Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/740,592

Simplified Multi-Part Refueling Device

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 10, 2022
Examiner
ONDRASIK, JOHN PAUL
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Tecflower AG
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allow Rate
17 granted / 35 resolved
-19.4% vs TC avg
Strong +66% interview lift
Without
With
+65.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
75
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
50.3%
+10.3% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 35 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/17/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 & 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichikawa et al. (USPGPN 20160082848 A1), in view of Ortiz et al. (USPGPN 20230211683 A1) and Sebestyen (USPGPN 2018/0281611). Regarding Claim 1, Ichikawa teaches a multi-part refueling device for refueling an electric drive battery of a movable vehicle, comprising: a vehicle-side coupling device (Fig.7, 13 & 180; Fig.7/31/32/33, 200; Fig.31/32/33, 30A: drive mechanism 30A is an alternative embodiment of drive mechanism 30, which is shown in Fig.7, and so drive mechanism 30A would also be driven by controller 180 through adjuster 9 to move power receiving unit 200) with a charging connection (Fig.7: connection between charger 142 and rectifier 13), a computer and control unit (Fig.7, 180), a contact plate connection designed as an electric cable (Fig.7: connection between power receiving unit 200 and rectifier 13) and a movable contact plate (Fig.7/31/32/33, 200) with connecting means, and a ground coupling device (Fig.33, 61) arranged in a stationary and fixed manner on the ground, which is compatible with the selected connecting means, wherein the vehicle-side coupling device carried on the vehicle includes connecting means (Fig.4, 22) and a manipulator arm (Fig.33, 30A) for descending, displacing and lowering the contact plate (Fig.33,200) in a center of the stationary ground coupling device, wherein the manipulator arm is mounted so that it can be moved up and down (Figs. 31 & 32 show that the manipulator moves up and down to position the contactor plate vertically), has at least one upper arm segment (Fig.33, 150T & 151) pivotally and rotatably mounted on the vehicle side (Fig.33, upper arms 150T & 151 pivot and rotate at 161T & 160T, respectively), a lower arm segment (Fig.33, 130T) where the contact plate (Fig.33, 200) is mounted, and is automatically controlled by the computer and control unit (controller 180 executes drive control of the drive mechanism 30, which would also execute drive control of the alternative embodiment 30A). Ichikawa fails to explicitly teach the ground coupling device with charging contacts, the vehicle-side coupling device including charging contacts, or the lower arm segment is telescopic. However, Sebestyen (Figs.1 & 4) teaches a vehicle charging arm system using a ground coupling device (CS) with charging contacts (4) and vehicle-side coupling device (304) with charging contacts (301). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Ichikawa with Sebestyen to use charging contacts instead of charging coils for the ground coupling device and vehicle-side coupling device. Doing so would allow for high current charging while reducing the risk to persons or animals in the vicinity of the vehicle, as evidenced by Sebestyen (¶0004). Moreover, Ortiz teaches the use of a telescopic arm segment to move a contact plate (¶0079: telescoping tubing or other electromechanically or pneumatically controlled telescoping hardware may be used to move the coil). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Ichikawa to use telescoping hardware for the lower arm segment, as taught by Ortiz, since it would provide a means for adjusting the contact plate’s height without having to further adjust the position of the upper arm segment and therefore increasing the adjustability of the height of the contact plate. Regarding Claim 2, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the manipulator arm includes the upper arm segment (Fig.33, 150T & 151) pivotally and rotatably mounted on the vehicle side (Fig.33, upper arms 150T & 151 pivot and rotate at 161T & 160T, respectively), a joint (Fig.33, 163), a lower arm segment (Fig.33, 130T) and a further joint (Fig.33, 164T) for mounting the contact plate (200), and is automatically controlled by the computer and control unit. Regarding Claim 3, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the upper arm segment of the manipulator arm is pivotally attached to a joint on the vehicle side (Fig.33, 160T & 161T). Regarding Claim 4, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the lower arm segment is designed as a telescopic segment that can be moved electrically, electromechanically or pneumatically controllably by the computer and control unit and can thus be extended linearly (as explained in the rejection of claim 1: [Ortiz] telescoping tubing or other electromechanically or pneumatically controlled telescoping hardware). Regarding Claim 5, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the manipulator arm is designed to be electrically, electromechanically or pneumatically controlled by the computer and control unit (drive mechanism 30A is controlled by the computer, as explained in the rejection of claim 1; Fig.33, 141/¶0290: drive unit 141 may be a pneumatic cylinder). Regarding Claim 6, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches having at least one sensor (Fig.7/15, 310) and is connected to the computer and control unit (Fig.7: controller 180 is connected to detectors 310) for determining the optimal position relative to the stationary ground coupling device (¶0230, controller 180, through HV-ECU 470 & detection ECU 460, uses detectors 310 to optimally position the power receiving device 11, and subsequently the power receiving unit 200), wherein the at least one sensor is a contact sensor, an electromagnetic sensor, a magnetic sensor, an optical sensor or an infrared sensor (¶0063: detectors 310 can detect a magnetic field or electric field). Ichikawa fails to explicitly teach the sensor is arranged on the contact plate or in the inner space of the contact plate. However, Ortiz teaches that the location of position sensors (Fig.14B, 92 & 94) can be arranged on a contact plate (Fig.14B, 115). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Ichikawa, in view of Ortiz and Sebestyen, to position the sensors on the contact plate to facilitate accurate placement of the charging member for increased efficiency, as evidenced by Ortiz. Regarding Claim 7, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches the stationary ground coupling device (Fig.7/33, 61) comprises charging electronics (Fig.7, 55, 64, & 230) which starts and ends the refueling process (¶0108: charging is started and stopped), wherein an electric current is fed in a controlled manner (¶0270: indicates that the frequency of the current supplied to the power transmitting coil is adjusted, or controlled). Regarding Claim 8, Ichikawa, in view of Ortiz and Sebestyen, (as applied to the rejection of claim 1) teaches a refueling method using a multi-part refueling device for refueling an electric drive battery of a movable vehicle, comprising the steps of: - providing the multi-part refueling device of claim 1 (as explained in the rejection of claim 1) - positioning the vehicle in the vicinity of a locally fixed immovable ground coupling device (Fig.20, steps S8, S9, & S10) - operating a computer and control unit to start the refueling process (¶0108, controller 180 sends charging start commands through communication unit 160), - lowering of a contact plate in the direction of the ground coupling device (Figs. 31 & 33 show the power receiving unit lowered towards the power supply device 61) on the ground beneath the vehicle by means of a manipulator arm electrically, electromechanically or pneumatically controlled (¶0290: drive unit 141 is a pneumatic cylinder) by the computer and control unit in such a way that connecting means of the contact plate are brought to a minimum distance from the ground coupling device (¶0230: the method of controlling the power receiving device 11 accounts for a minimum distance between the power transmitting device and the power receiving device), - starting the refueling process by applying electricity (¶0109: full-scale charging is started by power supply device 64), and after the refueling, - transferring the contact plate back into a storage state by means of the manipulator arm (¶0297: when charging completes, power receiving 200 is moved upwards back to position S1). Ichikawa fails to explicitly teach lowering the contact plate to a minimum distance from charging contacts of the ground coupling device and applying electricity to the charging contacts. However, Sebestyen teaches lowering the contact plate to a minimum distance from the charging contacts of the ground coupling device (Figs. 2a to 2b: contact element is moved to the stationary contact element until they come in contact) and applying electricity to the charging contacts (¶0007: movable contacting element for electric contact with a stationary contacting element for electric charging of the electric storage arrangement; which indicates electricity is applied to the charging contacts). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Ichikawa, in view of Ortiz and Sebestyen, with Sebestyen to lower the contact plate to a minimum distance from the charging contacts of the ground coupling device and apply electricity to the charging contacts. Doing so would allow for high current charging while reducing the risk to persons or animals in the vicinity of the vehicle, as evidenced by Sebestyen (¶0004). Regarding Claim 9, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the manipulator arm includes the upper arm segment (Fig.33, 150T & 151) pivotally and rotatably mounted on the vehicle side (Fig.33, upper arms 150T & 151 pivot and rotate at 161T & 160T, respectively), a joint (Fig.33, 163), a lower arm segment (Fig.33, 130T) and a further joint (Fig.33, 164T) for mounting the contact plate (200), and is automatically controlled by the computer and control unit. Regarding Claim 10, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the upper arm segment of the manipulator arm is pivotally attached to a joint on the vehicle side (Fig.33, 160T & 161T). Regarding Claim 11, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the lower arm segment is designed as a telescopic segment that can be moved electrically, electromechanically or pneumatically controllably by the computer and control unit and can thus be extended linearly (as explained in the rejection of claim 1: [Ortiz] telescoping tubing or other electromechanically or pneumatically controlled telescoping hardware). Regarding Claim 12, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches wherein the manipulator arm is designed to be electrically, electromechanically or pneumatically controlled by the computer and control unit (drive mechanism 30A is controlled by the computer, as explained in the rejection of claim 1; Fig.33, 141/¶0290: drive unit 141 may be a pneumatic cylinder). Regarding Claim 13, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches having at least one sensor (Fig.7/15, 310) and is connected to the computer and control unit (Fig.7: controller 180 is connected to detectors 310) for determining the optimal position relative to the stationary ground coupling device (¶0230, controller 180, through HV-ECU 470 & detection ECU 460, uses detectors 310 to optimally position the power receiving device 11, and subsequently the power receiving unit 200), wherein the at least one sensor is a contact sensor, an electromagnetic sensor, a magnetic sensor, an optical sensor or an infrared sensor (¶0063: detectors 310 can detect a magnetic field or electric field). Ichikawa fails to explicitly teach the sensor is arranged on the contact plate or in the inner space of the contact plate. However, Ortiz teaches that the location of position sensors (Fig.14B, 92 & 94) can be arranged on a contact plate (Fig.14B, 115). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Ichikawa, in view of Ortiz and Sebestyen, to position the sensors on the contact plate to facilitate accurate placement of the charging member for increased efficiency, as evidenced by Ortiz. Regarding Claim 14, Ichikawa, as modified, further teaches the stationary ground coupling device (Fig.7/33, 61) comprises charging electronics (Fig.7, 55, 64, & 230) which starts and ends the refueling process (¶0108: charging is started and stopped), wherein an electric current is fed in a controlled manner (¶0270: indicates that the frequency of the current supplied to the power transmitting coil is adjusted, or controlled). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN P ONDRASIK whose telephone number is (703)756-1963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOHN P ONDRASIK/Examiner, Art Unit 2859 /JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 10, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 18, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Oct 08, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 20, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12512690
VEHICLE ELECTRICITY STORAGE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12506190
BATTERY-MODULE TEMPERATURE INCREASE METHOD AND CELL BALANCING METHOD USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12500280
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MONITORING AT LEAST THREE BATTERY CELLS OF A BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12500437
DC FAST CHARGING USING CLOSED-LOOP CONTROL OF MULTI-FUNCTIONAL INVERTER-BASED BOOST CONVERTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12494659
Generating Vehicle Wakeup Signal
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
49%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+65.6%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 35 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month