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 . As per the remarks of 12/01/2025, claims 1, 7 and 15-20 have been amended. As per the amendments and arguments regarding the 112 rejections of claims 1, 3 and 8 have been considered as described in the remarks, hence rejections have been withdrawn. Applicant further amended the drawings to add the required descriptive labels as previously objected to the drawings. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn, and the replacement sheets are accepted. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statment
The Information Disclosure Statement dated 10/02/2025 is acknowledged and the cited references have been considered in this examination.
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 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 present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baarman et al. (US 2016/0134154) in view of Wilson et al. (US 62014/0364688) further in view of Large et al. (US 2014/0139178)(hereinafter, Large).
With respect to claim 1 and 15, Baarman et al. (hereinafter, Baarman) discloses a wireless charging device/method (Fig. 3, 3A-3C), comprising: a plurality of charging coils provided at a charging surface of the wireless charging device (See Reproduced drawing of Fig. 11; charging surface-Zone 1-Zone 7); a plurality of driver circuits, each configured to supply a charging current to one or more of the plurality of charging coils (Para. # 0058: the driver circuitry can individually energize the coils. The ability to individually select any combination of coils provides the ability to reduce dead zones relative to the embodiments where groups of fixed number of coils are energized); and a controller (Para. # 0048, 0057)
PNG
media_image1.png
686
856
media_image1.png
Greyscale
configured to: determine that a chargeable device is positioned proximate to a first charging coil in the plurality of charging coils (Para. # 0004, 0054/0055); couple the first charging coil to a second driver circuit (Para. # 0006, 010: immediately adjacent areas that are able to couple to the secondary coil), wherein a second charging coil in the plurality of charging coils is coupled to the second driver circuit (Fig. 9A); and configuring the charging current supplied by the second driver circuit to cause the first charging coil and the second charging coil to transfer a desired power level to the chargeable device (Para. # 0011, 0044: a multi-layer coil array, and a controller programmed to selectively energize one or more coils within the multi-layer coil array in order to transfer power wirelessly to a device placed on the charging surface).
BAARMAN, however, does not expressly disclose decouple the first charging coil in the plurality of charging coils from a first driver circuit.
Wilson et al. (Hereinafter, Wilson) discloses, on the other hand, decouple the first charging coil in the plurality of charging coils from a first driver circuit (see Para. # 0043: the current to the primary driver may be sensed as shown in the exemplary circuit of FIG. 7, where a current sense circuit (730) is coupled between the power supply (740) and the driver (720) to determine the current (i1) flowing into the driver of the primary coil (710); and the current flowing into the drive provides an indication of the magnitude of the alternative current (i2) flowing into the primary coil).
PNG
media_image2.png
457
831
media_image2.png
Greyscale
BAARMAN and Wilson are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor namely Selectable coil array and Orientation detecting docking system with inductive power drive circuit.
But both references do not expressly discloses coupling multiple charging coil to a driver circuit of the multiple driver circuit after decoupling the first charging coil from the first driver circuit.
Large, however, discloses coupling multiple charging coil to a driver circuit of the multiple driver circuit after decoupling the first charging coil from the first driver circuit (Para. # 0048, 0049: a plurality of driver circuits 32 can be provided such as 32a, 32b, 32c shown in FIG. 8A, and each of these driver circuits 32a-32c is connected to a separate one of the coils 30a-30c).
PNG
media_image3.png
443
689
media_image3.png
Greyscale
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Baarman’s coil array with the teaching of Wilson in view of Large for the benefit of protecting the charging or chargeable device from being damage due to excessive current to the coils erroneous orientations in one way, and also use multiple charging coils with particular dedicated driver using different charging circuit for dedicated battery to be charged or charging multiple devices (batteries) simultaneously.
With respect to claim 7, the combined references of Baarman, Wilson and Large disclose the wireless charging device/method as described above, Wilson discloses further comprising: decoupling the first charging coil from the second driver circuit when power transfer to the chargeable device has been terminated; and coupling the first charging coil to the first driver circuit after decoupling the first charging coil from the second driver circuit (see Para. # 0043: the current to the primary driver may be sensed as shown in the exemplary circuit of FIG. 7).
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baarman et al. (US 2016/0134154) in view of Wilson et al. (US 62014/0364688).
With respect to claims 8 and 9, Baarman et al. (hereinafter, Baarman) discloses a wireless charging device/method (Fig. 3, 3A-3C), comprising: a plurality of charging coils provided at a charging surface of the wireless charging device (See Reproduced drawing of Fig. 11; charging surface-Zone 1-Zone 7); a plurality of driver circuits, each configured to supply a charging current to one or more of the plurality of charging coils (Para. # 0058: the driver circuitry can individually energize the coils. The ability to individually select any combination of coils provides the ability to reduce dead zones relative to the embodiments where groups of fixed number of coils are energized); and a controller (Para. # 0048, 0057)
PNG
media_image1.png
686
856
media_image1.png
Greyscale
configured to: determine that a chargeable device is positioned proximate to a first charging coil in the plurality of charging coils (Para. # 0004, 0054/0055); couple the first charging coil to a second driver circuit (Para. # 0006, 010: immediately adjacent areas that are able to couple to the secondary coil), wherein a second charging coil in the plurality of charging coils is coupled to the second driver circuit (Fig. 9A); and configuring the charging current supplied by the second driver circuit to cause the first charging coil and the second charging coil to transfer a desired power level to the chargeable device (Para. # 0011, 0044: a multi-layer coil array, and a controller programmed to selectively energize one or more coils within the multi-layer coil array in order to transfer power wirelessly to a device placed on the charging surface).
BAARMAN, however, does not expressly disclose decouple the first charging coil in the plurality of charging coils from a first driver circuit.
Wilson et al. (Hereinafter, Wilson) discloses, on the other hand, decouple the first charging coil in the plurality of charging coils from a first driver circuit (see Para. # 0043: the current to the primary driver may be sensed as shown in the exemplary circuit of FIG. 7, where a current sense circuit (730) is coupled between the power supply (740) and the driver (720) to determine the current (i1) flowing into the driver of the primary coil (710); and The current flowing into the drive provides an indication of the magnitude of the alternative current (i2) flowing into the primary coil. Alternatively, a current within the driver or the current into the primary coil may be sensed).
PNG
media_image2.png
457
831
media_image2.png
Greyscale
BAARMAN and Wilson are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor namely Selectable coil array and Orientation detecting docking system with inductive power drive circuit
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Baarman’s coil array with the teaching of Wilson for the benefit of protecting the charging or chargeable device from being da\mage due to excessive current to the coils; erroneous orientations.
With respect to claim 10, the combined references of Baarman and Wilson disclose the wireless charging device/method as described above, Baarman discloses wherein each zone includes at least one coil assigned from the plurality of charging coils (para. # 0044; Fig. 11).
With respect to claim 11, the combined references of Baarman and Wilson disclose the wireless charging device/method as described above, Baarman discloses wherein the first charging coil is at least partially physically located within the first zone, and wherein the second charging coil is at least partially physically located within the second zone (Fig. 11, Zone 2; Para. # 0079: FIG. 8C, zone 1 is active when coils L1, L4, and L6 are energized, which can be accomplished by turning switches SW1, SW2, SW9, and SW10 on and turning the other switches off. As shown in FIG. 8D, zone 2 is active when coils L3, L4, and L6 are energized, which can be accomplished by turning switches SW5, SW6, SW9, and SW10 on and turning the other switches off).
With respect to claims 12 and 13, the combined references of Baarman and Wilson disclose the wireless charging device as described above, Baarman discloses wherein the first charging coil is assigned to the first zone, and wherein the second charging coil is assigned to the second zone (See Fig. 11, Zone 1 and Zone 2 charging coils assigned).
With respect to claim 14, the combined references of Baarman and Wilson disclose the wireless charging device as described above, Wilson discloses further comprising: a first switching circuit responsive to the controller and operable to couple the first charging coil to the first driver circuit; and a second switching circuit operable to couple the first charging coil and the second charging coil to the second driver circuit (see Para. # 0043, 0045: the current to the primary driver may be sensed as shown in the exemplary circuit of FIG. 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 16 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 3-6 and 17-19 are dependent on objected claims 2 and 16 respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments and arguments filed in the remarks of 12/01/2025 have been considered, and the previous rejections to the claims described in the last office action have been withdrawn, but a new ground of rejections have been introduced to address the amended claims and related arguments made (see the rejections above).
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 extension fee 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YALKEW FANTU whose telephone number is (571)272-8928. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00AM-4:00PM.
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, Taelor Kim can be reached at 571-270-7166. 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.
/YALKEW FANTU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859