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 .
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.
Claims 1-3 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US 20170366023) in view of Machida (JP2019125558).
Regarding claim 1 Tanaka teaches an energy storage unit for an energy storage system (see Fig. 1), the energy storage unit comprising: an energy storage bank which is connected to a power conversion device (see 8); and a bank management device (see 11), wherein the bank management device either: calculates, based on a current target value and a current measurement value of the energy storage bank, a current limit value to limit an excess of a current with respect to the current target value (see Fig. 3A); or calculates, based on a power target value and a power measurement value of the energy storage bank, a power limit value to limit an excess of power with respect to the power target value (see Fig. 3B).
Yet, Tanaka does not disclose using a previous current limit value or a previous current suppression value, and using a previous power limit value or a previous power suppression value.
However, Machida in the same field of charging and discharging control of a battery teaches using a previous current limit value or a previous current suppression value, and using a previous power limit value or a previous power suppression value (see Referring to FIG. 2, allowable current Ilim of battery 150 is calculated according to the charge / discharge history (here, charge history) of battery 150. Permissible current Ilim is a maximum current at which lithium metal is not deposited by lowering the negative electrode potential of battery 150 to the lithium reference potential (potential of lithium metal). and The allowable current Ilim (t) can be sequentially calculated by adding and subtracting the decrease term and the increase term for each operation cycle with respect to the allowable current (initial value Ilim (0)) in the state where there is no charge / discharge history. Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified TANAKA with the teachings of Machida having using a previous current limit value or a previous current suppression value, and using a previous power limit value or a previous power suppression value in order to prevent sudden, damaging electrical spikes by enforcing smooth, rate-limited transitions during operating state changes of charge and discharge.
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches wherein the bank management device either: acquires at least the current measurement value at a predetermined cycle and updates the current limit value of the energy storage bank, or acquires at least the power measurement value at a predetermined cycle and updates the power limit value of the energy storage bank (see 13, 14, 15, Fig. 1; Tanaka).
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches wherein the bank management device either: calculates the current limit value of the energy storage bank based on a difference of the current measurement value from the current target value of the energy storage bank and a ratio of the current measurement value to the current target value; or calculates the power limit value of the energy storage bank based on a difference of the power measurement value from the power target value of the energy storage bank and a ratio of the power measurement value to the power target value (see 13, 14, 15, Fig. 1; Tanaka).
Regarding claim 6 Tanaka teaches energy storage system which is connected to a power conversion device and stores electric energy, the energy storage system comprising: a plurality of energy storage units; and an integrated battery management device, each of the energy storage units comprising: an energy storage bank which is connected to the power conversion device; and a bank management device which is provided to correspond to the energy storage bank, wherein the integrated battery management device either: acquires or calculates a current limit value of each of the energy storage banks from the bank management device, and calculates a current limit value of the energy storage system based on the current limit value of each of the energy storage banks; or acquires or calculates a power limit value of each of the energy storage banks from the bank management device, and calculates a power limit value of the energy storage system based on the power limit value of each of the energy storage banks (see the rejection of claim 1).
However, Tanaka does not disclose based on a current target value and a current measurement value of the energy storage bank, and using a previous current limit value or a previous current suppression value, based on a power target value and a power measurement value of the energy storage bank, and using a previous power limit value or a previous power suppression value.
However, Machida in the same field of charging and discharging control of a battery teaches based on a current target value and a current measurement value of the energy storage bank, and using a previous current limit value or a previous current suppression value, based on a power target value and a power measurement value of the energy storage bank, and using a previous power limit value or a previous power suppression value (see Referring to FIG. 2, allowable current Ilim of battery 150 is calculated according to the charge / discharge history (here, charge history) of battery 150. Permissible current Ilim is a maximum current at which lithium metal is not deposited by lowering the negative electrode potential of battery 150 to the lithium reference potential (potential of lithium metal). and The allowable current Ilim (t) can be sequentially calculated by adding and subtracting the decrease term and the increase term for each operation cycle with respect to the allowable current (initial value Ilim (0)) in the state where there is no charge / discharge history. Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified TANAKA with the teachings of Machida having based on a current target value and a current measurement value of the energy storage bank, and using a previous current limit value or a previous current suppression value, based on a power target value and a power measurement value of the energy storage bank, and using a previous power limit value or a previous power suppression value in order to prevent sudden, damaging electrical spikes by enforcing smooth, rate-limited transitions during operating state changes of charge and discharge.
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches electric energy storage and conversion system comprising: a power conversion device (DC/DC Converter); and the energy storage system according to the energy storage system according to wherein the power conversion device either: controls a current of the energy storage system to be less than or equal to a current limit value of the energy storage system; or controls power of the energy storage system to be less than or equal to a power limit value of the energy storage system (see Fig.1 inside 1; Tanaka).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 6 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ELIM ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7114. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:30pm.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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.
/ELIM ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
