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 .
1. Claims 1-10 are currently pending in this application.
Claims 1-10 are amended as filed on 07/03/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hafner et al. (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2017/0201077 A1), hereinafter Hafner, in view of Chen (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2023/0198934 A1).
2. With respect to claims 1 and 6, Hafner taught a battery system control apparatus (0050, the system BMS) comprising: a communication circuit configured to allow one or more battery management systems to communicate with a network switch connected to a network (0050); and a processor (0047).
However, Hafner did not explicitly state wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a check signal to internal Internet protocol addresses allocatable at the network switch through the communication circuit; receive a response signal to the check signal from at least one internal IP address among the allocatable internal IP addresses; and generate a medium access control address-identification information table by allocating a MAC address of a BMS of the one or more BMSs, included in the response signal, to identification information. On the other hand, Chen did teach wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a check signal to internal Internet protocol addresses allocatable at the network switch through the communication circuit (0019); receive a response signal to the check signal from at least one internal IP address among the allocatable internal IP addresses (0020); and generate a medium access control address-identification information table by allocating a MAC address of a BMS of the one or more BMSs, included in the response signal, to identification information (0021-0022 & 0147). Both of the systems of Hafner and Chen are directed towards battery/power management and therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing of the invention, to modify the teachings of Hafner, to utilize generating a MAC address table, as taught by Chen, in order to more efficiently manage controlled devices.
Claim(s) 2-5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hafner, in view of Chen, and in further view of David C. Plummer (as found in the applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement), hereinafter Plummer.
3. As for claims 2 and 7, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 1 and 6 (respectively). However, Hafner Hafner did not explicitly state wherein the communication circuit is further configured to receive a request signal for requesting communication with a second BMS from a first BMS among the one or more BMSs, and wherein the processor is further configured to control to allow communication between the first BMS and the second BMS when a MAC address of the second BMS is included in the MAC address-identification information table. On the other hand, Plummer did teach wherein the communication circuit is further configured to receive a request signal for requesting communication with a second BMS from a first BMS among the one or more BMSs, and wherein the processor is further configured to control to allow communication between the first BMS and the second BMS when a MAC address of the second BMS is included in the MAC address-identification information table (page 4, the packet generation section, where the routing teaches the requesting and the finding a pair step teaches the allowing access limitation. Accordingly, the devices being BMS devices were previously shown by Hafner: 0050 and the MAC address generation table was previously shown by Chen: 0147). Both of the systems of Chen and Plummer are directed towards address resolution and therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing of the invention, to modify the teachings of Hafner, to utilize allowing access between devices, as taught by Chen, in order to ensure that the devices are operating optimally.
4. As for claims 3 and 8, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 2 and 7 (respectively). In addition, Plummer taught wherein the communication circuit is further configured to transmit a communication-unallowed message to the first BMS when the MAC address of the second BMS is not included in the MAC address-identification information table (page 4, the packet generation section, where the routing teaches the requesting and the finding a pair step teaches the allowing access limitation).
5. As for claims 4 and 9, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 2 and 7 (respectively). In addition, Hafner taught wherein the first BMS is a battery system controller, and the battery system control apparatus and the BSC are integrated one device (0050, the system BMS).
6. As for claims 5 and 10, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 4 and 9 (respectively). In addition, Hafner taught wherein the BSC and the network switch are integrated as one device (0050).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(a) Hess et al. (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2022/0069368 A1), 0028.
(b) Huff (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2018/0351144 A1), 0077-0079.
(c) Margalit (Pre-Grant Publication No. US 2020/0402006 A1), 0146, 0201.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH L GREENE whose telephone number is (571)270-3730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 10:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Nicholas R. Taylor can be reached at 571 272-3889. 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.
/JOSEPH L GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
