system threshold current on the common traction voltage bus and a first time requirement,
set an individual energy fuse trigger for each battery pack corresponding to the product of the squared value of an individual battery pack current threshold and a second time requirement, wherein the individual battery pack current threshold is set based on the maximum allowed system peak current value in relation to the number of battery packs, and the second time requirement is set based on the system energy threshold value in relation to the squared value of the maximum allowed system peak current value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cruise teaches the system energy threshold value corresponding to the product of the squared value of a system threshold current on the common traction voltage bus and a first time requirement(Cruise: Para 23 “the battery control unit 26 controls the switch as a function of current and time. If current is high, circuit components are only capable of withstanding very short durations of such current levels before overheating and/or failing. On the other hand, when current is sufficiently low, circuit components are able to operate indefinitely without overheating or failing. This relationship is defined by the squared value of current over time as shown in FIG. 4. The battery control unit 26 may implement this relationship as the trip point for the software-implemented fuse. For instance, the trip point may be defined as: F(l, t)=∫l2 dt, where l is the sensed current value from the current sensor 25. When the trip point is exceeded, the battery control unit 26 initiates a protective action to protect the battery pack”),
set an individual energy fuse trigger for each battery pack corresponding to the product of the squared value of an individual battery pack current threshold and a second time requirement, wherein the individual battery pack current threshold is set based on the maximum allowed system peak current value in relation to the number of battery packs, and the second time requirement is set based on the system energy threshold value in relation to the squared value of the maximum allowed system peak current value(Cruise: Para 23 “the battery control unit 26 controls the switch as a function of current and time. If current is high, circuit components are only capable of withstanding very short durations of such current levels before overheating and/or failing. On the other hand, when current is sufficiently low, circuit components are able to operate indefinitely without overheating or failing. This relationship is defined by the squared value of current over time as shown in FIG. 4. The battery control unit 26 may implement this relationship as the trip point for the software-implemented fuse. For instance, the trip point may be defined as: F(l, t)=∫l2 dt, where l is the sensed current value from the current sensor 25. When the trip point is exceeded, the battery control unit 26 initiates a protective action to protect the battery pack”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the computer system of Vogel with the feature of the system energy threshold value corresponding to the product of the squared value of a system threshold current on the common traction voltage bus and a first time requirement, set an individual energy fuse trigger for each battery pack corresponding to the product of the squared value of an individual battery pack current threshold and a second time requirement, wherein the individual battery pack current threshold is set based on the maximum allowed system peak current value in relation to the number of battery packs, and the second time requirement is set based on the system energy threshold value in relation to the squared value of the maximum allowed system peak current value. disclosed by Cruise. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “prevents cells in the Li-ion battery pack from deteriorating and shortening useful life of the pack” (Cruise: Para 4).
In regards to claim 11, the combination of Vogel and Cruise teaches The computer system of claim 1, and Cruise further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to define the maximum allowed system peak current value as the maximum allowed peak current of a load being powered by the energy storage system via the common traction voltage bus(Cruise: Para 23 “the battery control unit 26 controls the switch as a function of current and time. If current is high, circuit components are only capable of withstanding very short durations of such current levels before overheating and/or failing. On the other hand, when current is sufficiently low, circuit components are able to operate indefinitely without overheating or failing. This relationship is defined by the squared value of current over time as shown in FIG. 4. The battery control unit 26 may implement this relationship as the trip point for the software-implemented fuse. For instance, the trip point may be defined as: F(l, t)=∫l2 dt, where l is the sensed current value from the current sensor 25. When the trip point is exceeded, the battery control unit 26 initiates a protective action to protect the battery pack”). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Vogel and Cruise as in Claim 1 above.
In regards to claim 12, the combination of Vogel and Cruise teaches The computer system of claim 1, and Vogel further teaches A vehicle comprising the computer system of any of claim 1(Vogel: Para 7 “A typical case in this regard is a DC island power supply system, for example on vehicles, such as submarines, for example”)
As per claim 13, it recites A computer-implemented method having limitations similar to those of claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
In regards to claim 19, the combination of Vogel and Cruise teaches The method of claim 13, and Cruise further teaches A computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by the processing circuitry, the method of claim 13(Cruise: Para 6 “a battery control unit implemented as software instructions in a controller embedded in a battery pack”) The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Vogel and Cruise as in Claim 1 above.
In regards to claim 20, the combination of Vogel and Cruise teaches The method of claim 13, and Cruise further teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform the method of claim 13(Cruise: Para 6 “a battery control unit implemented as software instructions in a controller embedded in a battery pack”; Para 27 “the battery control unit will evaluate the trip point of the software-implemented fuse. A timeout value is retrieved from a lookup table. The timeout value will correlate to the sensed current value. As discussed above, the higher the sensed current value, the shorted the timeout value. The timeout values are stored in a lookup table stored in a memory device associated with the battery control unit”) The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Vogel and Cruise as in Claim 1 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10, 14-18 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The features “the setting of the individual energy fuse trigger is adapted in response to a change in the number of battery packs connected to the common traction voltage bus” in claims 2 and 14; “the processing circuitry is further configured to set the individual battery pack current threshold to at least the ratio of the maximum allowed system peak current value and the number of battery packs” in claims 3 and 15; “the processing circuitry is further configured to set the second time requirement to at least the ratio of the system energy threshold value and the product of the squared value of the maximum allowed system peak current value and the squared value of a second maximum allowed overcurrent value of between 110 % and 180%” in claim 5, 17; “the processing circuitry is further configured to set a time independent individual fuse trigger for each battery pack corresponding to the individual battery pack current threshold set to the product of the ratio of the maximum allowed system peak current value and the number of battery packs, and a third maximum allowed overcurrent value of between 110 % and 180 %” in claim 10 when taken in the context of the claims as a whole, were not uncovered in the prior art teachings.
Claims 4, 16 would be allowable based on the dependence on claims 3, 15 therefor inheriting the allowable subject matter disclosed in claims 3, 15.
Claims 6-8, 18 would be allowable based on the dependence on claims 5, 17 therefor inheriting the allowable subject matter disclosed in claims 5, 17.
Cruise( US20080304199A1) disclosed An overcurrent protection mechanism is provided for a battery pack that may removably attaches to a power tool. The mechanism includes: one or more battery cells disposed in a battery pack; a current sensor configured to sense current supplied by the battery; a switch in a circuit path with the battery cells; and a battery control unit implemented as software instructions in a controller embedded in a battery pack. The battery control unit is configured to receive a signal indicative of current from the current sensor and control the switch to interrupt current flow from the battery cells as a function of current and time.
Vogel ( US20110317321A1) disclosed an electrical resistance, in particular an ohmic resistance, for guiding and limiting the short-circuit current in the event of a short circuit, a first switch, which is connected in parallel with the resistance, for bypassing the resistance when there is no short circuit in the power supply system, and a monitoring and control device for monitoring the current through the switch and for opening the switch when the current through the switch exceeds a predetermined limit value.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yu (US20220227256) disclosed a circuit for a traction battery of a vehicle, the circuit comprising: switching means configured to electrically interconnect in series a first cell set comprising one or more battery cells and a second cell set comprising one or more battery cells, and configured to electrically interconnect in parallel the first cell set and the second cell set; and the circuit comprising at least one component configured to control electrical energy transfer between the first cell set and the second cell set associated with the first cell set and the second cell set having unequal voltages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WENYUAN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/W.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
6/15/26
Prosecution Insights