DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
In the communication filed on 09/09/2025, claims 1-4, 6-14, and 16-20 are pending. Claims 1, 6, 11, 13, 16, and 18 are amended. Claims 5 and 15 are presently cancelled.
Response to Arguments
The prior objection to claim 13 is withdrawn due to the amendments.
The applicant argues that original claim 5 (currently incorporated into amended claim 1), along with new limitations, are not fully taught by the prior art. Applicant’s arguments with respect the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection. Specifically, the secondary reference Olson used in the rejection of claim 5 has been replaced in the rejection of claim 1.
The examiner notes that due to the applicant’s change of scope from original claim 1 to include limitations of 5 as well as new limitations identified here, i.e. “the first conductive terminal further comprises an annular electrode, a bottom of the annular electrode comprises an outer convex circular arc portion, and the outer convex circular arc portion comprises a circular arc surface”, this final action is proper since it is necessitated by amendment.
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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019).
NOTE: As of the current date, the ECT catalog is available for download from the following hyperlink: https://ect-cpg.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ECT-2019_Catalog.pdf
Regarding Claim 1, Rand discloses a portable electronic device (“electronic device 112” in Figs. 1-2; embodied as laptop computer “401” in Fig. 3, “125” in Figs. 8-9, “135” in Fig. 19, “136” in Fig. 19b, “139” in Fig. 20, “145” in Figs. 21a-b, “150” in Fig. 22, “127” in Fig. 26, “401” in Figs. 28a-c).
Rand further discloses the portable electronic device (“112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra) is adapted to match a power supply device (“power delivery support structure 111” with “power delivery surface 111a”; Figs. 1, 2b-c, 3, 5a-c, 6a-c, 8, 9d, 10a-d, 14, 16a, 18a-b, 20, 21b, 22, 26, 27) comprising a plurality of charging electrodes (“pads 140a-b”; Fig. 2c; ¶ [100]: “power source flows ... to support structure 111 ... and a potential difference is provided between pads 140a and 140b in response”).
Rand further discloses the portable electronic device (“112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra) comprises the following
Rand further discloses a display screen (display for 125 shown in Figs. 8-9; “display 137” of “136” in Fig. 19b).
Rand further discloses a base (base of “125” is depicted but not labelled in Figs. 8-9; base “laptop housing 127” of laptop “135”/“136” shown in Figs. 19a-b), connected to the display screen (“display 137” of “136” in Fig. 19b), to cause the display screen to rotate relative to the base (display is shown in upright state in Fig. 19b and closed state in Fig. 19a).
Rand further discloses a charging circuit (“power adapter circuit 130” with contacts “120”/“125”; Figs. 2a, 4a-b; ¶ [107]: “each device 401 ... includes and carries a corresponding power adapter circuit in communication with corresponding contacts 120”), disposed in the base (Fig. 8 shows contacts “125a-d” in base of laptop “125”).
Rand further discloses the charging circuit (“130” with contacts “120”/”125”) comprises a first conductive terminal and a second conductive terminal (“contacts 120” in Figs. 2c, 4b; “contacts 125a-d” for laptop “125” in Fig. 8).
Rand further discloses the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and the second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”) are exposed on a bottom surface of the portable electronic device (“contacts 120” shown on bottom surface of “112” in Fig. 2c; “contacts 125a-d” shown on bottom surface of “125” in Fig. 8).
Rand further discloses when the portable electronic device (“112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra) is placed on the power supply device (Fig. 1 shows “112” placed on “111”), the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and the second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”) come into contact with the charging electrodes (140a-b), to form electrical connections (Fig. 2c shows “120” to come in contact with “140a-b” when placed on “111a”; ¶ [100]: “contacts 120a and 120b engage pads 140a and 140b, respectively”) and receive charging power (¶ [10]: “power delivery surface may deliver power via a plurality of contacts on the electrical device conducting electricity from the power delivery surface”).
Rand does not disclose “the first conductive terminal further comprises an annular electrode, a bottom of the annular electrode comprises an outer convex circular arc portion, and the outer convex circular arc portion comprises a circular arc surface”.
ECT teaches the first conductive terminal (“CP-059-026”, a variety of “battery probe”; pages 100, 104) further comprises an annular electrode (“CP-059-026” has a “J type tip” on the bottom, see annotated figures from pages 10 and 104, included infra).
PNG
media_image1.png
379
813
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
449
806
media_image2.png
Greyscale
ECT further teaches a bottom of the annular electrode (tip of “CP-059-026”) comprises an outer convex circular arc portion (annotated pages 10 + 104 figures show shape of the “J type tip” on the bottom of the “BIP-1” probe).
ECT further teaches the outer convex circular arc portion comprises a circular arc surface (surface is “gold plated” per page 104; circular shape is addressed supra).
ECT further teaches this shape of the first conductive terminal’s annular electrode to provide long-life, low-resistance, electrical and mechanical connections (page 104) while also not leaving marks on the contacted surfaces (page 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first conductive terminal disclosed by Rand to be an annular electrode with an outer convex circular arc surface, as taught by ECT, to provide durable electrical and mechanical connections to the charging electrodes and to avoid leaving marks on the charging electrodes.
Regarding Claim 11, Rand discloses a charging system (“power delivery system 100”; Figs. 1, 2b-c, 3), comprising a portable electronic device (“electronic device 112” in Figs. 1-2; embodied as laptop computer “401” in Fig. 3, “125” in Figs. 8-9, “135” in Fig. 19, “136” in Fig. 19b, “139” in Fig. 20, “145” in Figs. 21a-b, “150” in Fig. 22, “127” in Fig. 26, “401” in Figs. 28a-c).
Rand further discloses the portable electronic device (“112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra) comprising a display screen (display for 125 shown in Figs. 8-9; “display 137” of “136” in Fig. 19b), a base (base of “125” is depicted but not labelled in Figs. 8-9; base “laptop housing 127” of laptop “135”/“136” shown in Figs. 19a-b), and a charging circuit (“power adapter circuit 130” with contacts “120”/“125”; Figs. 2a, 4a-b; ¶ [107]: “each device 401 ... includes and carries a corresponding power adapter circuit in communication with corresponding contacts 120”).
Rand further discloses the base (“laptop housing 127” in Figs. 19a-b) is connected to the display screen (“display 137” of “136” in Fig. 19b) to cause the display screen to rotate relative to the base (display is shown in upright state in Fig. 19b and closed state in Fig. 19a).
Rand further discloses the charging circuit (“130” with contacts “120”/”125”) is disposed in the base (Fig. 8 shows contacts “125a-d” in base of laptop “125”).
Rand further discloses the charging circuit (“130” with contacts “120”/”125”) comprises a first conductive terminal and a second conductive terminal (“contacts 120” in Figs. 2c, 4b; “contacts 125a-d” for laptop “125” in Fig. 8).
Rand further discloses the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and the second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”) are exposed on a bottom surface of the portable electronic device (“contacts 120” shown on bottom surface of “112” in Fig. 2c; “contacts 125a-d” shown on bottom surface of “125” in Fig. 8).
Rand further discloses a power supply device (“power delivery support structure 111” with “power delivery surface 111a”; Figs. 1, 2b-c, 3, 5a-c, 6a-c, 8, 9d, 10a-d, 14, 16a, 18a-b, 20, 21b, 22, 26, 27) comprising a plurality of charging electrodes (“pads 140a-b”; Fig. 2c; ¶ [100]: “power source flows ... to support structure 111 ... and a potential difference is provided between pads 140a and 140b in response”).
Rand further discloses when the portable electronic device (“112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra) is placed on the power supply device (Fig. 1 shows “112” placed on “111”), the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and the second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”) come into contact with at least two of the charging electrodes (140a-b) to form electrical connections (Fig. 2c shows “120” to come in contact with “140a-b” when placed on “111a”; ¶ [100]: “contacts 120a and 120b engage pads 140a and 140b, respectively”).
Rand further discloses this cause[s] the power supply device (“111” with “111a”, “140a”, “140b”) to supply charging power (¶ [10]: “power delivery surface may deliver power via a plurality of contacts on the electrical device conducting electricity from the power delivery surface”) to the portable electronic device (112) through the charging electrodes (140a-b), the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and the second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”).
Rand does not disclose “wherein the first conductive terminal further comprises an annular electrode, a bottom of the annular electrode comprises an outer convex circular arc portion, and the outer convex circular arc portion comprises a circular arc surface”.
ECT teaches the first conductive terminal (“CP-059-026”, a variety of “battery probe”; pages 100, 104) further comprises an annular electrode (“CP-059-026” has a “J type tip” on the bottom, see annotated figures from pages 10 and 104, included supra).
ECT further teaches a bottom of the annular electrode (tip of “CP-059-026”) comprises an outer convex circular arc portion (annotated pages 10 + 104 figures show shape of the “J type tip” on the bottom of the “BIP-1” probe).
ECT further teaches the outer convex circular arc portion comprises a circular arc surface (surface is “gold plated” per page 104; circular shape is addressed supra).
ECT further teaches this shape of the first conductive terminal’s annular electrode to provide long-life, low-resistance, electrical and mechanical connections (page 104) while also not leaving marks on the contacted surfaces (page 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first conductive terminal disclosed by Rand to be an annular electrode with an outer convex circular arc surface, as taught by ECT, to provide durable electrical and mechanical connections to the charging electrodes and to avoid leaving marks on the charging electrodes.
Claims 2-3, 9, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019) and Esmaeili et al. (US 2017/0093087 A1; hereinafter “Esma”).
Regarding Claims 2 and 12, Rand discloses the portable electronic device (“electronic device 112” in Figs. 1-2; embodied as laptop computer “401” in Fig. 3, “125” in Figs. 8-9, “135” in Fig. 19, “136” in Fig. 19b, “139” in Fig. 20, “145” in Figs. 21a-b, “150” in Fig. 22, “127” in Fig. 26, “401” in Figs. 28a-c) is placed on (Fig. 1 shows “112” placed on “111”) the power supply device (“power delivery support structure 111” with “power delivery surface 111a”; Figs. 1, 2b-c, 3, 5a-c, 6a-c, 8, 9d, 10a-d, 14, 16a, 18a-b, 20, 21b, 22, 26, 27).
Though, as addressed supra, Rand discloses “the portable electronic device is placed on the power supply device”, Rand does not disclose “when the portable electronic device is placed on the power supply device, the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal are flush with a bottom surface of the base”.
Esma teaches the following when the portable electronic device (¶ [6]: “accessory device” which includes “connector arranged along an exterior surface of the device housing”; includes “electrical connector 700” on its exterior surface shown in Fig. 7A; ¶ [37]: “wide variety of accessory devices …”) is placed on the power supply device (“portable electronic device 100” in Fig. 1; ¶ [37]: “100 can … exchange power with various accessory device”; thus, the “accessory device” can receive power and be charged when its “electrical connector 700” is placed on the pads of “100”).
Esma teaches the first conductive terminal (one of the plurality of “pogo pin 650” in Fig. 7a; “650” includes “electrical contact 660” shown in Figs. 6b-c; ¶ [7]: “electrical contact having an exterior portion formed of electrically conductive material”) and the second conductive terminal (another of the plurality of “650” in Fig. 7a”) are flush with a bottom surface of the base (Fig. 6c shows “pogo pin 650” flush with the interface surface between the two devices; “front housing component 656” is the base).
Esma teaches this type of electrical connection (“pogo pin”) to provide a device with more robust and/or protected charging contacts (¶ [3]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the portable electronic device’s conductive terminals disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT for the conductive terminals to be flush with a bottom surface of the base when placed on the power supply device, as taught by Esma, for the advantages of improving the robustness and protection of the conductive terminals.
Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Rand discloses that when the portable electronic device (“112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra) is away from the power supply device (“111” with “111a”, “140a”, “140b”), the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) protrudes from the bottom surface (Fig. 2c shows “120” protruding from “112”) of the base (“laptop housing 127”, an embodiment of “112”, in Figs. 19a-b).
NOTE: The limitation “or a bottom of the display screen” is interpreted as optional by the term “or”.
Rand does not disclose “the first conductive terminal comprises a first spring, and when the portable electronic device is away from the power supply device, the first spring drives the first conductive terminal, to cause the first conductive terminal to protrude from the bottom surface of the base or a bottom of the display screen”.
Esma teaches the first conductive terminal (one of the plurality of “pogo pin 650” in Fig. 7a; includes “electrical contact 660” shown in Figs. 6b-c) comprises a first spring (“spring 658” within “650” in Fig. 6B).
Esma teaches the following when the portable electronic device (¶ [6]: “accessory device” which includes “connector arranged along an exterior surface of the device housing”; includes “electrical connector 700” on its exterior surface shown in Fig. 7A; ¶ [37]: “wide variety of accessory devices …”) is away from the power supply device (“portable electronic device 100” in Fig. 1).
Esma further teaches the first spring (658) drives the first conductive terminal (“650” with “660”), to cause the first conductive terminal to protrude (Fig. 6b shows “660” protruding beyond the surface of “656”) from the bottom surface of the base (“front housing component 656”).
Esma teaches the springs apply force to the contact (¶ [49]), which makes the coupling interface more robust (¶ [3]) and improves efficiency with an increased contact area (¶ [51])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the portable electronic device’s conductive terminals disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT to incorporate a spring and to protrude from the bottom surface of the base when away from the power supply device, as taught by Esma, for the advantages of improving the robustness and efficiency of the contact interfaces.
Regarding Claim 9, Rand discloses a base (base of “125” is depicted but not labelled in Figs. 8-9; base “laptop housing 127” of laptop “135”/“136” shown in Figs. 19a-b) with a first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and a second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”; “contacts 120” shown on bottom surface of “112” in Fig. 2c; “contacts 125a-d” shown on bottom surface of “125” in Fig. 8).
Rand does not disclose “a bottom of the base comprises a first slot and a second slot, the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal are disposed in the first slot and the second slot, and when the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal come into contact with the charging electrodes, the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal are displaced along the first slot and the second slot”.
Esma teaches the first conductive terminal (“electrical contact 660” shown in Figs. 6b-c; within one of the plurality of “pogo pin 650” in Fig. 7a; ¶ [7]: “electrical contact having an exterior portion formed of electrically conductive material”) and the second conductive terminal (“660” within another of the plurality of “650”; Figs. 6a-b, 7b) are disposed in the first slot and the second slot (each “650” has a slot which contains “660”; Figs. 6b-c; 7a).
Esma teaches when the first conductive terminal (“660” within one of “650”) and the second conductive terminal (“660” within another of “650”) come into contact with the charging electrodes (“contact area 674”; Figs. 6b-c), the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal are displaced along the first slot and the second slot (Fig. 6b shows “650” in extended position; Fig. 6c shows “660” being displaced along the slot within “650” after contacting “674”; this occurs to each of plurality of “650” shown in Fig. 7a)/
Esma teaches this type of electrical connection (“pogo pin”) to provide a device with more robust and/or protected charging contacts (¶ [3]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the portable electronic device disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT to replace the conductive terminals on the base of the device with the pogo pin connections taught by Esma for the advantages of improving the robustness and protection of the conductive terminals.
This combination of Rand, ECT and Esma teaches a bottom of the base (Rand: base “laptop housing 127” of laptop “135”/“136” shown in Figs. 19a-b) comprises a first slot and a second slot (as discussed supra, the slot within Esma “650” incorporated into each of the conductive terminals on the base of the device disclosed by Rand).
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019), Esmaeili et al. (US 2017/0093087 A1; hereinafter “Esma”), and the data sheet by LH (Solder Cup Spring Loaded Pin, Straight, 5/24/2019, Adam Tech Interconnects, Rev. -).
As of the current date, the data sheet by LH can be downloaded from either of the following links.
https://app.adam-tech.com/products/download/data_sheet/219095/ph-mvs-xxxx-data-sheet.pdf
https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/adam-tech/PH-MVS-5380/9831502
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, Rand does not disclose “the first conductive terminal further comprises a pad body, and the first conductive terminal protrudes from the pad body”.
LH teaches the first conductive terminal (Adam Tech Interconnects part number PH-MVS-XXXX; “gold plated” per drawing zone A-6) further comprises a pad body (see examiner annotated drawing infra).
LH further teaches the first conductive terminal protrudes from the pad body (see examiner annotated drawing infra).
PNG
media_image3.png
797
1151
media_image3.png
Greyscale
LH teaches the pad body provides a structure to be soldered to within the assembly the contact is installed into (“solder cup” per title).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the portable electronic device’s first conductive terminal disclosed by the combination of Rand, ECT, and Esma to incorporate a pad body, as taught by LH, for the advantage of improving manufacturability (time, cost) by introducing a solderable structure on the pad body.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019), McCracken et al. (US 2014/0132550 A1; hereinafter “McC”), and Olson et al. (US 2018/0054073 A1).
Regarding Claims 6 and 16, Rand does not disclose that “when a rotation angle of the display screen relative to the base changes, contact positions between the annular electrode and the charging electrodes also accordingly change”.
McC teaches a portable electronic device comprising a display screen (“computing device 102” with “display device 110”; Figs. 1, 3-7) and a base (“input device 104”; Figs. 1, 3-7). McC further teaches a first conductive terminal (“connection portion 202” with “electrical contacts 1802”; Figs. 1, 3-7, 27) fixed to the bottom edge of the display screen (102).
McC teaches that when the display screen (102) rotates relative to the base (104) changes, the angle of the first conductive terminal (202) changes (Figs. 3-4 show the orientation of “202” follows the rotation angle between “102” and “104”).
McC teaches this location of the first conductive terminal (202) for the advantage of enabling the transfer of power (¶ [6]) directly to the display screen portion of the portable electronic device, which is necessary in the case of a tablet device that can be detached from its base (such as a “supplemental keyboard” per ¶ [3]). This enables easier portability/mobility of the device (¶ [2]) because it can be used without the base.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display screen disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT to position the first conductive terminal on the bottom of the screen which changes orientation when the rotation angle changes, as taught by McC, for the advantage of improving the mobility of the device to the user.
Olson teaches when an angle of the first conductive terminal (200) changes (Fig. 1C and 1E show two different angles of “200”), contact positions between annular electrode (212) and the charging electrodes (“contact pins 321-323” on “323”) also accordingly change (Fig. 1C and 1E show two different contact positions between “212” and the “contact pins 321-323” on “323”).
Olson teaches this type of connection for the advantage of accommodating misalignments between the portable electronic device and the charging device (¶ [3, 45, 55]), which improves user experience and convenience.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the charging electrodes taught by the combination of Rand, ECT, and McC to be the bumps taught by Olson, for the advantages of improving convenience and user experience.
Thus, the combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Olson teaches that when a rotation angle of the display screen relative to the base changes, contact positions between the annular electrode and the charging electrodes also accordingly change.
Claims 7-8 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019), McCracken et al. (US 2014/0132550 A1; hereinafter “McC”) and Esmaeili et al. (US 2017/0093087 A1; hereinafter “Esma”).
Regarding Claims 7 and 17, Rand does not disclose “when the display screen rotates relative to the base beyond a predetermined angle, the first conductive terminal is displaced, to come into contact with the charging electrodes”.
McC teaches that when a rotation angle of the display screen (102) relative to the base (104) beyond a predetermined angle (occurs for all rotation angles, including “beyond a predetermined angle”), the first conductive terminal (202) is displaced (“202” is fixed to “102”, so it is displaced for any change in rotation angle; Figs. 3-4 show the orientation of “202” follows the rotation angle between “102” and “104”).
McC teaches this location of the first conductive terminal (202) for the advantage of enabling the transfer of power (¶ [6]) directly to the display screen portion of the portable electronic device, which is necessary in the case of a tablet device that can be detached from its base (such as a “supplemental keyboard” per ¶ [3]). This enables easier portability/mobility of the device (¶ [2]) because it can be used without the base.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the portable electronic device disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT to position the first conductive terminal on the bottom of the display screen such that the terminal displaced when the rotation angle changes, as taught by McC, for the advantage of improving the mobility of the device to the user.
Esma teaches a first conductive terminal (one of the plurality of “pogo pin 650” in Fig. 7A; “650” includes “electrical contact 660” shown in Figs. 6B-C; ¶ [7]: “electrical contact having an exterior portion formed of electrically conductive material”) that comes into contact with the charging electrodes (“connector 670”; Fig. 6B; ¶ [50]: “670, with which 650 is configured to electrically couple”; “660” gets pushed by “movable magnet 652” to mating connector “670” when within the magnet’s range).
Esma teaches this type of electrical connection (“pogo pin 650” and mating “connector 670”) to provide a device with more robust and/or protected charging contacts (¶ [3]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the first conductive terminal (located on the bottom of the display screen) and the charging electrodes (on surface of power supply device), as taught by the combination of Rand, ECT, and McC, to be a pogo pin and its mating connector (each with magnets), as taught by Esma, for the advantages of improving the robustness and protection of the conductive terminals.
Thus, the combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma teaches that when the display screen rotates relative to the base beyond a predetermined angle, the first conductive terminal is displaced, to come into contact with the charging electrodes.
Regarding Claims 8 and 18, the combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma teaches a portable electronic device (Rand’s “112” embodied as a laptop with various reference characters listed supra; modifications from McC and Esma are described supra) with a first conductive terminal (Rand’s “120”/“125” moved to bottom of display screen “137” per McC and modified to be a pogo pin per Esma’s “650”).
The combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma further teaches the first conductive terminal (Rand’s “120”/“125” modified to be Esma’s “650”) comprises a support assembly (from Esma: T-shaped “spring coupling device 608” within “650”; Figs. 6B-C), disposed in the display screen (first conductive terminal, modified per Esma’s “650”, is located on bottom of Rand’s display screen “137” per modification from McC).
The combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma further teaches a terminal spring (from Esma: “spring 658” within “650”; Figs. 6B-C), wherein a first end of the terminal spring is connected to the support assembly (from Esma: T-shaped “spring coupling device 608” is shown connected to one end of the “spring 658” in Figs. 6B-C).
The combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma further teaches a terminal assembly (from Esma: “electrical contact 660” within ”650”; Figs. 6B-C), connected to a second end of the terminal spring (from Esma: “660” is shown connected to the other end of the “spring 658” in Figs. 6B-C).
The combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma further teaches when the display screen (Rand’s “137” in Figs. 19a-b, with terminals “125a-d” in Fig. 8 modified to be Esma’s “650” and located on bottom of display screen per McC) rotates relative to the base (Rand’s “127”), the support assembly (from Esma: “608” within “650”) pushes the terminal spring (from Esma: “658” within “650”), to cause the terminal spring (from Esma: “658” within “650”) to push the terminal assembly (from Esma: “660” within “650”) to move (as the laptop screen opens to a wider angle, the first conductive terminal “650” will approach the charging electrode, including additional movement from the “moving magnet “652” pushing on “608”, which pushes on “658”, which causes “660” to move). Note, this combination of references also teaches a broader interpretation of this limitation (The support assembly and the first conductive terminal move with the rest of the display screen, even without magnetic forces; Thus, through the full rotational stroke of the display screen, the support assembly “608” inherently pushes the terminal spring “658”, which inherently pushes the terminal assembly “660”).
NOTE: Based on the previously set forth combination of Rand, ECT, McC, and Esma, these Claim 8 and 18 limitations are met without further modifications.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rand (US 2009/0072782 A1) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019) and Lollo et al. (US 2018/0262028 A1; hereinafter “Lollo-1”)
Regarding Claim 10, Rand discloses a distance (¶ [121]: “contacts 125a-125d are spaced apart from each other”) between the first conductive terminal (one of plurality of “120”/“125”) and the second conductive terminal (another of plurality of “120”/“125”).
Rand teaches this spacing of the terminals so the laptop can be positioned in many different positions relative to the power supply device and still be able to charge (¶ [121]), which improves the user experience.
Rand does not disclose this distance “is at least greater than 5 cm”. However, Rand does provide a non-quantitative description to indicate the conductive terminals of the laptop should be located in opposite corners of the laptop’s base. This is shown in the examiner-annotated Fig. 8, provided infra.
PNG
media_image4.png
595
1466
media_image4.png
Greyscale
One could simply examine a laptop’s dimensions to understand that the terminals taught by Rand should be spaced greater than 5 cm apart. However, Lollo-1 more explicitly teaches this limitation.
Lollo-1 teaches a distance (“predetermined distance c”; Figs. 1-2, 3A) between the first conductive terminal (“input terminal B1”; Figs. 1-2, 3A) and the second conductive terminal (“input terminal B1”; Figs. 1-2, 3A) is at least greater than 5 cm (¶ [42]: “the predetermined distance is … preferably greater than or equal to 55 mm”).
Lollo-1 teaches this terminal spacing (“predetermined distance c”) to provide user-friendly, reliable charging, by ensuring the spacing is sufficiently large to avoid forming a short-circuit (¶ [21]) by two terminals from being located on a same contact zone of the recharging surface (¶ [41]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the distance between the conductive terminals disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT to be greater than 5 cm, as taught by Lollo-1, for the advantage of improving the reliability of charging by preventing short circuits between the conductive terminals.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019) and Lollo et al. (US 2020/0227870 A1; hereinafter “Lollo-2”).
Regarding Claim 19, Rand does not disclose “the power supply device further comprises: a charging controller, electrically connected to the charging electrodes and configured to determine two of the charging electrodes that are in contact with the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal, to charge the portable electronic device through the two charging electrodes”.
Lollo-2 teaches the power supply device (“charging surface” and peripheral control devices in Figs. 1-3, 8-9, 12-13; “coupling interface 300” + “plurality of conductive regions 311-314” in Fig. 3) further comprises a charging controller (“coupling interface 300” with internal “controller 303”; Fig. 3).
Lollo-2 further teaches the charging controller (300) electrically connected to the charging electrodes (Fig. 3 shows electrical connections from “300” to “311-314”).
Lollo-2 further teaches the charging controller (300) is configured to determine two of the charging electrodes (“1060” in Fig. 11: “first conductive region” and “second conductive region” are determined after testing all regions on the surface, prior to charging) that are in contact with the first conductive terminal (“514” in contact with “first electrode 531” of “apparatus 520” in Fig. 5) and the second conductive terminal (“512” in contact with “second electrode 532” of “apparatus 520” in Fig. 5).
Lollo-2 further teaches the charging controller (300) is configured to charge the portable electronic device (“nomadic electronic device”/“apparatus” labelled as “120”, “320”, “420”, “520”, “620”, “901-903”, “1320” in Figs. 1-6, 8-9, 13; ¶ [153]: "such devices may include ... laptop computers") through the two charging electrodes (per Abstract: “multiple conductive regions of the surface can be used to charge an electronic device placed on it”)
Lollo-2 teaches this to verify the position and electrical characteristics (Fig. 11, steps 1060 + 1150) of the electronic device prior to charging it. This avoids attempting to charge across a short circuit, which would waste energy and damage the power supply device (¶ [10]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power supply device disclosed by the combination of Rand and ECT to incorporate a charging controller to identify the two charging electrodes to charge the device with, as taught by Lollo-2, to mitigate risks of wasted energy and/or damaging the power supply device.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 2009/0072782 A1; hereinafter “Rand”) in view of the ECT catalog (ECT Contact Products, POGO Contact Solutions, ect-cpg.com, Catalog 2019), Lollo et al. (US 2020/0227870 A1; hereinafter “Lollo-2”), and Dayan et al. (US 2004/0082369 A1).
Regarding Claim 20, Rand does not disclose “a distance between the first conductive terminal and the second conductive terminal is greater than a diagonal length of each of the charging electrodes”.
Dayan teaches a distance between the first conductive terminal (“electrical contact A1”; Fig. 2; ¶ [36]: “A1 and A2 may be built into the notebook computer itself”) and the second conductive terminal (“electrical contact A2”; Fig. 2) is greater than a diagonal length (Fig. 2 shows separation distance between “A1” and “A2” is greater than the diagonal distance of each of “conductive areas 14”) of each of the charging electrodes (“conductive areas 14”; Fig. 2).
Dayan teaches this arrangement contributes to enabling the mobile device (such as a “notebook computer” per ¶ [36]) to not have to be held in a fixed spatial relationship to the charging device (¶ [3-4]). This improves the mobility of the mobile device while charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the spacing of the conductive terminals disclosed by the combination of Rand, ECT, and Lollo-2 to be greater than the diagonal length of each of the charging electrodes, as taught by Dayan, to improve the mobility of the portable electronic device while charging.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Daniel P McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-5952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM Eastern.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/DANIEL P MCFARLAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859