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 .
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “determine, based on a range loss estimation corresponding to an estimated power consumption during the sleep mode, a remaining range estimation of the vehicle.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can mentally estimate, based on a known sleep state power consumption rate and sleep state duration, a power consumption during the sleep time, and convert that into a loss in range and subsequently a remaining range estimation. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculations. Mental processes and mathematical concepts have been held as being abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not purport the improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology, is not applied by way of a particular machine, does not effect a tangible transformation in state of a particular article, and is not otherwise applied in some meaningful manner beyond being generally linked to a specific technological environment, namely vehicles (see MPEP 2106.05).
The claim includes additional elements of “an electronic control unit … comprising: one or more processing cores.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, amounts to a generic computing device. The invocation of generic computing components to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim further recites “enter a sleep state responsive to the vehicle entering a sleep mode, enter a run state from the sleep state responsive to the vehicle exiting the sleep mode.” These limitations, when read in light of the specification, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The concept of turning off a processor when the overall system turns off and turning the processor on when the system turns on is well known in the art, specifically in vehicles. As the vehicle powers off, so too do the systems of the vehicle, including processors.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “determine, based on the sensor data, the range loss estimation that corresponds to the power consumption measurement.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. As noted above in the rejection of claim 1, a human being can mentally estimate a loss in range of the vehicle based on a measured power consumption. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculation.
The claim further recites an additional element of “obtain, from one or more sensors of the vehicle, sensor data indicating a power consumption measurement during the sleep mode of the vehicle.” This limitation does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because mere data collection for use in an abstract idea has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “the one or more processing cores are configured to, responsive to determining the range loss estimation, provide the remaining range estimation of the vehicle to a device of a user.” The display of available information from the result of analysis has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g); see also Electric Power Group, LLC. v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Circ. 2016)).
Regarding claim 4, the claim does not recite any additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Rather, the claim merely specifies the sensors comprises a power sensor. The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “the one or more processing cores are configured to provide for display the remaining range estimation upon detection of an active drive state of the vehicle.” The display of available information from the result of analysis has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g); see also Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 6, the claim recites, in part, “wherein the range loss estimation is determined using the first coulomb count measurement and the second coulomb count measurement.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. As noted above in the rejection of claim 1, a human being can mentally estimate a loss in range of the vehicle based on a measured power consumption. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculation.
The claim recites additional elements of “obtain a first coulomb count measurement at a first location between a high voltage battery pack and a vehicle power load using a first sensor of a plurality of sensors; and obtain a second coulomb count measurement at a second location between a low voltage battery pack and the vehicle power load using a second sensor of the plurality of sensors.” The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 7, the claim does not recite any additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Rather, the claim merely specifies the sources of the sensor data. The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 8, the claim does not recite any additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Rather, the claim merely specifies the sources of the sensor data. The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites “the remaining range estimation is determined based on a predetermined sleep state power consumption rate and a duration of the sleep mode.” As noted above in the rejection of claim 1, this limitation is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can mentally estimate, based on a known sleep state power consumption rate and sleep state duration, a power consumption during the sleep time, and convert that into a loss in range and subsequently a remaining range estimation. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculations.
The claim further recites “determine, responsive to the vehicle entering an active drive state following the vehicle exiting the sleep mode, a state of charge of a battery of the vehicle; modify the remaining range estimation into an updated remaining range estimation based on the state of charge of the battery.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is also a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can determine what the state of charge of the battery is and update the remaining range estimation based on that state of charge using a known prediction formula that translates SOC into distance.
The claim recites an additional element of “provide for display the updated remaining range estimation.” The display of available information from the result of analysis has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g); see also Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites “the one or more processing cores are configured to determine an updated range loss estimation based on the updated remaining range estimation.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can mentally estimate a range loss from a remaining range estimation by subtracting the remaining range estimation from a previous remaining range estimation. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of a calculation in the aforementioned manner.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites “the one or more processing cores are configured to update the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate using the updated range loss estimation.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human can mentally update the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate by simply calculating a new rate based on the updated range loss estimation and the sleep duration time.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate is iteratively updated after each update to the range loss estimation.” As noted above in the rejection of claim 11, this limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human can mentally update the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate by simply calculating a new rate based on the updated range loss estimation and the sleep duration time.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites, in part, “determining, by the one or more processing cores and based on the coulomb counting, a range loss estimation that corresponds to the state of charge loss during the sleep mode of the vehicle.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can mentally estimate a power consumption during the sleep time based on a difference in coulomb counting during the sleep time. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculation. Mental processes and mathematical concepts have been held as being abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not purport the improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology, is not applied by way of a particular machine, does not effect a tangible transformation in state of a particular article, and is not otherwise applied in some meaningful manner beyond being generally linked to a specific technological environment, namely vehicles (see MPEP 2106.05).
The claim recites additional elements of “setting, responsive to a vehicle entering a sleep mode, one or more processing cores of an electronic control unit of the vehicle to a sleep state” and “waking, responsive to a vehicle exiting the sleep mode, the one or more processing cores to a run state from the sleep state.” These limitations, when read in light of the specification, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The concept of turning off a processor when the overall system turns off and turning the processor back on when the vehicle is started is well known in the art, specifically in vehicles. As the vehicle powers off, so too do the systems of the vehicle, including processors.
The claimed “one or more processing cores”, in light of the specification, are generic computing components. The invocation of generic computing components to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim recites an additional element of “performing coulomb counting using one or more sensors to monitor a state of charge loss during the sleep mode of the vehicle.” The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “obtaining, from the one or more sensors, sensor data indicating a power consumption measurement during the sleep mode of the vehicle, wherein the range loss estimation corresponds to the power consumption measurement.” This limitation does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because mere data collection using known sources or techniques for use in an abstract idea has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites, in part, “determining, by the one or more processing cores and based on the range loss estimation, a remaining range estimation.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can mentally determine a remaining range estimation by subtracting the range loss estimation from a previous remaining range estimation. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of a calculation in the aforementioned manner.
The claim recites an additional element of “providing for display the remaining range estimation upon detection of an active drive state of the vehicle.” The display of available information from the result of analysis has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g); see also Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “performing the coulomb counting comprises: obtaining a first coulomb count measurement at a first location between a high voltage battery pack and a vehicle power load using a first sensor of a plurality of sensors; and obtaining a second coulomb count measurement at a second location between a low voltage battery pack and the vehicle power load using a second sensor of the plurality of sensors, wherein the range loss estimation is determined using the first coulomb count measurement and the second coulomb count measurement.” The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group). Furthermore, as noted above in the rejection of claim 1, a human being can mentally estimate a loss in range of the vehicle based on a measured power consumption. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculation.
Regarding claim 17, the claim does not recite any additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Rather, the claim merely specifies the sources of the sensor data. The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 18, the claim does not recite any additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Rather, the claim merely specifies the sources of the sensor data. The collection of available information using known sources or techniques has been held as being insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 19, the claim recites, in part, “determine, based on a predetermined sleep state power consumption rate and a duration of the sleep mode, a remaining range estimation.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can mentally estimate, based on a known sleep state power consumption rate and sleep state duration, a power consumption during the sleep time, and convert that into a loss in range and subsequently a remaining range estimation. Additionally or alternatively, this limitation is a mathematical operation in the form of performing the aforementioned calculations. Mental processes and mathematical concepts have been held as being abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)).
The claim further recites “determine, responsive to the electric vehicle entering an active drive state following the electric vehicle exiting the sleep mode, a state of charge of a battery of the electric vehicle” and “modify the remaining range estimation into an updated remaining range estimation based on the state of charge of the battery.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is also a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can determine what the state of charge of the battery is and update the remaining range estimation based on that state of charge using a known prediction formula that translates SOC into distance.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not purport the improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology, is not applied by way of a particular machine, does not effect a tangible transformation in state of a particular article, and is not otherwise applied in some meaningful manner beyond being generally linked to a specific technological environment, namely vehicles (see MPEP 2106.05).
The claim includes additional elements of “an electronic control unit comprising: one or more processing cores.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, amounts to a generic computing device. The invocation of generic computing components to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim further recites “enter a sleep state responsive to the electric vehicle entering a sleep mode, enter a run state from the sleep state responsive to the electric vehicle exiting the sleep mode.” These limitations, when read in light of the specification, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The concept of turning off a processor when the overall system turns off and turning the processor on when the system turns on is well known in the art, specifically in vehicles. As the vehicle powers off, so too do the systems of the vehicle, including processors.
The claim further recites an additional element of “provide for display the updated remaining range estimation.” The display of available information from the result of analysis has been held as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g); see also Electric Power Group).
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “modify a range loss estimation into an updated range loss estimation based on the updated remaining range estimation.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is also a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human being can determine an updated range loss estimation by determining the difference between the updated remaining range estimation from a previous remaining range estimation.
The claim further recites “update the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate using the updated range loss estimation, wherein the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate is iteratively updated after each update to the range loss estimation.” This limitation, when read in light of the specification, is a mental process capable of being performed in the human mind. A human can mentally update the predetermined sleep state power consumption rate by simply calculating a new rate based on the updated range loss estimation and the sleep duration time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kwak (US 2024/0190369 A1) generally teaches:
Apparatus and method embodiments for reducing current-drainage from a battery of a vehicle, can include a network monitor configured to monitor a network state, a vehicle usage pattern learner configured to determine a usage pattern of the vehicle by time of each day of a week based on a monitoring result of the network monitor and determine cut-off load ranges for respective sections of the usage pattern to store in a memory, and a cut-off determiner configured to compare a time point at which the vehicle is turned off to a time range of each of the sections and accordingly determine at least one power load to cut off. In an embodiment, the vehicle usage pattern learner can be further configured to determine the sections based on a vehicle usage probability.
Kwon (US 2024/0169769 A1) generally teaches:
Disclosed is a vehicle control apparatus, method, and system. The vehicle control apparatus may include a communication control device that sets, based on a host vehicle satisfying a power-off condition, a sleep state non-entry detection time. The sleep state non-entry detection time may be based on a vehicle state of the host vehicle. The vehicle control apparatus may detect at least one controller, of a plurality of controllers of the host vehicle, that has not entered a sleep state after the sleep state non-entry detection time has elapsed, and transmit, to the power control device, information on the at least one controller. The power control device may, based on the information on the at least one controller, interrupt power for operation of the at least one controller.
Tenma et al. (US 2020/0180469 A1) generally teaches:
This control device for an electric vehicle is provided with: a discharge control unit which, when the electric vehicle has been turned off, if the SOC of the battery is within a prescribed range in which the battery is prone to deteriorate, performs control for discharging the battery until the SOC has left the prescribed range; a travelable distance calculation unit which calculates the travelable distance of the electric vehicle using the SOC and a travel coefficient; and a travel coefficient correction unit which, before and after performing control for discharging the battery is performed by the discharge control unit, corrects the travel coefficient such that the travelable distance calculated by the travelable distance calculation unit is reduced.
Liu et al. (CN 116101068 A) generally teaches:
The application claims a battery electric quantity calibration system and method, electric vehicle, relating to the technical field of electric vehicle, the system comprises a signal connection of electric quantity calibration module and electric quantity management module; the electric quantity calibration module is used for collecting the battery power-off information or battery non-power-off information of the electric vehicle, and when the electric vehicle is powered on again, sending battery power-off information or battery non-power-off information to the electric quantity management module; after the electric vehicle is electrified again, the electric quantity management module can receive the battery power-off information or battery non-power-off information sent by the electric quantity calibration module, and the electric quantity management module will re-calculate the residual electric quantity of the battery according to the battery power-off information or battery non-power-off information, so that it is convenient to calibrate the remaining electric quantity remained when the electric quantity management module is cut off last time, so that the electric vehicle can accurately display the residual electric quantity of the current battery by recalibration method after replacing the battery or battery.
Yan et al. (CN 114954126 A) generally teaches:
The application claims a power supply method of starting battery of electric vehicle and power supply control device, the power supply method comprises: when the current voltage of the starting battery of the target electric vehicle is less than the voltage threshold, turn on DCDC converter, the power of the power battery is sent to the starting battery by the DCDC converter to supply power to the starting battery, and real-time obtaining the starting battery receives the charging electric quantity in the power supply process; determining whether the power compensation quantity reaches the threshold value of the power compensation quantity; if so, stopping the power battery to supply power to the starting battery; if not, continuing to supply power to the starting battery until the charging electric quantity of the battery reaches the compensation electric quantity threshold value. The technical solution provided by the application is capable of determining the power supply quantity threshold value, so as to control the switch of the DCDC converter, realizing the power supply control of the starting battery, improving the power supply performance of the electric vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANSHUL SOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-9411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7-5 ET.
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.
/ANSHUL SOOD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights