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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were/was submitted on 03/20/2025. The information disclosure statement(s) have/has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Europe on 04/17/2024.
Status of Application
Claims 1-19 are pending.
No claims are amended.
No claims are withdrawn from consideration.
No claims are cancelled.
No claims are added.
Claims 1, and 17, are independent claims.
Claims 1-19 will be examined.
This Non-Final Office action is in response to the “Claims” dated 03/20/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim(s) 1, and 17, is/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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the first predetermined lower voltage” in line 11. Claim 17 recites the limitation “the first predetermined lower voltage” in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The claim(s) has/have been interpreted as best understood by the Examiner as “a first predetermined lower voltage”.
The dependent claims 2-16, and 18-19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to resolve the deficiencies of the independent claims 1, and 17.
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(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWAMURA, US 20190113581, herein further known as Kawamura, in view of TAKEHIKO, JP 2013258296, herein further known as Takehiko, further in view of GEORGE-KELSO, EP 2093582, herein further known as George.
Regarding claim 1, Kawamura discloses a computer system comprising processing circuitry (¶¶ [0008-0010], [0032-0047], battery ECU) configured to: receive a request for a vehicle to enter a discharge/charge operational mode while a vehicle charging port of the vehicle is coupled to an external charging station configured to operate in a vehicle-to-grid (V2G) mode (¶¶ [0007-0008], [0015-0023], [0026-0029], see electric power system, FIG. 1 (i.e. V2G), [0055-0058], ECU 56 executes, execution request of the learning process, see also FIG. 6, steps1-5); and in response to the request for the vehicle to enter the discharge/charge operational mode (¶¶ [0007-0008], [0015-0023], [0026-0029], [0055-0058]): communicate a first discharge request to the external charging station to discharge energy from a battery in the vehicle (¶¶ [0069], discharge process, see also FIG. 6, step 6) to a power grid coupled to the external charging station (¶¶ [0027-0028], external charger 9, and electric power system (i.e. grid), FIG. 1) at a current in a discharge mode (¶¶ [0007], "discharge current" [0060], see also FIG. 2, [0069], discharge process, see also FIG. 6, step 6, [0060] which defines that the total amount of discharge current is integrated along the discharging process); detect an overall voltage of the battery at the first predetermined lower voltage in the discharge mode (¶¶ [0056] battery is discharged until it reaches a lower limit which depends on whether the battery reaches a predetermined lower limit voltage); and in response to detecting the overall voltage of the battery at the first predetermined lower voltage in the discharge mode (FIG. 6, step 6, discharging of the battery until a lower limit is reached): communicate a second discharge request to the external charging station to discharge energy from the battery in the vehicle to the power grid in the discharge mode (¶¶ [0069] invoke the external power supply function, electric power is supplied from the high-voltage battery 2 to the electric load 96 to discharge the high-voltage battery 2 until the battery voltage detected by the battery voltage sensor 62 reaches the lower limit voltage); detect a voltage of cells of the battery at the first predetermined lower voltage in the discharge mode; and in response to detecting the voltage of the cells of the battery at the first predetermined lower voltage in the discharge mode (¶¶ [0056] battery is discharged until it reaches a lower limit which depends on whether the battery reaches a predetermined lower limit voltage): communicate the charge request to the external charging station to deliver the charge energy to the battery from the power grid in the charge mode (FIG. 6, step 4); and measure the discharged energy from the battery in the discharge mode (FIG. 6, step 7); detect the battery at a discharge mode; and in response to detecting the battery at the first predetermined lower voltage in the discharge mode (FIG. 6, step 6): communicate a charge request to the external charging station to deliver charge energy to the battery from the power grid at a charge mode (FIG. 6, step 4); and measure the charge energy delivered to the battery in the charge mode (FIG. 6, step 5); detect when the battery is at a second predetermined higher voltage in the charge mode (FIG. 6, step 11); and in response to detecting the battery is at the in the charge mode: disable the discharge/charge operational mode (FIG. 6, step 55).
However, Kawamura does not explicitly state deactivate power consuming devices in the vehicle not essential to the vehicle operating in the discharge/charge operational mode, a first higher steady state current, a first lower steady state current lower than the first higher steady state current, second steady state current and second predetermined higher voltage.
Takehiko teaches deactivate power consuming devices in the vehicle not essential to the vehicle operating in the discharge/charge operational mode (battery is not operated, error of the estimated capacity | capacitance can be made small).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kawamura the deactivate power consuming devices in the vehicle not essential to the vehicle operating in the discharge/charge operational mode as taught by Takehiko.
One would be motivated to modify Kawamura in view of Takehiko for the reasons stated in Takehiko, more robust methods and systems wherein estimation accuracy of the charging rate is improved by correcting the first charging rate or the second charging rate.
Furthermore, George teaches a first higher steady state current, a first lower steady state current lower than the first higher steady state current, second steady state current and second predetermined higher voltage (discharge curves for different values, see FIG. 5, and FIG. 8).It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Kawamura the first higher steady state current, a first lower steady state current lower than the first higher steady state current, second steady state current and second predetermined higher voltage as taught by George.
One would be motivated to modify Kawamura in view of George for the reasons stated in George, more robust methods and systems used to refine a coarse estimate of a change in the proportion of battery capacity used.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kawamura discloses the claimed invention except for lower voltage is approximately 610-620 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current is between 5 A and 50 A. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use lower voltage is approximately 610-620 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current is between 5 A and 50 A, since applicant has not disclosed that lower voltage is approximately 610-620 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current is between 5 A and 50 A solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with other similar values.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kawamura discloses detecting the battery at the first predetermined lower voltage in the discharge mode (¶ [0056]), wait for a predetermined amount of time before communicating the charge request to the external charging station (¶¶ [0058], [0061], [0068], [0070], waiting period).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kawamura discloses detect when the battery is at a second predetermined higher voltage in the charge mode; and in response to detecting the battery is at the second predetermined higher voltage in the charge mode (FIG. 6, step 11): disable the discharge/charge operational mode (FIG. 6, step 55).
Regarding claim 5, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 5 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 5 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Kawamura discloses the claimed invention except for lower voltage is approximately 710-720 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current lower is greater than 5 A. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use lower voltage is approximately 710-720 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current lower is greater than 5 A, since applicant has not disclosed that lower voltage is approximately 710-720 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current lower is greater than 5 A solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with other similar values.
Regarding claim 7, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 7 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 7 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above, see also figure 6, steps S4 and S5).
Regarding claim 8, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 8 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above. Furthermore, the additional step of lowering the current in between the overall battery voltage reaching the higher voltage threshold and a voltage of cells reaching the higher voltage threshold, which constitutes merely realization or implementation choices that come within the scope of the customary practice followed by persons skilled in the art, especially as the advantages thus achieved can be readily contemplated in advance.
Regarding claim 9, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 9 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above. Furthermore, figure 2 and accompanying [0060]: "the battery capacity calculation part 672 calculates the battery capacity estimation value, which is the estimated value of the current battery capacity of the high-voltage battery 2, by accumulating the discharge current of the high-voltage battery 2 "; see also [ 0037] : "The battery ECU 60 is a microcomputer that is responsible for the control related to the estimation of the internal state of the high-voltage battery 2 (more specifically, the SOC [ % ] of the high voltage battery 2)").
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 9 above.
Kawamura discloses the claimed invention except for lower voltage is approximately 610-620 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current is between 5 A and 50 A. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use lower voltage is approximately 610-620 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current is between 5 A and 50 A, since applicant has not disclosed that lower voltage is approximately 610-620 Volts (V);the first lower steady state current is less than 5 Amps (A); and the steady state current is between 5 A and 50 A solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with other similar values.
Regarding claim 11, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 11 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 12 can clearly perform the same as the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 13-15, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Claims 13-15 define the scheduling of the discharge and charge cycles based on the cost or on the demand of the energy, which is considered measures which come within the scope of the customary practice followed by persons skilled in the art. Hence, these measures constitute straightforward design options.
Regarding claims 16, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Kawamura discloses a vehicle comprising the computer system (¶¶ [0026-0030], vehicle V, see also FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 17, all limitations have been examined with respect to the apparatus in claim 1. The method/steps taught/disclosed in claim 17 can clearly perform on the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 18, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 17 above.
Kawamura discloses further computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by processing circuitry (¶ [0063], procedure of the learning process which learns the correlation characteristic, used on ECU)
Regarding claims 19, the combination of Kawamura, Takehiko, and George, disclose all elements of claim 17 above.
Kawamura discloses further non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions executed by processing circuitry (¶ [0005], large memory to store maps).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Terry Buse whose telephone number is (313)446-6647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 PM 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, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/TERRY C BUSE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights