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 Objections
Claim(s) 1 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
As to claim 1, the term “is provided” should read “provided” to be more grammatically correct. For example, the instant claim may be directed to a device, wherein said device at least comprises: a body [[is]] provided with a power module, a frequency adjustment module, and an emission module.
The objection applies to other claim elements recited in the instant claim (i.e., “said power module is provided…”, “said frequency adjustment module is provided…”, and “said emission module is provided…”).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to claim 2, the term “a light, thin, and high temperature resistant material” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “a light, thin, and high temperature resistant material” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Page 6 of the specification 03/01/2022 discloses “so that said body 1 can be easily carried and installed, and can protect the electronic components inside said body 1 in a high temperature environment (such as a car engine room).” For examination purposes, the “a light, thin, and high temperature resistant material” is interpreted as “a material that is lighter, thinner and higher temperature resistant relative to at least one different material”
As to claim 6, the term “stable contact” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “stable” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshio Kitamura of JP 2002-334723 A (hereinafter referred to as Kitamura) in view of Hangseok Choi of US 2020/0381994 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Choi), James J. Fitzgibbon of US 2019/0020362 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Fitzgibbon), and Jonathan W. Skipper of US 2015/0038197 A (hereinafter referred to as Skipper).
As to claim 1, Kitamura pertains to the instant invention because Kitamura relates to a rechargeable battery (lead-acid batteries; Kitamura, paragraph [0004]) endurance device (a device that can prevent lead sulfate formation, which causes deterioration; Kitamura, paragraph [0007]).
Kitamura teaches to a rechargeable battery endurance enhancing device at least comprising:
a body is provided with a power module (power source 3; Kitamura, paragraph [0007], Fig. 1), a frequency adjustment module (a highly efficient circuit is used by the regenerator; Kitamura, paragraph [0007]) and an emission module (the ultra-high frequency oscillator and amplifier; Kitamura, paragraph [0007]);
said power module is provided with a conversion unit (the charger 4; Kitamura, paragraph [0006]), said conversion unit automatically converts the input voltage and current to provide the working voltage and current suitable for the operation of said body (the charger 4 … is a device that converts a general power source into DC and provides a voltage and current suitable for charging; Kitamura, paragraph [0006]);
said emission module is provided with an amplifier (the ultra-high frequency oscillator and amplifier; Kitamura, paragraph [0007; the term “said amplifier is used to amplify…” in line 20, page 13, is an intended use but the amplifier of Kitamura is nonetheless capable of amplifying an electromagnetic wave power) and a transmitting member (output terminal of regeneration device 5; Kitamura, paragraph [0021], Figs. 1-3); and
said transmitting member is used to connect the outside of a chemical rechargeable battery (output terminal of regeneration device 5; Kitamura, paragraph [0021], Figs. 1-3) and emit electromagnetic waves to the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the outside (by applying ultra-short high frequency waves between the positive and negative electrodes, we could activate the atoms in the aqueous electrolyte and remove the lead sulfate on the surface, thereby solving the problem; Kitamura, paragraph [0004]).
Kitamura does not explicitly teach a voltage stabilizing member and a protection circuit.
Kitamura does not explicitly teach a frequency adjustment member and an electromagnetic wave transmitter.
Choi pertains to the instant invention because Choi relates to a power module (power management module 188; Choi, paragraph [0043], Fig. 2).
Choi teaches to a voltage stabilizing member (the power adjuster 220, linear regulator; Choi, paragraph [0052], Fig. 2). Choi teaches that the power adjuster 220 may adjust the voltage level or the current level of the power supplier or the battery 189 into a different voltage level, wherein the power adjuster may be implemented in the form of a switching regulator (Choi, paragraph [0052]).
The recited term(s) “said voltage stabilizing member is used to…” in line 7, page 13, is/are an intended use but the power adjuster 220 and/or linear regulator of Choi is nonetheless capable of stabilizing voltage and current.
Choi teaches to a protection circuit (an over-voltage protection circuitry 340 for protection; Choi, paragraph [0078]). Choi also teaches a protection circuit module 240 (Choi, paragraph [0055]) for preventing a performance deterioration, or a damage to, a body of the battery 189 (Choi, paragraph [0055], Fig. 3B). The term “said protection circuit is used to…” in line 10, page 13, is an intended use, but the over-voltage protection circuitry 340 of Choi is nonetheless capable of protecting a body from damage caused by abnormal current or abnormal voltage.
Both Kitamura and Choi relate to a power module for a rechargeable battery (Choi, paragraph [0043], Fig. 2). Kitamura does not explicitly teach a voltage stabilizing member and a protection circuit. Kitamura does teach a rechargeable battery endurance enhancing device at least comprising a body that is provided with a power module (power source 3; Kitamura, paragraph [0007], Fig. 1). Choi teaches a voltage stabilizing member (the power adjuster 220; Choi, paragraph [0052], Fig. 2) and a protection circuit (an over-voltage protection circuitry 340 for protection; Choi, paragraph [0078]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the apparatus of Kitamura with the protection circuit and the voltage stabilizing member of Choi for managing power supplied to a rechargeable battery.
Kitamura in view of Choi does not explicitly teach a frequency adjustment member and an electromagnetic wave transmitter.
Fitzgibbon pertains to the instant invention because Fitzgibbon relates to electromagnetic waves (a radio broadcaster 118 configured to transmit radio frequency waves; Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0016]).
Fitzgibbon teaches tuning elements 217 (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]). Fitzgibbon teaches that the controller 211 controls the output frequency of the tuning elements 217 (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]). Fitzgibbon teaches that electrical length of radiating elements 218 is varied so as to allow selection of a transmit frequency (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]).
Both Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon relate to transmitting an electromagnetic wave (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0016]). Kitamura in view of Choi does not explicitly teach a frequency adjustment member. Kitamura in view of Choi does teach using a frequency oscillator (Kitamura, paragraph [0007]). Fitzgibbon teaches tuning elements 217 (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]) for controlling the frequency so as to allow selection of a transmit frequency (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]). Changing frequency necessarily changes wavelength of a wave. The term “said frequency adjustment member is used to” in line 13, page 13, is an intended use, but tuning elements 217 of Fitzgibbon is nonetheless capable of controlling wavelength and frequency of electromagnetic wave.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the apparatus of Kitamura in view of Choi with the tuning elements of Fitzgibbon for generating electromagnetic wave with designated wavelength and frequency in transmitting an electromagnetic wave.
Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon does not explicitly teach an electromagnetic wave transmitter.
Skipper pertains to the instant invention because Skipper relates to electromagnetic waves (Skipper, paragraph [0017], Fig. 2).
Skipper teaches an antenna (RF transmitter 32 emits a radio frequency signal via antenna 34; Skipper, paragraph [0017], Fig. 2).
Both Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon and Skipper relate to electromagnetic waves (Skipper, paragraph [0017], Fig. 2). Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon does not explicitly teach an electromagnetic wave transmitter for generating an electromagnetic wave with designated wavelength and frequency. Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon does teach applying ultra-short high short frequency waves for activating the atoms in the aqueous electrolyte and remove the lead sulfate on the surface (Kitamura, paragraph [0004]). Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon does teach to a frequency oscillator (Kitamura, paragraph [0007]) for obtaining the required power. Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon does teach that electrical length of radiating elements 218 is varied so as to allow selection of a transmit frequency (Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]).
Skipper teaches an antenna (RF transmitter 32 emits a radio frequency signal via antenna 34; Skipper, paragraph [0017], Fig. 2). The antenna would have been capable of transmitting electromagnetic waves of desired frequency range because radio wave antenna encompasses a broader range, including lower frequencies (up to GHz), as perceived by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the apparatus of Kitamura in view of Choi and Fitzgibbon with the antenna of Skipper for generating electromagnetic wave with designated wavelength and frequency.
As to claim 2, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper teaches that ultra-short waves, which are also used in microwave ovens, activate atomic movement and have the effect of normalizing impurities in positive and negative active materials (Kitamura, paragraph [0013]), wherein the activated atoms are in the aqueous electrolyte (Kitamura, paragraph [0004]). Applying microwaves on aqueous electrolytes necessarily results in heat generation due to vibration of water molecules. For this reason, the choice of the material of the body would have amounted to an engineering choice. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a material that is thermally resistant so that the material does not degrade or lose structural integrity.
As to claim 3, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper teaches to the device of claim 1, wherein said body is connected to the positive electrode and the negative electrode of said chemical rechargeable battery, so as to supply the power of said body through said chemical rechargeable battery (lead acid battery positive terminal 8, lead acid battery negative terminal 9; Kitamura, paragraph [0021], Figs. 1-3).
As to claim 4, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper teaches to the device of claim 1, wherein said body obtains the required power by connecting an external power supply (3 power source; Kitamura, paragraphs [0006], [0021], Fig. 1).
As to claim 5, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper teaches to the device of claim 1, wherein said frequency adjustment module is provided with a switch, and said switch is used to switch the wavelength and frequency of electromagnetic waves suitable for different chemical rechargeable batteries (The controller 211 outputs enable or disable signals to the switching modules 219A, 219B which causes the switching modules 219A, 219B to selectively add or take out various reactive elements in the tuning circuit 217; Fitzgibbon, paragraph [0026]).
As to claim 6, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper does not explicitly teach that there is a contact between an emission module of a device and a battery. The instant claim recites a configuration wherein the weight of the battery results in a contact with the emission module of the rechargeable battery endurance enhancing device.
However, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper does teach using a transmitting member is used to connect the outside of a chemical rechargeable battery (output terminal of regeneration device 5; Kitamura, paragraph [0021], Figs. 1-3) and emit electromagnetic waves to the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the outside (by applying ultra-short high short frequency waves between the positive and negative electrodes, we could activate the atoms in the aqueous electrolyte and remove the lead sulfate on the surface, thereby solving the problem; Kitamura, paragraph [0004], Fig. 4). The term “said transmitting member is used to…” in line 2, page 14, is an intended use, but output terminal of Kitamura is nonetheless capable of connecting and emitting electromagnetic waves to the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the outside.
In light of the teaching that the electromagnetic waves are transmitted to the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the outside, the fact that a claimed device is in stable contact with said emission module would not have modified the operation of the device.
The term “stable contact” is interpreted as being in proximity to allow connection and emission of electromagnetic waves such that the waves arrive at the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the outside for enhancing endurance of a rechargeable battery because the lead acid battery 7 of Kitamura has to be in proximal distance to the regeneration device 6 of Kitamura for the electromagnetic waves to be delivered to the chemical substances inside the lead acid battery. In other words, the battery and the device must be connected by electromagnetic waves, but as long as the battery and the device are connected by electromagnetic waves, the battery and the device does not have to be at a contact at a specific distance to be operable.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success for one of ordinary skill in the art with a predictable result of delivering electromagnetic waves to the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the transmitting member outside from merely ensuring proximity between the transmitting member (output terminal of regeneration device 5; Kitamura, Fig. 1) of the regeneration device 6 and the lead acid battery 7 (Kitamura, Fig. 1) for the purpose of applying ultra-short waves to solve the recognized problem of sulfation (Kitamura, paragraph [0014]).
Therefore, rearrangement of parts would not be sufficient by itself to patently distinguish over an otherwise old device unless there are new or unexpected results. Please refer to MPEP § 2144.04(V)(C).
As to claim 9, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper teaches to the device of claim 1, wherein said body is provided with a wireless signal transmission module (wireless communication module 192; Choi, paragraph [0045], Fig. 1).
As to claim 10, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper teaches to the device of claim 1, wherein said body is provided with a display member (the display device 160 may visually provide information to the outside, e.g. a user; Choi, paragraph [0036], Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshio Kitamura of JP 2002-334723 A (hereinafter referred to as Kitamura) in view of Hangseok Choi of US 2020/0381994 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Choi), James J. Fitzgibbon of US 2019/0020362 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Fitzgibbon), and Jonathan W. Skipper of US 2015/0038197 A (hereinafter referred to as Skipper), as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of James D. Bennett of US 2010/0033021 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Bennett).
As to claim 7, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper does not explicitly teach an anti-jamming member.
The instant specification 03/01/2022 does not describe in detail what constitutes an “anti-jamming function” on page 5. The examiner notes that anti-jamming functionalities are typically installed on the receiving portion, not an emission module. The term “anti-jamming” is interpreted herein as reducing electromagnetic interference, or achieving coherence, as understood in one of ordinary skill in the art.
Bennett pertains to the instant invention because Bennett pertains to delivering a power remotely, using RF coupling (Bennett, paragraph [0019]).
Bennett teaches enhancing the efficiency of power delivery using a plurality of resonating coils arranged in the form of an array called the transmitter resonant phased array (Bennett, paragraph [0024]), wherein the combination of the coil and capacitor forms tuned circuit that can be tuned to the frequency of a controlled power source (Bennett, paragraph [0024]). Bennett teaches that, as a result of using such arrays, the highest possible power as a result of the coherence or constructive interference is achieved (Bennett, paragraph [0057]). The plurality of resonating coils arranged in the form of an array reads into “an anti-jamming member.”
Both Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper and Bennett relate to delivering a power remotely (Bennett, paragraph [0019]). Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper does not explicitly teach an anti-jamming member. Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper does teach using a transmitting member (output terminal of regeneration device 5; Kitamura, paragraph [0021], Figs. 1-3) for emitting electromagnetic waves to the chemical substances inside said chemical rechargeable battery from the outside (by applying ultra-short high short frequency waves between the positive and negative electrodes, we could activate the atoms in the aqueous electrolyte and remove the lead sulfate on the surface, thereby solving the problem; Kitamura, paragraph [0004], Fig. 4). Bennett teaches an anti-jamming member (a plurality of resonating coils arranged in the form of an array; Bennett, paragraph [0024]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have modified the device of Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, and Skipper with the anti-jamming member of Bennett for improving efficiency in delivering power in a remote manner.
As to claim 8, Kitamura in view of Choi, Fitzgibbon, Skipper, and Bennett teaches to the device of claim 7, wherein said anti-jamming member is an anti-jamming patch (transmitter resonant phased array 203 reads into an anti-jamming patch; Bennet, paragraph [0072], Fig. 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1254. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:00-16:00.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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 LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
/JAMES LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1794