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 (IDS) submitted on 22 May 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed a “computer program product comprising code” which can include signals per se. The specification specifically states, paragraph 00101, “All or a portion of the examples disclosed herein may be implemented as a computer program 620 stored on a transitory or non-transitory computer-usable or computer-readable storage medium” which is not one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
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 1-7, 10-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0311706 by Takao in view of US 2022/0376518 by Xiao et al. (Xiao hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Takao discloses a computer system [see at least paragraphs 0048-0049, “a microcomputer”] for determining a compensation current [see at least paragraph 0083], wherein the compensation current [see at least paragraph 0083, “the discharge upper limit current value”] is adapted to counteract at least parts of a charge equalization current expected [see at least paragraph 0081, “cross current”] to be generated by an activation of an additional battery pack in parallel connection with one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least Figure 6, (20a) and (20b)], the computer system comprising processing circuitry configured to: calculate a compensation current limit for the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0078], the lower compensation current limit at least being based on a voltage and impedance of the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0089, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052] and a voltage and impedance of each one of the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052; Figure 7, (S11)-(S17)]; calculate an upper compensation current limit for the additional battery pack [see at least Figure 7, (S17)], the upper compensation current limit at least being based on a maximum discharge ability of an electrical system being powered by the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least Figure 7, (S18)], a maximum discharge ability of the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087, “discharge upper limit”], a voltage and impedance of the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0089, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052], and a voltage and impedance of each one of the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052].
Takao fails to disclose a lower compensation current limit and thus defining a range between the lower and upper compensation current limits. However, Xiao discloses a similar system for connecting parallel batteries [see at least Abstract] which employs a current range [see at least paragraph 0050, “The value Y can be selected in a certain range, that is, a certain system current is allowed when the battery packs are disconnected, so that the system can continue to operate, and at the same time the safety of system components can be ensured”] based off of system characteristics including voltage and internal resistance (impedance) [see at least paragraphs 0043-0044, “the value X1 needs to be calculated and determined according to the electrical characteristics of the system, such as the system voltage, the internal resistance of the battery packs”].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the parallel battery system of Takao to use the current range, as disclosed by Xiao, in order to maintain the current within an upper and lower limit. Thus, offering the benefit of a safe current range which provides protection to the components within the parallel battery system.
Regarding claim 2, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 1.
Takao wherein the current range is deterministic for each specific configuration of currently activated battery packs [see at least Figure 7, (S11)], and dynamically adaptable in response to a change in said each specific configuration [see at least paragraph 0084, “dynamic determining process”].
Regarding claim 3, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 2.
Takao discloses wherein said change is caused by one or more of: an increment or decrement in the number of currently activated battery packs [see at least Figure 7, (S19) and (S110)], a variation in internal cell resistance as a function of state of charge and temperature [see at least paragraphs 0061-0062, “SOC-charge upper limit current characteristics of cells E1 to En also depend on the temperature and the degree of degradation (SOH)”], and an increase in an ageing property of the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraphs 0061-0062, “the degree of degradation (SOH)”].
Regarding claim 4, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 1.
Takao discloses wherein the maximum discharge ability is determined based on a state of charge [see at least paragraph 0087, “Based on the SOC of battery pack 20 connected to pack relay RY1“] and a required power duration for the one or more currently activated battery packs powering the electrical system [see at least paragraph 0067, “traveling time”/“past travel data”].
Regarding claim 5, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 1.
Takao discloses wherein a voltage difference between the voltage of the additional battery pack and the voltage of each one of the one or more currently activated battery packs is below a minimum allowed voltage difference to close a controllable contactor of the additional battery pack [see at least paragraphs 0087-0089, “CCV”; Figure 7, (S13)-(S19)].
Regarding claim 6, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 5.
Takao discloses wherein the voltage difference is determined by performance conditions of the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0087].
Xiao discloses properties of the controllable contactor [see at least paragraph 0051, “maximum allowable impulse current of the contactor”].
Regarding claim 7, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to calculate the lower and upper compensation current limits using Kirchhoff's laws [Kirchhoff’s laws are a property of circuit analysis/design and are inherent in circuity calculations].
Regarding claim 8. The computer system of claim 7, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to calculate the lower compensation current limit using the following formula: IESSVnEy1-(Z,1),where IESS(min) is the lower compensation current limit, n is an activation number of the additional battery pack in relation to the one or more currently activated battery packs, vn is the voltage of the additional battery pack, and vj and RI is the voltage and resistance, respectively, of battery pack j from among the battery packs.
Regarding claim 10, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 1.
Takao discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: apply the compensation current to the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087]; and activate the additional battery pack [see at least Figure 7, (S19)].
Regarding claim 11, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 10.
Takao discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to activate the additional battery pack by controlling a closing of a controllable contactor [see at least Figure 6, (RY1b)] of a battery circuit to which the one or more currently activated battery packs are connected [see at least Figure 6].
Regarding claim 12, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 10.
Takao discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to apply the compensation current by controlling one or more controllable loads of a battery circuit to which the one or more currently activated battery packs are connected [see at least paragraph 0067; paragraph 0081].
Regarding claim 13, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 10.
Xiao discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to repeatedly determine the compensation current, apply the compensation current, and activate the additional battery pack, until a time-out condition is met [see at least paragraph 0046, “Such a process is repeated until all battery packs in the system are closed”].
Regarding claim 14, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 13.
Xiao discloses wherein the time-out condition is met once all battery packs included in an energy storage system or a HV component are activated [see at least paragraph 0046, “Such a process is repeated until all battery packs in the system are closed”].
Regarding claim 15, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 13.
Xiao discloses wherein the time-out condition is met once a battery circuit to which the one or more currently activated battery packs are connected has reached a maximum feasible current throughput [see at least paragraph 0051; paragraph 0069].
Regarding claim 17, Takao in view of Xiao teaches claim 1.
Takao discloses a vehicle [see at least paragraph 0031, “electric vehicle”].
Regarding claim 18, Takao discloses a computer-implemented method [see at least paragraphs 0048-0049, “a microcomputer”] for determining a compensation current [see at least paragraph 0083], wherein the compensation current [see at least paragraph 0083, “the discharge upper limit current value”] is adapted to counteract at least parts of a charge equalization current [see at least paragraph 0081, “cross current”] expected to be generated by an activation of an additional battery pack in parallel connection with one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least Figure 6, (20a) and (20b)], the computer-implemented method comprising: calculating a compensation current limit for the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0078], the compensation current limit at least being based on a voltage and impedance of the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0089, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052], and a voltage and impedance of each one of the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052; Figure 7, (S11)-(S17)]; calculating an upper compensation current limit for the additional battery pack [see at least Figure 7, (S17)], the upper compensation current limit being at least based on a maximum discharge ability of an electrical system being powered by the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087, “discharge upper limit”], a maximum discharge ability of the one or more currently activated battery packs, a voltage and impedance of the additional battery pack [see at least paragraph 0089, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052], and a voltage and impedance of each one of the one or more currently activated battery packs [see at least paragraph 0087, “CCV” (closed circuit voltage) and “the internal resistance” (impedance); paragraph 0052].
Takao fails to disclose a lower compensation current limit and thus defining a range between the lower and upper compensation current limits. However, Xiao discloses a similar system for connecting parallel batteries [see at least Abstract] which employs a current range [see at least paragraph 0050, “The value Y can be selected in a certain range, that is, a certain system current is allowed when the battery packs are disconnected, so that the system can continue to operate, and at the same time the safety of system components can be ensured”] based off of system characteristics including voltage and internal resistance (impedance) [see at least paragraphs 0043-0044, “the value X1 needs to be calculated and determined according to the electrical characteristics of the system, such as the system voltage, the internal resistance of the battery packs”].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the parallel battery system of Takao to use the current range, as disclosed by Xiao, in order to maintain the current within an upper and lower limit. Thus, offering the benefit of a safe current range which provides protection to the components within the parallel battery system.
Regarding claim 19, Takao in view of Xiao teaches claim 18.
Takao discloses a computer program product comprising program code [see at least paragraphs 0048 and 0055].
Regarding claim 20, Takao in view of Xiao teaches claim 18.
Takao discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing circuitry [see at least paragraphs 0048 and 0055].
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0311706 by Takao in view of US 2022/0376518 by Xiao et al. (Xiao hereinafter) in further view of US 2023/0182620 by Crosman et al. (Crosman hereinafter).
Regarding claim 16, Takao in view of Xiao teaches the computer system of claim 15.
Takao discloses maximum current throughput [see above], but Takao in view of Xiao fails to teach wherein in response to the battery circuit reaching the maximum feasible current throughput, the processing circuitry is configured to: introduce a delay timer during which no additional battery pack is activated, obtain battery data from a battery management system, and in response to the battery data indicating an increase in the maximum feasible current throughput, cancel the delay timer and cause a continued operation of repeatedly determining the compensation current, applying the compensation current, and activating additional battery packs. However, Crosman discloses a vehicle with multiple parallel battery packs [see at least Abstract] which repeatedly and sequentially activates the parallel battery packs [see at least paragraph 0020] which includes a delay time before activating the next parallel battery pack [see at least paragraph 0029, “The system controller circuit 252 waits to send the command to go online and continues to monitor the load voltage”] to avoid high inrush current [see at least paragraph 0011].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the parallel battery system of Takao in view of Xiao to include the delay time, as disclosed by Crosman, in order to reduce/eliminate inrush current. Thus, offering the benefit of protection for the components of the circuit and ensuring stable operation of the parallel battery system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claims 8-9 define a specific equation for how the upper and lower compensation current limit is calculated which is not found in the prior art.
Takao being the closes prior art discloses aspects of the invention including calculations and methods for compensation current limits. However, Takao fails to disclose the specific equations used in claims 8-9.
Xiao is also close prior art as it also discloses calculations and methods for compensation current limits. As above, Xiao fails to disclose the specific equations used in claims 8-9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tyagi et al. (US 2023/0179002) discloses balancing power between cells in a battery pack which uses a compensation current.
Hilligoss et al. (US 2021/0028503) discloses an active voltage balancing system between parallel battery packs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joel Barnett whose telephone number is (571)272-2879. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, Regis Betsch can be reached at 571-270-7101. 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.
/JOEL BARNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REGIS J BETSCH/SPE, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights