DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
In the communication dated December 31, 2025, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-8, 14-18 and 20 are elected, claims 9-13 and 19 are withdrawn. Claims 1 and 15 are currently amended.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 31, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
The applicant argues that Rader does not teach or suggest the newly claims dual-condition selection as found in claims 1 and 15 (see applicant remarks pages 11-13 and 16).
The applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, after further search, Elias-Palacios US20200209902A1 is newly cited, as further detailed in the action below, as teaching the charging management control of a switched capacitor and a linear regulator connected in parallel.
The applicant argues with regard to claim 4 that Rader does not meet the stepwise increase in voltage (see page15 of applicant remarks).
However, because Rader discusses raising the input voltage Vin (¶53), all that is required is two data points, thus, as long as Vin rises, then a step-wise voltage increase is taught.
Applicant argues that Rader does not disclose range-setting grounded in battery-charging power loss and a conversion ratio as recited in claim 7.
Examiner agrees that Rader does not explicitly teach setting according to power loss. However, this feature is taught by Elias-Palacios US20200209902A1 as detailed in the rejection below (see page 15 of the applicant remarks).
The applicant further argues that charging modes such as constant-current and constant voltage are not taught by Rader as recited in claim 6 (see pages 15-16).
Constant current and constant voltage are frequent charging methods in the art. Further, a linear regulator is known to mainly operate in a constant voltage mode. However, in the interest of an explicit constant current disclosure Mao et al. US20200076249A1 discloses disabling the linear regulator during a constant current in which the switched capacitor is turned on.
The applicant argues that the reading of “reusing a switch” of claim 14 has been misinterpreted and attention should be directed to ¶38 of the specification (see page 16 of applicant remarks).
However, it is unclear how a switch is “reused” while charging in the linear regulator mode. In ¶38 of applicant spec the reuse seems to apply to devices arranged in series. If this is the case, the claim should be withdrawn. If not, then further clarification is required in the claim language. This is indicated in the 112 rejection detailed below.
Drawings
The drawings were received on December 3, 2025. These drawings are accepted and entered.
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites “selection for battery charging management is performed only when both nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery differ by more than a first threshold and the charging power of the battery exceeds a second threshold” in lines 9-12. This claim language is limiting the selection to only occur in this condition. However, further in the claim recites “when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is less than the first threshold” in lines 16-17, which contradicts the requirement that the voltage difference be greater than the first threshold in order to perform a selection.
Similar claim language appears in claim 15 and thus is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 1.
Claims 2-8, 14, 16-18 and 20 are rejected at least due to their dependency from a rejected claim.
Claim 14 recites “do not operate simultaneously” and “the switched capacitor converter is reused as a power device of the linear regulator”. It is uncertain how they do not operate simultaneously, but the switching converter is used during the linear regulator operation”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 recites subject matter that is included in amended claim 1 and thus does not further limit the claim. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claims 6-8 are rejected at least due to their dependency from a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rader et al. US20090016085A1 in view of Elias-Palacios US20200209902A1.
Regarding claim 1. Rader discloses a charging control method of a power supply equipment (FIG. 1) wherein the power supply equipment comprises a power stage circuit (DC-to-DC converter 10) and load 12, an input power supply charges the battery through the power stage circuit (14), the power stage circuit comprises a linear regulator (18) and a switched capacitor converter (20), the linear regulator is connected in parallel with the switched capacitor converter (FIG. 1 illustrates the linear pass output circuit and the charge pump circuit to be connected in parallel).
Rader does not explicitly teach that the load is a battery; selection for battery charging management is performed only when both nominal voltage of the battery and the actual volage of the battery differ by more than a first threshold and the charging power of the battery exceeds a second threshold; wherein, when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is greater than the first threshold and the charging power of the battery is greater than the second threshold, the switched capacitor converter performs the battery charging management and the linear regulator is disabled; and when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is less than the first threshold, the linear regulator performs the battery charging management and the switched capacitor converter is disabled
Elias-Palacios discloses a battery (20) as the load (FIG. 1).
selection for battery charging management is performed only when both nominal voltage of the battery and the actual volage of the battery differ by more than a first threshold (¶18 - nominal voltage range is in the range of 5.5-16V; ¶18-19 – it is determined whether the voltage is within the nominal range) and the charging power of the battery exceeds a second threshold (¶22 – when the power received at the input drops below requisite levels, the boost regulator 220 operates; ¶25 - minimum battery voltage is 4V which can be fully supported by the switched capacitor regulator);
wherein, when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is greater than the first threshold and the charging power of the battery is greater than the second threshold, the switched capacitor converter performs the battery charging management and the linear regulator is disabled (¶19 – when the voltage falls below parameters set by voltage reference, the switched capacitor 220 takes over control and stopes the linear regulator 210; ¶22 – when the power received at the input drops below requisite levels, the boost regulator 220 operates; ¶25 - minimum battery voltage is 4V which can be fully supported by the switched capacitor regulator); and
when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is less than the first threshold, the linear regulator performs the battery charging management and the switched capacitor converter is disabled (¶18 – while the voltage is operating in the nominal range, it is the linear regulator 210 that operates and not the switched capacitor boost regulator 220).
NOTE: the language of “when” is considered conditional language. Because the system of Rader and Elias-Palacios may never reach one of the conditions i.e. the difference being above a threshold or the difference being below a threshold, thus, if the references discloses one of the conditions the claim limitations are met. However, in the interest of compact prosecution, the conditional language has been examined.
Although using the difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is not explicitly taught, a person of ordinary skill in the art would know to modify the determination by using the middle point of the range (10.5V) as the threshold. If the difference is more than 4.5V, then the actual voltage is outside the nominal voltage range. Thus, arriving at the same result.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the charging management of Elias-Palacios to the system of Rader in order to provide safe operations under various voltage conditions (Elias-palacios; ¶28).
Regarding claim 2. Rader teaches sampling the voltage of the battery (¶32 – operating conditions are detected; ¶29 – operating conditions include VIN, VOUT, load current etc.).
Rader discloses adjusting an input voltage of the power stage circuit according to the voltage of the battery (¶30 the converter is operated in a buck or boost mode according to the detected operating conditions).
Rader discloses wherein when the switched capacitor converter (20) performs the battery charging management, a ratio of the input voltage of the power stage circuit to the voltage of the battery is within a first range (¶30 – if the charge pump output circuit 20 is configured for a boost mode, it will have greater than one input-to-voltage ratio e.g. 1.5x or 2x, thus having a first range).
Rader discloses when the linear regulator performs the battery charging management, the ratio of the input voltage of the power stage circuit to the voltage of the battery is within a second range (¶30 - linear pass output circuit 18 is regarded as having a nominally one-to-one input-to-output voltage ratio, thus having a second range that is less than the first).
Regarding claim 3. Radar discloses that when the switched capacitor converter performs charging, an input voltage of the power stage circuit increases with the voltage of the battery (¶30 – charge pump output circuit configured for a boost mode operation).
Regarding claim 4. Rader discloses the input voltage of the power stage circuit increases stepwise with the voltage of the battery (¶53 – Vin rises, thus increasing; under the broadest reasonable interpretation, if the voltage is increasing there is naturally some sort of stepwise increase).
Regarding claim 5. Rader discloses the linear regulator (18) is connected in parallel with the switched capacitor converter (20) (FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 8. Rader discloses that the linear pass output circuit 18 operates at a one-to-one input to output voltage ratio, thus, when charging the battery in a constant voltage charging mode, the linear regulator (18) performs the battery charging management, and the switched capacitor converter is disabled (¶30).
Regarding claim 15. Rader discloses power supply equipment (FIG. 1), comprising a power stage circuit (14) and a load 12, wherein the load 12 is charged through the power stage circuit (14), the power stage circuit (14) comprises a linear regulator (18) and a switched capacitor converter (20), the linear regulator (18) is connected in parallel (FIG. 1) with the switched capacitor converter (20), and
Rader does not explicitly teach that the load is a battery; and the linear regulator and the switched capacitor converter are selected for battery charging management only when both (i) a voltage difference between a nominal voltage of the battery and an actual voltage of the battery is greater than a first threshold and (ii) a charging power of the battery is greater than a second threshold; wherein, when both thresholds are satisfied, the switched capacitor converter performs the battery charging management and the linear regulator is disabled; and when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is less than the first threshold, the linear regulator performs the battery charging management and the switched capacitor converter is disabled.
Elias-Palacios discloses a battery (20) as the load (FIG. 1).
the linear regulator (210) and the switched capacitor converter (220)are selected for battery charging management only when both (i) a voltage difference between a nominal voltage of the battery and an actual voltage of the battery is greater than a first threshold (¶18 - nominal voltage range is in the range of 5.5-16V; ¶18-19 – it is determined whether the voltage is within the nominal range) and (ii) a charging power of the battery is greater than a second threshold;
(¶22 – when the power received at the input drops below requisite levels, the boost regulator 220 operates; ¶25 - minimum battery voltage is 4V which can be fully supported by the switched capacitor regulator)
wherein, when both thresholds are satisfied, the switched capacitor converter performs the battery charging management and the linear regulator is disabled (¶19 – when the voltage falls below parameters set by voltage reference, the switched capacitor 220 takes over control and stopes the linear regulator 210; ¶22 – when the power received at the input drops below requisite levels, the boost regulator 220 operates; ¶25 - minimum battery voltage is 4V which can be fully supported by the switched capacitor regulator); and
when the voltage difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is less than the first threshold, the linear regulator performs the battery charging management and the switched capacitor converter is disabled (¶18 – while the voltage is operating in the nominal range, it is the linear regulator 210 that operates and not the switched capacitor boost regulator 220).
NOTE: the language of “when” is considered conditional language. Because the system of Rader and Elias-Palacios may never reach one of the conditions i.e. the difference being above a threshold or the difference being below a threshold, thus, if the references discloses one of the conditions the claim limitations are met. However, in the interest of compact prosecution, the conditional language has been examined.
Although using the difference between the nominal voltage of the battery and the actual voltage of the battery is not explicitly taught, a person of ordinary skill in the art would know to modify the determination by using the middle point of the range (10.5V) as the threshold. If the difference is more than 4.5V, then the actual voltage is outside the nominal voltage range. Thus, arriving at the same result.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the charging management of Elias-Palacios to the system of Rader in order to provide safe operations under low voltage conditions (Elias-palacios; ¶28).
Regarding claim 16. Rader discloses that the voltage of the battery is sampled (¶32 – operating conditions are detected; ¶29 – operating conditions include VIN, VOUT, load current etc.), an input voltage of the power stage circuit is adjusted according to the voltage of the battery (¶30 the converter is operated in a buck or boost mode according to the detected operating conditions), and when the switched capacitor converter (20) performs the battery charging management, a ratio of the input voltage of the power stage circuit to the voltage of the battery is within a first range (¶30 – if the charge pump output circuit 20 is configured for a boost mode, it will have greater than one input-to-voltage ratio e.g. 1.5x or 2x); and when the linear regulator performs the battery charging management, the ratio of the input voltage of the power stage circuit to the voltage of the battery is within a second range (¶30 - linear pass output circuit 18 is regarded as having a nominally one-to-one input-to-output voltage ratio).
Regarding claim 17. Radar discloses that when the switched capacitor converter performs charging, the input voltage of the power stage circuit increases with the voltage of the battery (¶30 – charge pump output circuit configured for a boost mode operation).
Regarding claim 18. Rader discloses that when the linear regulator (18) is connected in parallel with the switched capacitor converter (20) (FIG. 1) , Rader discloses that the linear pass output circuit 18 operates at a one-to-one input to output voltage ratio, thus, operating in a constant voltage mode, the charge pump output circuit 20 operates in a boost mode, thus, increasing the voltage such that when charging the battery in a constant current charging mode (voltage is increasing), the switched capacitor converter (20) performs the battery charging management (because the voltage is no longer constant), and the linear regulator is disabled (see ¶30); and Rader discloses that the linear pass output circuit 18 operates at a one-to-one input to output voltage ratio, thus, when charging the battery in a constant voltage charging mode, the linear regulator (18) performs the battery charging management, the switched capacitor converter is disabled (¶30).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rader et al. US20090016085A1 in view of Elias-Palacios US20200209902A1 and further in view of Mao et al. US20200076249A1.
Regarding claim 6. Rader does not explicitly teach that when charging the battery in a constant current charging mode, the switched capacitor converter performs the battery charging management, and the linear regulator is disabled.
Mao discloses when charging the battery in a constant current charging mode, the switched capacitor converter performs the battery charging management, and the linear regulator is disabled (FIG. 6; ¶85 – buck circuit – or linear regulator - is disabled and the switched capacitor charges in a constant current charging mode).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the constant current charging control of Mao with the system of Rader and Elias-Palacios in order regulate the charging current using a charging mode common in the art to increase voltage (Mao; ¶85)
NOTE: the language of “when” is considered conditional language. Because the system of Rader and Elias-Palacios may never reach one of the conditions i.e. “when” allows for the case that the event does not occur such as never reaching constant current charging in a charging cycle, thus, if the references discloses one of the conditions the claim limitations are met. However, in the interest of compact prosecution, the conditional language has been examined.
Regarding claim 7. Rader discloses the first range is set according to a conversion ratio of the input voltage of the power stage circuit to the voltage of the battery (¶30-32 – mode is selected based on the detected operating conditions and determining which of the output circuits is “stronger” in terms of input-to-output voltage ratio. It is determined whether to operate in each mode according to the output needs).
Rader does not explicitly teach the range set according to power loss of battery charging
Elias-Palacios discloses adjusting the operation according to a degraded functionality of the battery (¶20).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill that a degraded battery would cause the first range to be set differently than an undegraded battery as the input to output ratio would not be as high.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the charging management of Elias-Palacios to the system of Rader in order to provide safe operations under various voltage conditions (Elias-palacios; ¶28).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rader et al. US20090016085A1 in view of Elias-Palacios US20200209902A1 and in further view of Ito et al. US7560915B2.
Regarding claim 14. Rader does not explicitly teach that when the linear regulator and the switched capacitor converter do not operate simultaneously, at least one switching device in the switched capacitor converter is reused as a power device of the linear regulator.
Ito discloses that when the linear regulator and the switched capacitor converter do not operate simultaneously, at least one switching device in the switched capacitor converter is reused (switch is repeatedly controlled) as a power device of the linear regulator (claim 4 – linear regulator receives boosted output voltage from the charge pump booster circuits and generates the regulated voltage).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the switched capacitor as a power device as taught by Rader, since Ito states at col 1 , lines 53-57 that such a modification would prevent overshoot and improve the stability of the output power.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rader et al. US20090016085A1 in view of Elias-Palacios US20200209902A1 and in further view of Petersen US10454291B2.
Regarding claim 20. Rader discloses the switched capacitor converter (20) comprises at least one capacitor and at least a first switch transistor (¶38 – charge pump transistors and switched capacitors),
Rader discloses that the linear pass output circuit 18 operates at a one-to-one input to output voltage ratio, thus, operating in a constant voltage mode, the charge pump output circuit 20 operates in a boost mode, thus, increasing the voltage such that when charging the battery in a constant current charging mode(voltage is increasing), the switched capacitor converter (20) performs the battery charging management (because the voltage is no longer constant) (¶30).
Rader does not explicitly disclose a second switch transistor, a third switch transistor, and a fourth switch transistor, the first switch transistor, the second switch transistor, the third switch transistor and the fourth switch transistor are connected in sequence, a first terminal of the first switch transistor receives an input voltage of the power stage circuit, a second common connection terminal of the second switch transistor and the third switch transistor is connected to the battery; the at least one capacitor comprises a first terminal connected with a first common connection terminal of the first switch transistor and the second switch transistor, and a second terminal connected with a third common connection terminal of the third switch transistor and the fourth switch transistor.
Peterson discloses that the switched capacitor converter (FIG. 3) comprises at least one capacitor (300) and at least a first switch transistor (S1), a second switch transistor (S2), a third switch transistor (S3), and a fourth switch transistor (S4).
Peterson discloses the first switch transistor, the second switch transistor, the third switch transistor and the fourth switch transistor are connected in sequence (S1-S4 are connected in sequence as illustrated by FIG. 3).
Peterson discloses a first terminal of the first switch transistor (S1) receives an input voltage of the power stage circuit (FIG. 1 connected to the power source battery 200), a second common connection terminal of the second switch transistor and the third switch transistor is connected to the battery (a terminal of each of S2 and S3 are connected to the load via Vout).
Peterson discloses the at least one capacitor (300) comprises a first terminal connected with a first common connection terminal of the first switch transistor (S1) and the second switch transistor (S2), and a second terminal connected with a third common connection terminal of the third switch transistor (S3) and the fourth switch transistor (S4) (FIG. 3).
Rader discloses the claimed invention except for the details of the charge pump. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include the known charge pump circuitry of Peterson to the charge pump of Rader, since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. Agrizap, Inc. v. Woodstream Corp., 520 F.3d 1337, 86 USPQ2d 1110 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM..
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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859