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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on March 21, 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim 1 is independent.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/21/2025, 04/15/2025 and 06/21/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Reference character K1 in Figure 3.
Reference character K2 in Figure 3.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16, line 2, should be changed to “comprise:”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 11 is 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 11 recites the limitation "The charging system" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-12, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kirleis (US-20220013814-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kirleis teaches a battery management system (see Kirleis, Abstract, figure 7a, paragraphs 83-87, regarding battery management system 700) including a tangible, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon that, in response to execution by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraphs 90, 95, 120 and 129, regarding “the battery pack controller 730 may comprise a plurality of bus output switches 768, a micro-controller unit (MCU) 708 (one or more processors) operatively coupled with a memory device (e.g., RAM, ROM, flash memory, etc.)” and “control algorithms (instructions) to ensure that the battery cells 772 in the system are operating with in safe operating conditions”) comprising:
performing, by the one or more processors, a capacity check cycle on a battery system (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 85, regarding battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 performing state of charge (SoC) and state of health (SoH) updates on a periodic basis), the battery system configured to power a propulsion system of an electrically powered aircraft (see Kirleis, figures 1a, 1b and 7c, paragraphs 83-85, regarding battery management system 700 onboard solar-powered aircraft 100a and/or 100b, exemplary of an electrically powered aircraft), the capacity check cycle including:
establishing, by the one or more processors, a first initial state of charge of the battery system (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 85, regarding battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 performing state of charge (SoC) and state of health (SoH) updates on a periodic basis, wherein the commencement of the updates establishes a first initial state of charge),
charging, by the one or more processors and through a charging system, the battery system to a first voltage (see Kirleis, figure 9b, paragraph 134, regarding at step 912, charging system charges batteries with lowest SoC/CCV (closed-circuit voltage) first until a target output (a first) voltage is achieved),
tapering, by the one or more processors, the charging of the battery
system from the charging system until a current reaches a set amperage (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 92, regarding “limiting charge current at the end of charge”, exemplary of tapering charging based on an amperage threshold), and
discharging, by the one or more processors, the battery system to a second voltage (see Kirleis, figure 9b, paragraph 126, regarding at step 812, charging system discharges batteries with highest SoC/CCV (closed-circuit voltage) first until a target output (a second) voltage is achieved); and
calculating an estimated battery capacity of the battery system based on battery data from the capacity check cycle (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 116-117, regarding “battery supervisory circuit 732, however, tracks impedance/resistance and capacity of each battery cell 772 over time” wherein “a coulomb counting method then calculates the remaining capacity simply by accumulating the charge transferred in or out of the battery”, exemplary of calculating estimated battery capacity from check cycle battery data).
Regarding claim 2, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including wherein the operations further comprise transmitting, by the one or more processors, the estimated battery capacity of the battery system to the charging system (see Kirleis, figures 7a and 7b, paragraphs 116-117 and 129-134, regarding “battery supervisory circuit 732, however, tracks impedance/resistance and capacity of each battery cell 772 over time” sent (transmitted) from MCU 708 (processors) of battery pack controller 730).
Regarding claim 3, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including wherein the operations further comprise allowing, by the one or more processors, the battery system to rest between the tapering of the charging and the discharging the battery system for a period of time prior to the discharging the battery system (see Kirleis, figures 7a and 7b, paragraph 114, regarding battery supervisory circuit 732 performing extending battery life through rest periods by charging a subset of battery cells 732 at a given time, while other cells are rested (bypassed from charging)).
Regarding claim 4, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 3, including wherein an average temperature of the battery system falls below a threshold average temperature in response to the allowing the battery system to rest (see Kirleis, figures 7a, 7b and 8, paragraphs 120-121, regarding step 802, “the battery supervisory circuit 732 takes temperature measurements of the various battery cells 772 and bypasses, via the battery switches 762, battery cells 772 that fall outside of a predetermined thermal operating range (thresholds)”, thus allowing these battery cells to rest).
Regarding claim 5, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 4, including wherein the threshold average temperature is less than 90 °F (32.2 °C) (see Kirleis, figures 7a, 7b and 8, paragraphs 120-121, regarding step 802, “In this example, a battery cell 772 is bypassed (rested) if the temperature of the battery cell 772 measured by its associated temperature sensor 758 is less than 4° F. or greater than 140° F. (i.e., outside the thermal operating range)”, for example, a temperature of 90 °F falls between this threshold range).
Regarding claim 7, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including wherein the operations further comprise recharging, by the one or more processors and through the charging system, the battery system to a second initial state of charge (see Kirleis, figures 7a, 7b and 8, paragraphs 95 and 116, regarding battery supervisory circuit 732 balance (re)charging battery packs based on varied cell degradation over time, therefore recharges will be to a different state from a first state, for example, to a second state of a “degraded” battery).
Regarding claim 8, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including wherein the operations further comprise receiving, by the one or more processors, a maintenance testing command from the charging system prior to performing the capacity check cycle (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 84-85, 95 and 118, regarding battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 continuously evaluating state of charge (SoC) and state of health (SoH) updates on a periodic basis and sending data/commands (for example a maintenance testing command, when a cell is estimated/predicted to be failing at a higher rate than other cells) to the battery supervisory circuit 732).
Regarding claim 10, Kirleis also teaches a battery power management unit for the electrically powered aircraft (see Kirleis, figures 1a, 1b and 7c, paragraphs 83-85, regarding battery management system 700 onboard solar-powered aircraft 100a and/or 100b, exemplary of an electrically powered aircraft), the battery power management unit comprising:
the battery management system of claim 1 as taught by Kirleis; and
the battery system in electrical communication with the battery management system, the battery system configured to power the propulsion system of the electrically powered aircraft (see Kirleis, figures 1a, 1b and 7c, paragraph 83, regarding “solar-powered aircraft 100a, 100b can include a battery management system 700 to regulate the output voltage of a multi series-connected (electrical communication) reconfigurable battery system (e.g., battery pack assembly 202)”).
Regarding claim 11, Kirleis also teaches the charging system (see Kirleis, figure 9b, paragraph 134, regarding at step 912, charging system charges batteries with lowest SoC/CCV (closed-circuit voltage) first until a target output (a first) voltage is achieved), comprising:
the battery management system of claim 1 as taught by Kirleis; and
a charging battery system electrically coupled to the battery management
system, the charging battery system configured to charge the battery system that is configured to power the propulsion system of the electrically powered aircraft (see Kirleis, figures 1a, 1b and 7c, paragraphs 83-85 and 129, regarding battery management system 700 onboard solar-powered aircraft 100a and/or 100b, exemplary of an electrically powered aircraft, wherein battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 (electrically coupled) to charge battery pack 212 (battery system configured to power the propulsion system of aircraft 100a/100b)).
Regarding claim 12, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including further comprising repeating the performing the capacity check cycle on the battery system after a set operational interval (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 85, regarding battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 performing state of charge (SoC) and state of health (SoH) updates on a periodic basis (for example, at repeated intervals)).
Regarding claim 15, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including wherein the operations further comprise:
repeating, by the one or more processors, the performing the capacity check cycle for a plurality of battery systems, each of the plurality of battery systems corresponding to the electrically powered aircraft configured to be powered by the respective battery system in the plurality of battery systems (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 83-85 and 129, regarding battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 performing state of charge (SoC) and state of health (SoH) updates on a periodic basis (for example, at repeated intervals)) with each battery system of a plurality of batteries (battery packs 212a thru 212f) associated with an electrically powered aircraft), and
compiling, by the one or more processors, a capacity data for each of the plurality of battery systems (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraphs 83-85, 116-117 and 129, regarding “battery supervisory circuit 732, however, tracks impedance/resistance and capacity of each battery cell 772 over time” wherein “a coulomb counting method then calculates the remaining capacity simply by accumulating the charge transferred in or out of the battery”, exemplary of calculating estimated battery capacity from check cycle battery data for each of the plurality of battery systems (battery packs 212a thru 212f)).
Regarding claim 18, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, including wherein the operations further comprise:
receiving, by the one or more processors, a second estimated battery capacity from an aircraft battery management system, the second estimated battery capacity calculated by the aircraft battery management system during operation of the electrically powered aircraft (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 83-85, regarding battery pack controller 730 of battery management system 700 performing state of charge (SoC) and state of health (SoH) updates on a periodic basis (for example, at repeated intervals), such that, for example, while electrically powered aircraft operation has elapsed with a reduction in battery charge, a second estimated capacity); and
calibrating, by the one or more processors, the estimated battery capacity based on the second estimated battery capacity (see Kirleis, figure 7a, paragraph 116-117, regarding “battery supervisory circuit 732, however, tracks impedance/resistance and capacity of each battery cell 772 over time” wherein “a coulomb counting method then calculates the remaining capacity simply by accumulating the charge transferred in or out of the battery”, exemplary of calibrating estimated battery capacity from subsequent (a second) estimated capacity).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirleis (US-20220013814-A1) in view of Ijaz (US-20220111759-A1).
Regarding claim 6, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, except wherein the discharging the battery system is at a substantially constant rate of discharge.
However, Ijaz remedies this shortfall with a teaching of controlled discharging rate based on battery capacities (see Ijaz, figures 1 and 5B, paragraphs 51 and 77, regarding battery management system (BMS) 104 controlling discharge at constant rates, such as, for example discharging at high (substantially) C-rates 522).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at in the art the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the battery management system of Kirleis to further comprise the discharging constant rates of Ijaz because this provides user control over the level or rate of battery performance degradation to optimize battery usage over time, therefore, modified Kirleis enables wherein the discharging the battery system is at a substantially constant rate of discharge.
Regarding claim 20, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, except wherein the performing the capacity check cycle is facilitated by shuttling current between the charging system and the battery system through a bi-directional direct current (DC) / DC converter.
However, Ijaz remedies this shortfall with a teaching of a battery management system utilizing bi-direction DC-DC converters for managing current flow and/or isolation and throttle contribution (see Ijaz, figures 1 and 5A, paragraphs 51 and 72-73, regarding battery management system (BMS) 104 using a bi-directional DC-DC converter 502).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the battery management system of Kirleis to further comprise utilization of bi-directional DC-DC converter of Ijaz because this improves operational safety by controlling/isolating current flow when a fire hazard anomaly occurs, therefore, modified Kirleis enables wherein the performing the capacity check cycle is facilitated by shuttling current between the charging system and the battery system through a bi-directional direct current (DC) / DC converter.
Claims 9, 13-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirleis (US-20220013814-A1) in view of Sperling (US-20170139015-A1).
Regarding claim 9, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, except further comprising updating a displayed battery capacity of the battery system with the estimated battery capacity of the battery system.
However, Sperling remedies this shortfall with a teaching of displaying state of health of a battery (for example, estimated capacity) with color coded alarm/alert indicators at the battery or transmitting to the cockpit (see Sperling, figures 2-3, paragraphs 20 and 49-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the battery management system of Kirleis to further comprise the display system of Sperling because this improves operational safety with additional information for situational awareness, therefore, modified Kirleis enables further comprising updating a displayed battery capacity of the battery system with the estimated battery capacity of the battery system.
Regarding claim 13, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 1, except wherein the operations further comprise: comparing the estimated battery capacity of the battery system to a threshold capacity of the battery system; and generating an alert in response to the estimated battery capacity falling below the threshold capacity of the battery system.
However, Sperling remedies this shortfall with a teaching of displaying state of health of a battery (for example, estimated capacity) with color coded alarm/alert indicators at the battery or transmitting to the cockpit (see Sperling, figures 2-3, paragraphs 20 and 49-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the battery management system of Kirleis to further comprise the display/alarm/alert system of Sperling because this improves operational safety with additional information for situational awareness, therefore, modified Kirleis enables wherein the operations further comprise: comparing the estimated battery capacity of the battery system to a threshold capacity of the battery system; and generating an alert in response to the estimated battery capacity falling below the threshold capacity of the battery system (see Sperling, figures 2-3, paragraphs 20 and 49-50, regarding a state of health value is below a critical value (for example, a threshold capacity), the battery 11 is no longer airworthy and a red LED is indicated as an alert).
Regarding claim 14, modified Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 13, including wherein the threshold capacity of the battery system is associated with an airworthiness standard for the battery system (see Sperling, figures 2-3, paragraphs 20 and 49-50, regarding a state of health value is below a critical value (for example, a threshold capacity), the battery 11 is no longer airworthy and a red LED is indicated as an alert).
Regarding claim 19, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 18, excluding wherein the operations further comprise transmitting the estimated battery capacity to a display device in a cockpit of the electrically powered aircraft.
However, Sperling remedies this shortfall with a teaching of displaying state of health of a battery (for example, estimated capacity) with color coded alarm/alert indicators at the battery or transmitting to the cockpit (see Sperling, figures 2-3, paragraphs 20 and 49-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the battery management system of Kirleis to further comprise the display/alarm/alert system of Sperling because this improves operational safety with additional information for situational awareness, therefore, modified Kirleis enables wherein the operations further comprise transmitting the estimated battery capacity to a display device in a cockpit of the electrically powered aircraft.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirleis (US-20220013814-A1) in view of Hettrich (US-20200168959-A1).
Regarding claim 16, Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 15, except wherein the operations further comprises: determining, by the one or more processors, a probability distribution based on the capacity data for each of the plurality of battery systems; and determining a maintenance interval for a newly manufactured set of battery systems based on the probability distribution.
However, Sperling remedies this shortfall with a teaching of utilizing multivariate statistical analysis, for example using probability distributions to determine confidence levels for battery maintenance (see Hattrich, figures 4-5, paragraph 121, 148 and 173-175).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the battery management system of Kirleis to further comprise the statistical analysis of Hattrich because this improves the determination accuracy of when to conduct maintenance on the batteries, therefore, modified Kirleis enables wherein the operations further comprises: determining, by the one or more processors, a probability distribution based on the capacity data for each of the plurality of battery systems; and determining a maintenance interval for a newly manufactured set of battery systems based on the probability distribution.
Regarding claim 17, modified Kirleis teaches the battery management system of claim 16, including, wherein the maintenance interval is based on a confidence level of a capacity of each of the newly manufactured set of battery systems being above a threshold capacity after the maintenance interval (see Hattrich, figures 4-5, paragraph 121, 148 and 173-175, regarding “when a maintenance determination is made to allow for removal of the battery from the device”).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached form PTO-892.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER NING whose telephone number is (408) 918-7664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Peter D. Nolan can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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.
/P.Y.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
August 16, 2026
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights