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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually (Beaston, Willson, and Robinson), one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Regarding the applicant’s arguments against Willson, it is stated that Kim “does not teach or suggest the claimed current values”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kim states in ¶0069 that the battery protection circuit 23, which receives control signals from the BMS 22, controls a flow of current based on the received control. Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand this control signal to include current values.
Furthermore, applicant argues that Kim “does not teach or suggest … cumulative-amount switching conditions”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. It appears the applicant is affording a narrower interpretation of the term accumulative charging/discharging amount than that afforded by the examiner. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the term accumulated charging/discharging amount may be understood to mean a battery state of charge amount, and therefore Kim discloses the charge and discharge limits as presented in the rejection made in the prior office action. It would also be understood that the first discharging current value or second charging current value would be transmitted at a time when the first accumulative charging/discharging values are equal to the corresponding thresholds, e.g. a battery at the threshold H1 would receive a discharging command and a battery at the threshold L1 would receive a charging command.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., charging sequence/thresholds that trigger transmission of current values/charge-discharge-recharge logic/in the same charging session) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Original grounds of rejection are maintained for claims 1, 11, & 20 (Beaston, in view of Robinson). However, new grounds of rejection have been included in this action for claims 1, 11, & 20 as necessitated by the amended claim set filed 08/05/2026. The claim set introduced new limitations in claims 9 & 18 (depending from claims 1 & 11, respectively) and in new claim 21 (depending from claim 20), which require different prior art from the previous, upheld, rejections of claims 1, 11, & 20.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 08/05/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of Application 17/715,166 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, 10-12, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beaston et al. (USPGPN 20170106764 A1), in view of Willson (US 10926644 B1), Kim et al. (USPGPN 20120249078 A1), and Robinson et al. (USPGPN 20130342011 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Beaston teaches a charging and discharging apparatus (Fig. 3B, 300B), characterized by comprising a DC/DC converter (Fig. 3B, 305) and a control unit (Fig. 3B, 303); wherein the control unit is configured to: control (¶0041) the DC/DC converter (305) based on the first charging current (¶0049) to charge the battery (Fig. 3B, 309) through an energy storage battery (Fig. 3B,312) (¶0048).
Beaston does not explicitly teach wherein the DC/DC converter is bi-directional, and wherein the control unit is configured to: receive a first charging current transmitted by a battery management system (BMS) of a battery; receive a first discharging current transmitted by the BMS and control the bi- directional DC/DC converter based on the first discharging current to discharge a battery capacity of the battery to the energy storage battery, wherein the first discharging current is a discharging current transmitted by the BMS when a first accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative charging amount threshold and a voltage of a battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full- charging voltage of the battery cell; and receive a second charging current transmitted by the BMS and, wherein the second charging current is a charging current transmitted by the BMS when a first accumulative discharging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative discharging amount threshold.
However, Willson shows it is common in the art that an electric vehicle includes a battery (Fig. 1, 30) with an associated BMS (Fig. 1, 32) that communicates with a control unit (Fig. 1, 34). The BMS communicates charging parameters to the control unit (Col 4, lines 7-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vehicle taught by Beaston to include a BMS system in the vehicle which communicates charging parameters to the control unit, as taught by Willson. This would allow the battery to communicate with the control unit based on its charging needs.
Moreover, Robinson teaches a power management system which teaches a charging system that connects two rechargeable energy sources (Fig. 3, 360 & 370) that can charge or discharge between each other bi-directionally (¶0020 & 0022). These two power sources are connected to a power bus (Fig. 4, 410) through DC/DC converters (Fig. 4, 440 & 442; bi-directional power flow indicates bi-directional DC/DC converters are used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging system taught by Beaston with Robinson to use a bi-directional DC/DC converter and control the vehicle battery to discharge to the BESS battery system using the DC/DC converter. Doing so would allow the DC/DC converter to ensure compatibility between battery voltages before charging or discharging, and allows the BESS system recharge from the vehicle in a state where the vehicle is not in use and the power grid has a high demand cost.
Moreover, Kim teaches a BMS (Fig. 2, 22) which communicates with a controller (Fig. 2, 23) to provide charging and discharging instructions (¶0064 & 0073). These charging and discharging instructions are based on a first lower limit (Fig. 4, L1), second lower limit (Fig. 4, L2), and first upper limit (Fig. 4, H1) which indicates three separate control signals for charging and discharging control. Examiner equates these separate control signals to the first charging current value, second charging current value, and first discharging current value. First discharging occurs when the battery exceeds a threshold (H1) and second charging occurs when the battery exceeds a threshold (L2). Kim also teaches that the discharge control (H1) does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full charge voltage (Fig. 4, H1 is lower than 100% SOC).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging control method taught by Beaston to include charging current values communicated from the BMS to the control unit, based on charging and discharging thresholds, as shown in Kim. It would also be obvious to ensure discharging does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full charge voltage, as shown in Kim. Both modifications would assist in extending the lifetime of the battery.
Regarding Claim 2, Beaston, as modified, is capable of receiving a second discharging current value, and controlling the DC/DC converter to discharge the battery capacity to the energy storage battery, as described in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose that the second discharging current value is transmitted when a second accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a second accumulative charging amount threshold and a voltage of the battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full-charging voltage of the battery cell.
However, Kim further teaches a control signal based on a second discharge control signal based on a second capacity threshold (Fig. 4, H2) which is also does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full-charging voltage (Fig. 4, H2 is less than 100% SOC).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Beaston, in view of Wilson, Robinson, and Kim, with Kim to include a second capacity threshold which the BMS uses communicate a second discharging current value when the battery cell capacity is less than a full-charging voltage. Doing so will assist in extending the lifetime of the battery.
Regarding Claim 8, Beaston, as modified, does not explicitly teach that at least one of the first charging current, the first discharging current and the second charging current is determined and obtained by the BMS according to a state parameter of the battery; the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state.
However, Kim further teaches that a charging or discharging control signal is based on the SOC of the battery (Fig.4 & ¶0073).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, with Kim to determine the charging or discharging currents values using the SOC of the battery, as taught by Kim. Doing so ensures the SOC is held within a desired threshold to improve the lifetime of the battery.
Regarding Claim 10, Beaston, as modified, does not explicitly teach that the control unit is further configured to: receive a first charging voltage transmitted by the BMS, wherein the first charging voltage and the first charging current are carried in a first battery charging demand message.
However, Robinson further teaches a control unit (Fig. 6, 420) which receives desired max voltage levels (¶0161) with desired current levels (¶0161).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the charging system taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, to include a charging voltage in the communication, as taught by Robinson, between the BMS and control unit to ensure safe battery charging.
Regarding Claim 11, Beaston teaches a battery charging method, performed by a charging and discharging apparatus (Fig. 3B, 300B), comprising a DC/DC converter (Fig. 3B, 305) and a control unit (Fig. 3B, 303); wherein the control unit is configured to: control (¶0041) the DC/DC converter (305) based on the first charging current (¶0049) to charge the battery (Fig. 3B, 309) through an energy storage battery (Fig. 3B,312) (¶0048).
Beaston does not explicitly teach wherein the DC/DC converter is bi-directional, and the method comprising: receiving, by the control unit, a first charging current transmitted by a battery management system (BMS) of a battery; receiving, by the control unit, a first discharging current transmitted by the BMS and controlling the bi- directional DC/DC converter based on the first discharging current to discharge a battery capacity of the battery to the energy storage battery, wherein the first discharging current is a discharging current value transmitted by the BMS when a first accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative charging amount threshold and a voltage of a battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full- charging voltage of the battery cell; and receiving, by the control unit, a second charging current value transmitted by the BMS and, wherein the second charging current value is a charging current value transmitted by the BMS when a first accumulative discharging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative discharging amount threshold.
However, Willson shows it is common in the art that an electric vehicle includes a battery (Fig. 1, 30) with an associated BMS (Fig. 1, 32) that communicates with a control unit (Fig. 1, 34). The BMS communicates charging parameters to the control unit (Col 4, lines 7-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vehicle taught by Beaston to include a BMS system in the vehicle which communicates charging parameters to the control unit, as taught by Willson. This would the battery to communicate with the control unit based on its charging needs.
Moreover, Robinson teaches a power management system which teaches a charging system that connects two rechargeable energy sources (Fig. 3, 360 & 370) that can charge or discharge between each other bi-directionally (¶0020 & 0022). These two power sources are connected to a power bus (Fig. 4, 410) through DC/DC converters (Fig. 4, 440 & 442; bi-directional power flow indicates bi-directional DC/DC converters are used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging system taught by Beaston with Robinson to use a bi-directional DC/DC converter and control the vehicle battery to discharge to the BESS battery system using the DC/DC converter. Doing so would allow the DC/DC converter to ensure compatibility between battery voltages before charging or discharging, and allows the BESS system recharge from the vehicle in a state where the vehicle is not in use and the power grid has a high demand cost.
Moreover, Kim teaches a BMS (Fig. 2, 22) which communicates with a controller (Fig. 2, 23) to provide charging and discharging instructions (¶0064 & 0073). These charging and discharging instructions are based on a first lower limit (Fig. 4, L1), second lower limit (Fig. 4, L2), and first upper limit (Fig. 4, H1) which indicates three separate control signals for charging and discharging control. Examiner equates these separate control signals to the first charging current value, second charging current value, and first discharging current value. First discharging occurs when the battery exceeds a threshold (H1) and second charging occurs when the battery exceeds a threshold (L2). Kim also teaches that the discharge control (H1) does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full charge voltage (Fig. 4, H1 is lower than 100% SOC).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging control method taught by Beaston to include charging current values communicated from the BMS to the control unit, based on charging and discharging thresholds, as shown in Kim. It would also be obvious to ensure discharging does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full charge voltage, as shown in Kim. Both modifications would assist in extending the lifetime of the battery.
Regarding Claim 12, Beaston, as modified, is capable of receiving a second discharging current value, and controlling the DC/DC converter to discharge the battery capacity to the energy storage battery, as described in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose that the second discharging current value is transmitted when a second accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a second accumulative charging amount threshold and a voltage of the battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full-charging voltage of the battery cell.
However, Kim further teaches a control signal based on a second discharge control signal based on a second capacity threshold (Fig. 4, H2) which is also does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full-charging voltage (Fig. 4, H2 is less than 100% SOC).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the method taught by Beaston, in view of Wilson, Kim and Robinson, with Kim to include a second capacity threshold which the BMS uses communicate a second discharging current value when the battery cell capacity is less than a full-charging voltage. Doing so will assist in extending the lifetime of the battery.
Regarding Claim 20, Beaston teaches a charging and discharging apparatus (300B) and a battery charging method, characterized by being applied to a charging and discharging apparatus (300B), the method comprising: controlling (¶0041) the DC/DC converter (305) of the charging and discharging apparatus based on the first charging current (¶0049) to charge the battery (Fig. 3B, 309) through an energy storage battery (Fig. 3B,312) (¶0048).
Beaston does not explicitly teach a bi-directional DC/DC converter and the charging and discharging apparatus comprising a processor and non-transitory memory, wherein the memory stores a battery charging method, wherein the method comprises receiving a first charging current value transmitted by a battery management system (BMS) of a battery; receiving a first discharging current value transmitted by the BMS and controlling the bi- directional DC/DC converter based on the first discharging current to discharge a battery capacity of the battery to the energy storage battery, wherein the first discharging current value is a discharging current value transmitted by the BMS when a first accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative charging amount threshold and a voltage of a battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full- charging voltage of the battery cell; and receiving a second charging current value transmitted by the BMS and, wherein the second charging current value is a charging current value transmitted by the BMS when a first accumulative discharging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative discharging amount threshold.
However, Willson shows it is common in the art that an electric vehicle includes a battery (Fig. 1, 30) with an associated BMS (Fig. 1, 32) that communicates with a control unit (Fig. 1, 34). The BMS communicates charging parameters to the control unit (Col 4, lines 7-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vehicle taught by Beaston to include a BMS system in the vehicle which communicates charging parameters to the control unit, as taught by Willson. This would the battery to communicate with the control unit based on its charging needs.
Moreover, Robinson teaches a power management system which teaches a charging system that connects two rechargeable energy sources (Fig. 3, 360 & 370) that can charge or discharge between each other bi-directionally (¶0020 & 0022). These two power sources are connected to a power bus (Fig. 4, 410) through DC/DC converters (Fig. 4, 440 & 442; bi-directional power flow indicates bi-directional DC/DC converters are used). Robinson also teaches that an energy management schema may be stored on memory (Fig. 4, 430) to be ran by a CPU (420) (¶0172).
Beaston and Robinson are considered analogous to the claimed invention since they both pertain to charging and discharging batteries that are connected to each other. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging system taught by Beaston to use a bi-directional DC/DC converter and control the vehicle battery to discharge to the BESS battery system using the DC/DC converter. Doing so would allow the DC/DC converter to ensure compatibility between battery voltages before charging or discharging, allows the BESS system recharge from the vehicle in a state where the vehicle is not in use and the power grid has a high demand cost, and would for efficient and consistent control from the battery charging method..
Moreover, Kim teaches a BMS (Fig. 2, 22) which communicates with a controller (Fig. 2, 23) to provide charging and discharging instructions (¶0064 & 0073). These charging and discharging instructions are based on a first lower limit (Fig. 4, L1), second lower limit (Fig. 4, L2), and first upper limit (Fig. 4, H1) which indicates three separate control signals for charging and discharging control. Examiner equates these separate control signals to the first charging current value, second charging current value, and first discharging current value. First discharging occurs when the battery exceeds a threshold (H1) and second charging occurs when the battery exceeds a threshold (L2). Kim also teaches that the discharge control (H1) does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full charge voltage (Fig. 4, H1 is lower than 100% SOC).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging control method taught by Beaston to include charging current values communicated from the BMS to the control unit, based on charging and discharging thresholds, as shown in Kim. It would also be obvious to ensure discharging does not occur when the battery cell voltage exceeds a full charge voltage, as shown in Kim. Both modifications would assist in extending the lifetime of the battery.
Claim(s) 3 & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, as applied to claims 1 & 11 above, and further in view of Mitsutani (USPGPN 20150298568 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Beaston, as modified, teaches that the control unit is further configured to: control the bi-directional DC/DC converter to discharge the battery capacity of the battery to the energy storage battery, as described in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly teach the control unit determining according to the first discharging current that a discharging demand power of the battery is smaller than a discharging power threshold.
Mitsutani teaches a converter (Fig. 1, 10) that is controlled to ensure the discharging power limit (Wout2) is not exceeded (¶0133).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, to monitor the discharging power of the battery, which Mitsutani teaches since a measurement is required to determine if a limit is not exceeded, and control the DC/DC converter to allow the battery to discharge to the energy storage battery if the discharging power is below the discharging limit. This would allow for greater charging efficiency of the energy storage battery.
Regarding Claim 13, Beaston, as modified, teaches controlling, by the charging and discharging apparatus, the bi-directional DC/DC converter to discharge the battery capacity of the battery to the energy storage battery, as described in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly teach determining, by the control unit, and according to the first discharging current that a discharging demand power of the battery is smaller than a discharging power threshold.
Mitsutani teaches a converter (Fig. 1, 10) that is controlled to ensure the discharging power limit (Wout2) is not exceeded (¶0133).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, to monitor the discharging power of the battery, which Mitsutani teaches since a measurement is required to determine if a limit is not exceeded, and control the DC/DC converter to allow the battery to discharge to the energy storage battery if the discharging power is below the discharging limit. This would allow for greater charging efficiency of the energy storage battery.
Claim(s) 5 & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, as applied to claims 1 & 11 above, and further in view of Komiya et al. (USPGPN 20130054069 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly teach that the control unit is further configured to: obtain a state of charge (SOC) of the energy storage battery; and determine that the SOC is greater than or equal to a SOC threshold and control the bi-directional DC/DC converter based on the first charging current to charge the battery through the energy storage battery.
However, Komiya teaches a charging system where the control unit (Fig. 3, 111) obtains an SOC of the storage battery (Fig. 3, 108), and determines if the SOC of the storage battery exceeds a threshold (¶0089). The control unit further controls the DC/DC converter (Fig. 3, 110) to discharge the storage battery (108) to the battery (103) (¶0089).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, with Komiya to monitor the SOC of the storage battery and discharge the storage battery to the battery, by controlling the DC/DC converter, if the SOC of the storage battery exceeds a threshold. Doing so helps avoid overcharging the storage battery.
Regarding Claim 15, Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly teach obtaining, by the control unit, a state of charge (SOC) of the energy storage battery, determining that the SOC is greater than or equal to a SOC threshold, and controlling the bi-directional DC/DC converter based on the first charging current to charge the battery through the energy storage battery.
However, Komiya teaches a charging system where the control unit (Fig. 3, 111) obtains an SOC of the storage battery (Fig. 3, 108), and determines if the SOC of the storage battery exceeds a threshold (¶0089). The control unit further controls the DC/DC converter (Fig. 3, 110) to discharge the storage battery (108) to the battery (103) (¶0089).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, with Komiya to monitor the SOC of the storage battery and discharge the storage battery to the battery, by controlling the DC/DC converter, if the SOC of the storage battery exceeds a threshold. Doing so helps avoid overcharging the storage battery.
Claim(s) 7 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, as applied to claims 1 & 11 above, and further in view of Hermann (USPGPN 20140091748 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly teach the control unit is further configured to: receive a charging stop command transmitted by the BMS and stop charging the battery, wherein the charging stop command is a command transmitted by the BMS when a voltage of a battery cell of the battery exceeds a full-charging voltage of the battery cell.
However, Hermann teaches a battery monitoring system which monitors the cell voltage in a battery pack to ensure the voltage remains within an operable range. If the voltage increases or decreases outside the range, an interrupt is activated to stop the charge or discharged. (¶0067)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging system taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, to include a charging interrupt, as taught by Hermann, to have the BMS transmit a charging stop instruction when the voltage of the battery exceeds an upper threshold. This avoids overcharging the battery and improves the lifetime of the battery.
Regarding Claim 17, Beaston, as modified, fails to explicitly teach the receiving, by the control unit, a charging stop command transmitted by the BMS and stopping charging the battery, wherein the charging stop command is a command transmitted by the BMS when a voltage of a battery cell of the battery exceeds a full-charging voltage of the battery cell.
However, Hermann teaches a battery monitoring system which monitors the cell voltage in a battery pack to ensure the voltage remains within an operable range. If the voltage increases or decreases outside the range, an interrupt is activated to stop the charge or discharged. (¶0067)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the charging system taught by Beaston, in view of Willson, Kim, and Robinson, to include a charging interrupt, as taught by Hermann, to have the BMS transmit a charging stop instruction when the voltage of the battery exceeds an upper threshold. This avoids overcharging the battery and improves the lifetime of the battery.
Claim(s) 1, 11, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai et al. (USPGPN 2012/0098489), in view of Liu et al. (USPGPN 2021/0070185 – published Mar. 2021).
Regarding Claim 1, Arai (Figs. 1, 4, & 5) teaches a charging and discharging apparatus, comprising a bi-directional converter (62) and a control unit (10), for charging a battery (20) with a battery management system (BMS) (22), wherein the control unit is configured to:
control the bi-directional converter based on a first charging current value to charge the battery (S3: C0);
control the bi-directional converter based on a first discharging current value to discharge a battery capacity of the battery (S33: D1), wherein the first discharging current value is a discharging current value when a first accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative charging amount threshold (S4 & S5: VS1) and a voltage of a battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full-charging voltage of the battery cell (S10); and
control the bi-directional converter based on a second charging current value to charge the battery (S41: C2), wherein the second charging current value is a charging current value when a first accumulative discharging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative discharging amount threshold (¶0057 & 0058: D1=C1=.5A with a 5s duration, so the discharge amount threshold would be 2.5 coulombs).
Arai fails to explicitly teach the bi-directional converter is a DC/DC converter;
the control unit receives a first charging current value, first discharging current value, and second charging current value transmitted by the BMS of the battery; and
charging the battery from an energy storage battery and discharging the battery to the energy storage battery.
However, Liu (Fig. 6F & 7) teaches a system which includes a battery (132) that charges from an energy storage battery (134) and discharges to the energy storage battery (bi-directional power flow indicates charging and discharging to/from battery 134), through a bi-directional DC/DC converter (160).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Arai with Liu to include an energy storage battery for charging and discharging the battery and the bi-directional DC/DC converter. Doing so would provide the well known benefit of conserving energy by storing discharged energy from the battery in the energy storage battery, while also reducing the demand on the AC grid.
Arai, as modified, discloses the claimed invention except for the control unit communicates with the BMS of the battery, but does not receive charging/discharging current values from the BMS, and instead generates the charging/discharging current values. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the BMS generate and transmit the charging/discharging current values to the control unit, instead of the control unit generating them, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would reduce the processing demand on the control unit.
Regarding Claim 11, Arai (Figs. 1, 4, & 5) teaches a battery charging method performed by a charging and discharging apparatus, comprising a bi-directional converter (62) and a control unit (10), for charging a battery (20) with a battery management system (BMS) (22), the method comprising:
controlling, by the control unit, the bi-directional converter based on a first charging current value to charge the battery (S3: C0);
controlling, by the control unit, the bi-directional converter based on a first discharging current value to discharge a battery capacity of the battery (S33: D1), wherein the first discharging current value is a discharging current value when a first accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative charging amount threshold (S4 & S5: VS1) and a voltage of a battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full-charging voltage of the battery cell (S10); and
controlling, by the control unit, the bi-directional converter based on a second charging current value to charge the battery (S41: C2), wherein the second charging current value is a charging current value when a first accumulative discharging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative discharging amount threshold (¶0057 & 0058: D1=C1=.5A with a 5s duration, so the discharge amount threshold would be 2.5 coulombs).
Arai fails to explicitly teach the bi-directional converter is a DC/DC converter;
receiving, by the control unit, a first charging current value, first discharging current value, and second charging current value transmitted by the BMS of the battery; and
charging the battery from an energy storage battery and discharging the battery to the energy storage battery.
However, Liu (Fig. 6F & 7) teaches a system which includes a battery (132) that charges from an energy storage battery (134) and discharges to the energy storage battery (bi-directional power flow indicates charging and discharging to/from battery 134), through a bi-directional DC/DC converter (160).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Arai with Liu to include an energy storage battery for charging and discharging the battery and the bi-directional DC/DC converter. Doing so would provide the well known benefit of conserving energy by storing discharged energy from the battery in the energy storage battery, while also reducing the demand on the AC grid.
Arai, as modified, discloses the claimed invention except for the control unit communicates with the BMS of the battery, but does not receive charging/discharging current values from the BMS, and instead generates the charging/discharging current values. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the BMS generate and transmit the charging/discharging current values to the control unit, instead of the control unit generating them, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would reduce the processing demand on the control unit.
Regarding Claim 20, Arai (Figs. 1, 4, & 5) teaches a charging and discharging apparatus, comprising:
a bi-directional converter (62);
a processor (10), for charging a battery (20) with a battery management system (BMS) (22); and
a non-transitory memory (¶0047: RAM) storing a computer program (¶0047:certain programs) that, when executed by the processor, causes the charging and discharging apparatus to perform a battery charging method, wherein the battery charging method comprises:
controlling, by the control unit, the bi-directional converter based on a first charging current value to charge the battery (S3: C0);
controlling, by the control unit, the bi-directional converter based on a first discharging current value to discharge a battery capacity of the battery (S33: D1), wherein the first discharging current value is a discharging current value when a first accumulative charging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative charging amount threshold (S4 & S5: VS1) and a voltage of a battery cell of the battery does not exceed a full-charging voltage of the battery cell (S10); and
controlling, by the control unit, the bi-directional converter based on a second charging current value to charge the battery (S41: C2), wherein the second charging current value is a charging current value when a first accumulative discharging amount of the battery is greater than or equal to a first accumulative discharging amount threshold (¶0057 & 0058: D1=C1=.5A with a 5s duration, so the discharge amount threshold would be 2.5 coulombs).
Arai fails to explicitly teach the bi-directional converter is a DC/DC converter;
receiving, by the control unit, a first charging current value, first discharging current value, and second charging current value transmitted by the BMS of the battery; and
charging the battery from an energy storage battery and discharging the battery to the energy storage battery.
However, Liu (Fig. 6F & 7) teaches a system which includes a battery (132) that charges from an energy storage battery (134) and discharges to the energy storage battery (bi-directional power flow indicates charging and discharging to/from battery 134), through a bi-directional DC/DC converter (160).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Arai with Liu to include an energy storage battery for charging and discharging the battery and the bi-directional DC/DC converter. Doing so would provide the well known benefit of conserving energy by storing discharged energy from the battery in the energy storage battery, while also reducing the demand on the AC grid.
Arai, as modified, discloses the claimed invention except for the control unit communicates with the BMS of the battery, but does not receive charging/discharging current values from the BMS, and instead generates the charging/discharging current values. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the BMS generate and transmit the charging/discharging current values to the control unit, instead of the control unit generating them, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would reduce the processing demand on the control unit.
Claim(s) 9, 18, & 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai, in view of Liu, as applied in the rejection of claims 1, 11, & 20 above, and further in view of Josephs et al. (USPGPN 2016/0204625), Onnerud et al. (USPGPN 2010/0289457), and Berkowitz et al. (USPGPN 2021/0296908 – filed Jun. 2021).
Regarding Claim 8, Arai, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the first charging current value and the second charging current value corresponds to a charging rate ranging between 2C and 1 OC, the first discharging current value corresponds to a discharging rate ranging between 0.1C and 1C, and a ratio of the first accumulative discharging amount threshold to the first accumulative charging amount threshold is smaller than or equal to 10%,
wherein the first accumulative charging amount threshold and the first accumulative discharging amount threshold are each determined according to a state parameter of the battery and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state.
However, Josephs teaches a battery charging method which pulse charges a battery (Fig.11) and utilizes a charging current value that is greater than 2C and less than 10C (¶0075; a 2C rate with 50% duty cycle would charge the battery in approximately 1.1 hours using the charging method taught; ¶0059, Table 2, Test 1: 0 to 100% charge range in 19 min indicates a charge rate of approximately 3C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Josephs to use a charge rate greater than 2C and less than 10C. Doing so would allow for a faster charging time, as evidenced by Josephs (see Table 2, ¶’s 0010, 0039, 0075, esp. 0075).
Moreover, Onnerud teaches a battery charging and discharging system where a battery is discharged at a rate of 0.5C (Fig. 9A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Onnerud to have the first discharge current set to a rate between 0.1C and 1C, as taught by Onnerud, for more efficient battery use.
Lastly, Berkowitz teaches a pulse charging system which determines charging and discharging amount accumulation thresholds (¶0061: adjust or control one or more characteristics of the charge pulses and/or discharge pulses) according to a state parameter of the battery (¶0061: amount of charge or current removed so that the change in voltage is within one or more predetermined ranges) and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state (¶0070: predetermined ranges may change based on or according to one of more parameters of the battery such as SOC or SOH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Berkowitz to include wherein the first accumulative charging amount threshold and the first accumulative discharging amount threshold are each determined according to a state parameter of the battery and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state. Doing so allows for maximizing cycle life of the battery, as evidenced by Berkowitz (¶0004).
Regarding Claim 18, Arai, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the first charging current value and the second charging current value corresponds to a charging rate ranging between 2C and 1 OC, the first discharging current value corresponds to a discharging rate ranging between 0.1C and 1C, and a ratio of the first accumulative discharging amount threshold to the first accumulative charging amount threshold is smaller than or equal to 10%,
wherein the first accumulative charging amount threshold and the first accumulative discharging amount threshold are each determined according to a state parameter of the battery and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state.
However, Josephs teaches a battery charging method which pulse charges a battery (Fig.11) and utilizes a charging current value that is greater than 2C and less than 10C (¶0075; a 2C rate with 50% duty cycle would charge the battery in approximately 1.1 hours using the charging method taught; ¶0059, Table 2, Test 1: 0 to 100% charge range in 19 min indicates a charge rate of approximately 3C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Josephs to use a charge rate greater than 2C and less than 10C. Doing so would allow for a faster charging time, as evidenced by Josephs (see Table 2, ¶’s 0010, 0039, 0075, esp. 0075).
Moreover, Onnerud teaches a battery charging and discharging system where a battery is discharged at a rate of 0.5C (Fig. 9A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Onnerud to have the first discharge current set to a rate between 0.1C and 1C, as taught by Onnerud, for more efficient battery use.
Lastly, Berkowitz teaches a pulse charging system which determines charging and discharging amount accumulation thresholds (¶0061: adjust or control one or more characteristics of the charge pulses and/or discharge pulses) according to a state parameter of the battery (¶0061: amount of charge or current removed so that the change in voltage is within one or more predetermined ranges) and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state (¶0070: predetermined ranges may change based on or according to one of more parameters of the battery such as SOC or SOH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Berkowitz to include wherein the first accumulative charging amount threshold and the first accumulative discharging amount threshold are each determined according to a state parameter of the battery and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state. Doing so allows for maximizing cycle life of the battery, as evidenced by Berkowitz (¶0004).
Regarding Claim 21, Arai, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the first charging current value and the second charging current value corresponds to a charging rate ranging between 2C and 1 OC, the first discharging current value corresponds to a discharging rate ranging between 0.1C and 1C, and a ratio of the first accumulative discharging amount threshold to the first accumulative charging amount threshold is smaller than or equal to 10%,
wherein the first accumulative charging amount threshold and the first accumulative discharging amount threshold are each determined according to a state parameter of the battery and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state.
However, Josephs teaches a battery charging method which pulse charges a battery (Fig.11) and utilizes a charging current value that is greater than 2C and less than 10C (¶0075; a 2C rate with 50% duty cycle would charge the battery in approximately 1.1 hours using the charging method taught; ¶0059, Table 2, Test 1: 0 to 100% charge range in 19 min indicates a charge rate of approximately 3C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Josephs to use a charge rate greater than 2C and less than 10C. Doing so would allow for a faster charging time, as evidenced by Josephs (see Table 2, ¶’s 0010, 0039, 0075, esp. 0075).
Moreover, Onnerud teaches a battery charging and discharging system where a battery is discharged at a rate of 0.5C (Fig. 9A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Onnerud to have the first discharge current set to a rate between 0.1C and 1C, as taught by Onnerud, for more efficient battery use.
Lastly, Berkowitz teaches a pulse charging system which determines charging and discharging amount accumulation thresholds (¶0061: adjust or control one or more characteristics of the charge pulses and/or discharge pulses) according to a state parameter of the battery (¶0061: amount of charge or current removed so that the change in voltage is within one or more predetermined ranges) and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state (¶0070: predetermined ranges may change based on or according to one of more parameters of the battery such as SOC or SOH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Arai, in view of Liu, with Berkowitz to include wherein the first accumulative charging amount threshold and the first accumulative discharging amount threshold are each determined according to a state parameter of the battery and each change with a change in the state parameter of the battery, the state parameter of the battery comprises at least one of a battery temperature, a battery voltage, a battery current, a state of charge of the battery and a battery health state. Doing so allows for maximizing cycle life of the battery, as evidenced by Berkowitz (¶0004).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 14, & 16 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.
Claims 4 and 14 recites comparing a discharging demand power with a discharging power threshold, and controlling the bi-directional DC/DC converter to discharge a battery capacity of the battery corresponding to a first discharge power and controlling the DC/DC converter to discharge a battery capacity of the battery corresponding to a second discharge power to a power grid through a second charging and discharging apparatus. The prior art of record fails to teach these limitations in combination with all other elements disclosed in the claims.
Claims 6 & 16 depend on claims 4 & 14 and so they are allowable for the same reasons.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOHN P ONDRASIK whose telephone number is (703)756-1963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
/JOHN P ONDRASIK/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights