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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 9 , 12, 14-16, 19-20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2018/0278072), hereinafter Lee.
As to claims 9 and 16 , Lee discloses in figure 3, (reproduced below);-
PNG
media_image1.png
536
549
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A method [see figure above], comprising in a in a first charging phase: providing a first voltage having a constant value to a charging circuit [the charging circuit receives charging voltage], and providing, by the charging circuit charging current having a constant current value to a battery subsequent to the first charging phase [ITRK], in a second charging phase providing the first voltage having the constant value to the charging circuit: and providing, by the charging circuit, the charging current having a second constant current value [IPRE] to the battery in which the second constant current value is greater than the first constant current value; and subsequent to the second charging phase, in a third charging phase, providing the first voltage having a voltage value that tracks a second voltage of the battery to the charging circuit: ; and providing, by the charging circuit, the charging current having a third constant current value to the battery, in which the third constant current value is greater than the second constant current value [figure 3, shows the charging current based on battery terminal voltage, ITRE, IPRE, ICC, wherein ICC>IPRE>ITRE].
As to claims 12 and 14 , Lee discloses in figure 3, wherein: the charging circuit is configurable to transition from the first charging phase to the second charging phase responsive to the second voltage at the battery terminal exceeding a first threshold [see Fig. 5, steps S210-S250 shows battery charging based on battery voltage thresholds].
As to claim 15. Lee discloses inf figure 3, the third constant current value is higher than the second constant current value [see figure above and also ICC>IPRE>ITRE].
As to claim 19, Lee discloses in figure 3 ,wherein: the charging control circuit is configurable to transition from the first charging phase to the second charging phase responsive to the second voltage exceeding a first threshold [see figure above].
As to claim 20, Lee discloses in figure 3, wherein the charging circuit is configurable autonomously transition between the first charging phase, the second charging phase, and the third charging phase [see figure 3; the charging is transition from on current charging phase or stage to the other charging phase or stage autonomously].
As to claim 22, Lee discloses in figure 3, wherein: the charging circuit is configured to: activate the third charging phase responsive to the second voltage exceeding a threshold in the second charging phase [VC-TRK, VC_PRE and VC_CV].
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 1-2,4,6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2019/0280486), hereinafter Cheng, in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0278072), hereinafter Lee.
As to Claim 1, Cheng discloses in figures 1-4, portable system, comprising:
a portable charger [battery box (403); figure 4 and ¶022] having a first terminal and configurable to provide a first voltage at the first terminal [Vin terminal; see figure 4];
a portable device [portal able electronic device (401); see ¶0022] including a charging circuit [ charging circuit (205)] having a second terminal [the terminal output from the charging circuit and a battery terminal [the terminal connected the battery terminal to the charging output terminal] , the second terminal [the second terminal is electrically connected to the input terminal ] coupled to the first terminal the charging circuit configurable to;
in a first charging phase, receive the first voltage having a constant voltage value at the second terminal [receiving voltage from the portable charger].
Cheng does not disclose explicitly, provide a charging current having a first constant current value, during the first charging phase the battery terminal, subsequent to the first charging phase, in a second charging phase, receive the first voltage having the constant voltage value at the second terminal , and provide the charging current having a second constant current value, in which the second constant current value is greater than the first constant current value;
subsequent to the second charging phase, in a third charging phase, receive the first voltage having a voltage value that tracks a second voltage at the battery terminal , receive a constant current at the second terminal , and provide the charging current having a third constant current value during the third charging phase, in which the third constant current value is greater than the second constant current value.
Lee discloses in figure 3, provide a charging current having a first constant current value [ITRK ; trickle charging ; see figure 3] , during the first charging phase the battery terminal, subsequent to the first charging phase, in a second charging phase, receive the first voltage having the constant voltage value at the second terminal , and provide the charging current having a second constant current value [second constant current charging IPRE ], in which the second constant current value is greater than the first constant current value; [ITRK > IPRE ]
subsequent to the second charging phase, in a third charging phase [figure 3, constant current phase ], receive the first voltage having a voltage value that tracks a second voltage at the battery terminal [noted that the current is based on the voltage current which is equivalent with applicant’s charging current] , receive a constant current at the second terminal , and provide the charging current having a third constant current [ICC ] value during the third charging phase, in which the third constant current value is greater than the second constant current value [figure 3, shows the charging current based on battery terminal voltage, ITRE, IPRE, ICC, wherein ICC>IPRE>ITRE].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to charge the battery of Cheng with plurality of step-wise charging current as taught by Lee in order shortening a battery charging time and increasing a charging power efficiency.
As to claim 2, Cheng discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein, in the third charging phase, the first and second voltages differ by no more than about 200 millivolts.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose appropriate voltage threshold or difference value, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine s-kill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
As to claim 4 , Lee discloses in figure 3, wherein: the charging circuit is configurable to transition from the first charging phase to the second charging phase responsive to the second voltage at the battery terminal exceeding a first threshold [see Fig. 5, steps S210-S250 shows battery charging based on battery voltage thresholds].
As to claim 6 Lee discloses in figure 3 , wherein: the linear charging circuit is configured to: transition from the second charging phase to the third charging phase responsive to the voltage of the second battery exceeding a second threshold while charging the second battery in the second charging phase the second charging phase, the charging voltage is constant and the charging current is constant [see Fig. 5, steps S210-S250 shows battery charging based on battery voltage thresholds; ICC>IPRE>ITRE ].
As to claim 8 , Lee discloses in figure 3, wherein the third constant charging current value is higher than the second constant charging current value [see figures 4 and 5; ICC>IPRE>ITRE].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2019/0280486), hereinafter Cheng, in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0278072), hereinafter Lee, and in view of Chang et al. (US 2015/0069957), hereinafter Chang.
As to claim 3, neither Chen nor Lee discloses, wherein: the charging circuit has: a load terminal and includes: a first transistor coupled between the load terminal and the second terminal; and a second transistor coupled between the load terminal and the battery terminal; and the charging circuit is configurable configured to, in the third charging phase, fully turn on the first transistor and the second transistor.
Chang discloses in figure 1, wherein: the charging circuit has : a load terminal [Output terminal]; a first transistor [transistor 128] coupled between the load terminal and the second charging terminal [connected to the battery terminal]; and a second transistor [transistor 124-4] coupled between the load terminal and the battery terminal; and the charging circuit is circuit is configurable to, in the third charging phase, fully turn on the first transistor and the second transistor [noted that the switches are on to charge the battery].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a load and a transistor switches in Cheng’s apparatus as taught by Chane in order to protect reverse current also to power the load.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Lee , in view of Sasao (US 2019/0202384).
As to claim 5, neither Cheng nor Lee discloses, wherein: the charging circuit includes: a temperature monitor circuit; an overvoltage monitor circuit; and an overcurrent monitor circuit, and the charging circuit is configurable to exit the charging phase responsive to detection of an overtemperature fault, an overvoltage fault, or an overcurrent fault.
Sasao discloses in figure wherein: the charging circuit includes: a temperature monitor circuit [element 24] ; an overvoltage monitor circuit [element 23] ; and an overcurrent monitor circuit [element 25] , and the charging circuit is configurable to exit the charging phase responsive to detection of an overtemperature fault, an overvoltage fault, or an overcurrent fault [see ¶0024; when overvoltage, high temperature and over current detected then the control stops the charging process].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Cheng’s apparatus and add battery parameters such as overvoltage, temperature measuring means as taught by Sassao in order to increase the life of the rechargeable battery.
Claims 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
As to claims 10 and 17, Lee discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein, in the third charging phase, the first and second voltages differ by no more than about 200 millivolts.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose appropriate voltage threshold or difference value, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine s-kill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Chang et al. (US 2015/0069957), hereinafter Chang.
As to claims 11 and 18, Lee discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein: the charging circuit has: a load terminal and includes: a first transistor coupled between the load terminal and the second terminal; and a second transistor coupled between the load terminal and the battery terminal; and the charging circuit is configurable configured to, in the third charging phase, fully turn on the first transistor and the second transistor.
Chang discloses in figure 1, wherein: the charging circuit has : a load terminal [Output terminal]; a first transistor [transistor 128] coupled between the load terminal and the second charging terminal [connected to the battery terminal]; and a second transistor [transistor 124-4] coupled between the load terminal and the battery terminal; and the charging circuit is circuit is configurable to, in the third charging phase, fully turn on the first transistor and the second transistor [noted that the switches are on to charge the battery].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a load and a transistor switches in Lee’s apparatus as taught by Chane in order to protect reverse current also to power the load.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Sasao (US 2019/0202384).
As to claim 13 Lee discloses all of the claim limitations except, exiting the charging phase responsive to detection of an overvoltage fault.
Sasao discloses in figure 1, exiting the charging phase responsive to detection of an overvoltage fault or an overcurrent fault by the portable device [overcurrent detection element 25 and the control stop the charging when overvoltage is detected; see (0024).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Lee’s apparatus and add battery parameters such as overvoltage, temperature measuring means as taught by Sassao in order to increase the life of the rechargeable battery..
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Sasao (US 2019/0202384).
As to claim 21, Asao discloses all of the claim limitations except , wherein: the charging circuit includes: a temperature monitor circuit;
an overvoltage monitor circuit; and
an overcurrent monitor circuit, and
the charging circuit is configurable to transmit or block the first voltage from the first terminal to the battery terminal and responsive to outputs of at least one of the temperature monitor circuit, the overvoltage monitor circuit, or t the overcurrent monitor circuit.
Sasao discloses in figure wherein: the linear charging circuit includes: a temperature monitor circuit [element 24] ; an overvoltage monitor circuit [element 23] ; and an overcurrent monitor circuit [element 25] , and the charging circuit is configurable to transmit or block the first voltage from the first terminal to the battery terminal and responsive to outputs of at least one of the temperature monitor circuit, the overvoltage monitor circuit, or the overcurrent monitor circuit. [see ¶0024; when overvoltage, high temperature and over current detected then the control stops the charging process].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Lee’s apparatus and add battery parameters such as overvoltage, temperature measuring means as taught by Sassao in order to increase the life of the rechargeable battery.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of CN 103779887 A, hereinafter 887’.
As to claim 23, Szepesi discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the first voltage is as low as 3.2 volts and the constant charging current is as high a one ampere.
887’ discloses in Szepesi discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the charging voltage is as low as 3.2 volts and the constant charging current is as high a one ampere [see ¶0025].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply appropriate charging currents and voltage in Lee’s apparatus such as 11-14 charging voltages and charging current is 0.5-0.75 amps in Asao’s apparatus as taught by 887’ in order avoid battery damage due to overcharging.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Argument
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response
Lee discloses in figure 1, the charging circuit (120) receives voltage Vin. The input voltage Vin could be a DC power Source which is constant [see ¶0023]. The charging circuit adjusts the charging mode while the charging circuit receives the same Vin voltage.
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 SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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 A. Huffman can be reached on Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859