Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/760,492

TERMINAL, TERMINAL CHARGING METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 10, 2022
Examiner
ONDRASIK, JOHN PAUL
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
ZTE CORPORATION
OA Round
2 (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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 08/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that the voltage boost converter disclosed in Jiang is operated to eliminate or reduce the operation dead zone of the post-stage voltage converter, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., maintaining the output voltage to the battery) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). 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 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) 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11-13, & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paparrizos et al. (USPGPN 2021/0376643 A1 – effectively filed May 27, 2020), in view of Jiang et al. (USPGPN 2023/0006460 A1 – effectively filed Mar. 12, 2020). Regarding Claim 1, Paparrizos (Fig.3-1) teaches a terminal, comprising: a charging circuit (120) comprising a boost charging branch (126-1; ¶0082: 126-1 is a buck-boost charger) and a direct charging branch (126-2; ¶0082: 126-2 is a bypass charger) which are connected to one another in parallel; a branch selector switch (302-1, 302-2, & 302-N) respectively connected to the boost charging branch and the direct charging branch, and the buck charging branch; and a controller (128) connected to the branch selector switch, configured to acquire an output capability parameter of an external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger circuit based on a power source type or capability of the power source adapter) and send a switching signal to the branch selector switch (¶0081: charging controller 128 can selectively open or close any switch 302) according to the output capability parameter, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on one of the boost charging branch and the direct charging branch (¶0081: switches are closed to connect the chargers to the battery). Paparrizos teaches a buck/boost charger but fails to explicitly teach separate buck and boost charging branches as claimed, and fails to explicitly teach wherein sending, by the controller, a switching signal to the branch selector switch according to the output capability parameter, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on one of the boost charging branch, the direct charging branch, and the buck charging branch comprises one of: in response to that the output capability parameter of the charger is within a preset first interval range, sending a first switching signal to the branch selector switch, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on the boost charging branch. However, Jiang teaches a power conversion circuit which includes a voltage buck converter and a voltage boost converter connected in parallel (Fig.3, 111 & 112) and that the boost circuit converter is activated when the input voltage to the conversion circuit is below a lower limit value (¶0074: voltage boost converter 111 is operated when the input voltage is below a lower limit value) (examiner equates below a lower limit value to a preset first interval range). 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 Paparrizos to provide separate buck and boost charging branches and to include a first interval range to determine the activation state of the branch selector switch to switch on the boost charging branch, as taught by Jiang. Doing so would allow for simpler control of the power conversion since buck or boost converters are simpler designs than a buck/boost converter and allow the voltage output to the battery to be maintained above a lower limit for improved efficiency. Regarding Claim 2, Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, further teaches comprising a battery pack (Fig.3-1, 122-1) respectively connected to the boost charging branch, the direct charging branch, and the buck charging branch. Regarding Claim 3, Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, wherein the battery pack comprises at least two batteries connected in series (¶0065: 122-1 may include one or more batteries in series). Regarding Claim 5, Paparrizos (Fig.3 & 3-1), in view of Jian, further teaches comprising a charging interface (124) connected to the branch selector switch (302-1, 302-2, & 302-N) and configured to be externally connected to the charger (104). Regarding Claim 6, Paparrizos, in view of Jian, further teaches wherein acquiring, by the controller, an output capability parameter of an external charger comprises: identifying a type of the external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a power source type of the power source adapter 104); and acquiring the output capability parameter (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a capability of the power source adapter 104) of the charger according to the type of the charger (¶0068: power source adapter capabilities, 5V/9V/10V/20V, are related to the charging type). Regarding Claim 8, Paparrizos teaches a terminal charging method, comprising: acquiring an output capability parameter of an external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger circuit based on a power source type or capability of the power source adapter); and sending a switching signal to a branch selector switch (¶0081: charging controller 128 can selectively open or close any switch 302) according to the output capability parameter, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on one of a boost charging branch and a direct charging branch (¶0081: switches are closed to connect the chargers to the battery). Paparrizos teaches a buck/boost charger but fails to explicitly teach separate buck and boost charging branches as claimed, and fails to explicitly teach wherein sending, by the controller, a switching signal to the branch selector switch according to the output capability parameter, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on one of the boost charging branch, the direct charging branch, and the buck charging branch comprises one of: in response to that the output capability parameter of the charger is within a preset first interval range, sending a first switching signal to the branch selector switch, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on the boost charging branch. However, Jiang teaches a power conversion circuit which includes a voltage buck converter and a voltage boost converter connected in parallel (Fig.3, 111 & 112) and that the boost circuit converter is activated when the input voltage to the conversion circuit is below a lower limit value (¶0074: voltage boost converter 111 is operated when the input voltage is below a lower limit value) (examiner equates below a lower limit value to a preset first interval range). 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 Paparrizos to provide separate buck and boost charging branches and to include a first interval range to determine the activation state of the branch selector switch to switch on the boost charging branch, as taught by Jiang. Doing so would allow for simpler control of the power conversion since buck or boost converters are simpler designs than a buck/boost converter and allow the voltage output to the battery to be maintained above a lower limit for improved efficiency. Regarding Claim 9, Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, further teaches wherein acquiring an output capability parameter of an external charger comprises: identifying a type of the external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a power source type of the power source adapter 104); and acquiring the output capability parameter (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a capability of the power source adapter 104) of the charger according to the type of the charger (¶0068: power source adapter capabilities, 5V/9V/10V/20V, are related to the charging type). Regarding Claim 11, Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, teaches an electronic device, comprising: a memory (Fig.1, 110) configured to store a program; and a processor (Fig.3-1, 128; ¶0059: charging controller 128 may be a processor) configured to execute the program stored in the memory (¶0058: charging controller 128 may include a separate CRM 110 to store processor-executable instructions), wherein the program, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform a terminal charging method of claim 8 (as disclosed in the rejection of claim 8). Regarding Claim 12, Paparrizos teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (¶0053: CRM 110 includes instruction 112, and does not include transitory propagating signals or carrier waves), storing computer-executable instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the terminal charging method comprising: acquiring an output capability parameter of an external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger circuit based on a power source type or capability of the power source adapter); and sending a switching signal to a branch selector switch (¶0081: charging controller 128 can selectively open or close any switch 302) according to the output capability parameter, so as to enable the branch selector switch to switch on one of a boost charging branch and a direct charging branch (¶0081: switches are closed to connect the chargers to the battery). Paparrizos teaches a buck/boost charger but fails to explicitly teach separate buck and boost charging branches as claimed. However, Jiang teaches a power conversion circuit which includes a voltage buck converter and a voltage boost converter connected in parallel (Fig.3, 111 & 112). 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 Paparrizos to provide separate buck and boost charging branches, as taught by Jiang. Doing so would allow for simpler control of the power conversion since buck or boost converters are simpler designs than a buck/boost converter. Regarding Claim 13, Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, further teaches wherein acquiring an output capability parameter of an external charger comprises: identifying a type of the external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a power source type of the power source adapter 104); and acquiring the output capability parameter (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a capability of the power source adapter 104) of the charger according to the type of the charger (¶0068: power source adapter capabilities, 5V/9V/10V/20V, are related to the charging type). Regarding Claim 15, Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, further teaches wherein acquiring an output capability parameter of an external charger comprises: identifying a type of the external charger (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a power source type of the power source adapter 104); and acquiring the output capability parameter (¶0066: charging controller 128 can select a charger based on a capability of the power source adapter 104) of the charger according to the type of the charger (¶0068: power source adapter capabilities, 5V/9V/10V/20V, are related to the charging type). Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, as applied in the rejection of claim 2 above, and further in view of Shen (USPGPN 2007/0152627 A1 – published Jul. 5, 2007). Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, fails to explicitly teach further comprising: a buck output circuit connected to the battery pack and configured to buck a voltage outputted by the battery pack and then output the voltage to an electrical device. However, Shen (Fig.1 & 2) teaches a power regulation system for a battery (2) supplying power to a portable system (Vsys) which uses a buck output circuit (14) to buck the battery voltage before outputting to the voltage to the system (steps 320-350). 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 Paparrizos, in view of Jiang, to use a buck output circuit to reduce the voltage of the battery before supplying the output voltage to the system electronics, as taught by Shen. Doing so ensures that voltage provided to the system is suitable for the electronics, and avoids damaging the electronics by supplying a high 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 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

Aug 10, 2022
Application Filed
May 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 20, 2025
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
Moderate
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