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 .
Claims Status
Claims 1, 3-17 and 19-20 are currently pending, claims 1, 5-11, 14-17 and 19-20 are currently amended.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 12/26/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) amended claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of OH et al. (2015/0162767 A1. Please see new grounds of rejection below)
Applicant's arguments filed 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art does not disclose “a plurality of through openings are formed on a bottom surface of the recess”. The examiner respectfully disagrees and explains that the HWANG in view of BELKIN and in further view of PINKOS discloses a wireless charger (HWANG) comprising a recess to receive an electronic device camera (BELKIN). PINKOS further discloses a wireless charger comprising a fan to pull air from the top of the wireless charger through openings in the top surface of the wireless charger. The examiner explains that placing the opening in the recess for receiving the camera of the electronic device is an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the inventio disclosed by HWANG and BELKIN with the teachings of PINKOS by adding the fan and openings in the top surface of the wireless charger, the examiner further explains that it would have been obvious to try placing the openings in one of finite choice locations (the recess part or the flat part of the wireless charger) for the benefit of providing cooling to the wireless charger.
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(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OH et al. (2015/0162767 A1, hereinafter OH).
Regarding claim 1, OH discloses a wireless charger, comprising:
a case (See Fig.3, Item#230 and Par.30, disclose a housing);
a top cover (See Fig.3, Items#220+216+215+211, disclose a top cover) comprising an insulating material (See Fig.3, Item#211 and Par.34, disclose the anti-slip member is made of urethane or rubber, considered to be a thermal and electric insulator) for placing an electronic device on the top cover (See Figs.2A-1B, disclose an electronic device 100 placed on the top cover of the wireless charger 200) and being a pad disposed on a top wall of the case (See Fig.
3, Item#210 andPars.32-33, disclose a pad 210 as part of the cover; this is interpreted to meeting the limitation of the cover being a pad placed on top of the perimeter wall of the case);
at least one coil disposed in the case for wireless charging the electronic device (See Fig.3, Item#250 and Par.83, disclose a wireless charging module 250 comprising a transmitting coil [Fig.11A, Item#3111b]. Fig.3 and Par.53, disclose the wireless charging module 250 is placed in the housing "case" 230); and
a first magnet embedded inside the pad for aligning with a second magnet of the electronic device for wireless charging the electronic device (See Fig.5, Items#225 and Pars.68-69, disclose screws fit in the holes and leave a gap between the screw head and the edge of the cover 210 , a magnet 225 may be mounted in the remaining space [i.e. flush with the surface, i.e. embedded]);
wherein the at least one coil and the first magnet are disposed on two opposite sides of the top wall of the case (See Fig.3, discloses the top of the perimeter wall supporting the cover [220+216+215+211], the magnets 225 are embedded on the top of the layer 220 of the cover [above the perimeter wall] and the wireless charging coil [wireless module 250] is placed inside the case 230 [Par.83] i.e. lower than the perimeter wall).
Regarding claim 3, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, wherein the pad comprises a polymer material (See Fig.3, Item#211 and Par.34, disclose the anti-slip member is made of urethane or rubber).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claim(s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of HWANG (US 2020/0212726 A1, hereinafter HWANG).
Regarding claim 4, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, however OH does not disclose wherein the pad comprises wherein the pad comprises a plastic material with high thermal conductivity.
HWANG discloses a wireless charger comprising a pad wherein the pad comprises a plastic material with high thermal conductivity (See Fig.2 Item#160 and Par.13).
OH and HWANG are analogous art since they both deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of HWANG by using a plastic material with high thermal conductivity in the cover for the benefit of dissipating heat away from the electronic device.
Regarding claim 13, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, However OH does not disclose wherein said at least one coil is disposed on a magnetic sheet comprising ferrite.
HWANG discloses a wireless charger comprising at least one coil, wherein said at least one coil is disposed on a magnetic sheet comprising ferrite (See Fig.2, Item#120 and Pars.75-77, disclose coils 112-113 placed on ferrite sheet 120).
OH and HWANG are analogous art since they both deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of HWANG by disposing the at least one coil on a magnetic sheet comprising ferrite for the benefit of preventing interference by shielding the electronic components from the magnetic field generated by the wireless charging coil.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of PARTOVI et al. (US 2012/0146576 A1, hereinafter PARTOVI).
Regarding claim 6, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, wherein the at least one coil comprises a first coil (See Fig.11A, Item#3111b, disclose a first coil), the wireless charger further comprising magnets that surrounds the first coil (See Fig.5, Items#225 and Par.69, disclose a plurality of magnets [4 magnets on top of the screws] as shown in Fig.3, the screw holes where the magnets are installed surround the coil on the wireless charging module 250).
However, OH does not disclose a third magnet (single magnet) that surrounds the first coil.
PARTOVI discloses a wireless charger comprising a coil and a magnet that surrounds the coil (See Fig.21 [left figure] disclose a magnet surrounding a coil).
OH and PARTOVI are analogous art since they both deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of PARTOVI by replacing the plurality of magnets with a single magnet that surrounds the coil for the benefit improving the coupling efficiency and improving misalignment tolerance.
Claim(s) 7 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of KARANIKOS et al. (US 2022/0094202 A1, hereinafter KARANIKOS).
Regarding claim 7, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, However, OH does not disclose wherein the at least one coil comprises a first coil and a second coil, the wireless charger further comprising a third magnet that surrounds the first coil.
KARANIKOS discloses a wireless charger comprising a first coil (See Fig.3, Item#330 and Par.96, disclose a first coil) and a second coil (See Fig.3, Item#430 and Par.98, disclose a second coil), the wireless charger further comprising a third magnet that surrounds the first coil (See Fig.3, Item#320 and Par.95, disclose an annular magnetic array).
OH and KARANIKOS are analogous art since they both deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of KARANIKOS by replacing the single wireless charging coil with a first coil and a second coil and a magnet surrounding the first coil for the benefit of providing a wireless charger which can simultaneously charging a plurality of electronic devices while aligning and securing the electronic device to the wireless charger.
Regarding claims 14 and 15 (Claim 15 is considered representative for limitations matching purposes), OH and KARANIKOS disclose the wireless charger of claim 7 as discussed above, wherein the third magnet is an open ring, and comprises at least one gap that is located between two different positions of the third magnet (See KARANIKOS, Fig.3, Item#320, discloses an open ring magnet with a gap between two portions. The examiner explains that the gap has the benefit of reducing eddy currents).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of KARANIKOS and in further view of LOS et al. (US 2021/0345520 A1, hereinafter LOS).
Regarding claim 8, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, However, OH does not disclose wherein the at least one coil comprises a first coil and a second coil, the wireless charger further comprises a third magnet, the third magnet surrounds the first coil, and a fan is disposed at a lateral side of the at least one coil.
KARANIKOS discloses a wireless charger comprising a first coil (See Fig.3, Item#330 and Par.96, disclose a first coil) and a second coil (See Fig.3, Item#430 and Par.98, disclose a second coil), the wireless charger further comprising a third magnet that surrounds the first coil (See Fig.3, Item#320 and Par.95, disclose an annular magnetic array).
OH and KARANIKOS are analogous art since they both deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of KARANIKOS by replacing the single wireless charging coil with a first coil and a second coil and a magnet surrounding the first coil for the benefit of providing a wireless charger which can simultaneously charging a plurality of electronic devices while aligning and securing the electronic device to the wireless charger.
However, OH and KARANIKOS do not disclose a fan is disposed at a lateral side of the at least one coil.
LOS discloses a wireless charger comprising a fan disposed at a lateral side of the coils (See Fig.20A, discloses a fan 410 disposed at a lateral side of the coils 21,321).
OH, KARANIKOS and LOS are analogous art sine they all deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH and KARANIKOS with the teachings of LOS by adding a fan at a lateral side of the coils for the benefit of cooling the power transmitter components and the mobile device (See LOS, Par.49).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of KIM et al. (US 2020/0083726 A1, hereinafter KIM) and in further view of KARANIKOS.
Regarding claim 9, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, however OH does not disclose wherein the at least one coil comprises a first coil, a second coil, and a third coil, the second coil is disposed on the first coil and the third coil, and the wireless charger further comprises a third magnet that surrounds the second coil.
KIM discloses a wireless charger comprising a first coil (See Fig.2, Item#232), a second coil (See Fig.2, Item#231), and a third coil (See Fig.2, Item#233), the second coil is disposed on the first coil and the third coil (See Fig.2, discloses coil 231 is placed over 232 and 233).
OH and KIM are analogous art since they both deal with wireless chargers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of KIM by replacing the single coil with a first coil, a second coil, and a third coil, the second coil is disposed on the first coil and the third coil for the benefit of improving the alignment by providing a charging surface comprising three overlapping coils.
However, OH and KIM do not disclose the wireless charger further comprises a third magnet that surrounds the second coil.
KARANIKOS discloses a wireless charger further comprising a third magnet that surrounds the first coil (See Fig.3, Item#320 and Par.95, disclose an annular magnetic array).
OH, KIM and KARANIKOS are analogous art sine they all deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH and KIM with the teachings of KARANIKOS by adding a magnet around the second coil for the benefit of enhancing the alignment and charging efficiency by aligning the electronic device with the central charging coil (by aligning the electronic device with the central charging coil, the electronic device receives power directly from the central coil and lesser power from the other two coils overlapping the central coil).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of BELKIN (NPL, https://www.belkin.com/p/magnetic-portable-wireless-charger-10k/P-BPD001.html. Available online as of March, 30 ,2021).
PNG
media_image1.png
814
1404
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, however OH does not disclose wherein a recess is formed on a top surface of the case, a camera lens of the electronic device being placed in said recess.
BELKIN discloses a wireless charger comprising a recess formed on a top surface of the wireless charger case, wherein a camera lens of the electronic device is capable of being placed in said recess (See above figure, discloses the BELKIN wireless charger comprising a recess corresponding to the mobile phone camera such that the camera lens is placed in the recess).
OH and BELKIN are analogous art since they deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of BELKIN by forming a recess in the top surface of the case of the wireless charger for the benefit of enhancing the alignment between the electronic device receiving coil and the charging coil by allowing the electronic device to lay flat on the charging surface by receiving the protruding mobile phone camera lens.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of BELKIN and KARANIKOS and in further view of LOS.
Regarding claim 11, OH and BELKIN disclose the wireless charger of claim 10 as discussed above, However, OH and BELKIN does not disclose wherein the at least one coil comprises a first coil and a second coil, the wireless charger further comprises a third magnet that surrounds the first coil, and a fan is disposed at a lateral side of the at least one coil and is located under said recess.
KARANIKOS discloses a wireless charger comprising a first coil (See Fig.3, Item#330 and Par.96, disclose a first coil) and a second coil (See Fig.3, Item#430 and Par.98, disclose a second coil), the wireless charger further comprising a third magnet that surrounds the first coil (See Fig.3, Item#320 and Par.95, disclose an annular magnetic array).
OH, BELKIN and KARANIKOS are analogous art since they all deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH and BELKIN with the teachings of KARANIKOS by replacing the single wireless charging coil with a first coil and a second coil and a magnet surrounding the first coil for the benefit of providing a wireless charger which can simultaneously charging a plurality of electronic devices while aligning and securing the electronic device to the wireless charger.
However, OH, BELKIN and KARANIKOS do not disclose a fan is disposed at a lateral side of the at least one coil and is located under said recess.
LOS discloses a wireless charger comprising a fan disposed at a lateral side of the coils (See Fig.20A, discloses a fan 410 disposed at a lateral side of the coils 21,321).
OH, BELKIN, KARANIKOS and LOS are analogous art sine they all deal with wireless charging.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH, BELKIN and KARANIKOS with the teachings of LOS by adding a fan at a lateral side of the coils for the benefit of cooling the power transmitter components and the mobile device (See LOS, Par.49).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of GOLKO et al. (US 9,852,844 B2, hereinafter GOLKO).
Regarding claim 12, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, However OH does not disclose wherein an E-field shielding board is disposed between the first magnet and said at least one coil.
GOLKO disclose a wireless charger comprising a first alignment magnet (See Fig.2, Item#111, discloses a magnet inside the charge dock 102). at least one charging coil (See FIg.2, Item#113b and COl.6, lines 26-29, disclose a wireless power transmission coil) and an E-field shielding board is disposed between the first magnet and said at least one coil (See Fig.2, Item#107 and Col.4, line 60 to Col.5, line 10 disclose a shield layer surrounding the magnet and the transmitting coil, Coils 113a and 113b are also surrounded by shielding 141a, 141b the effect of which is an electrostatic field).
OH and GOLKO are analogous art since they both deal with wireless chargers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of GOLKO by adding an E-shield between the first magnet and the at least one coil for the benefit of directing the magnetic field of the first magnet towards the second magnet to avoid interference with the wireless power circuit.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH in view of LU (US 2020/0006966 A1, hereinafter LU).
Regarding claim 5, OH discloses the wireless charger of claim 1 as discussed above, however OH does not disclose further comprising a low-carbon steel ring that is placed under the first magnet and above the at least one coil.
LU discloses a wireless charger comprising a shielding ring placed around the first magnet and separating the magnet from the coil (See Figs.3 and 4, discloses a shielding magnet 12 comprising a magnet 121 and shielding cover 122).
OH and LU are analogous art since they both deal with wireless chargers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by OH with the teachings of LU by replacing the magnet disclosed by OH with the shielded magnet disclosed by LU (the combination would provide a shielded magnet with the bottom part of the shielding below the magnet and above the coil of OH) for the benefit of protecting the coil against interference from the magnetic field of the magnet (See LU, Par.23).
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HWANG in view of BELKIN, PINKOS et al. (US 2021/0050741 A1, hereinafter PINKOS), HONG and in further view of FAN.
Regarding claim 16, HWANG discloses a wireless charger, comprising:
a metallic case (See Fig.1 and Par.88, disclose the housing 150 is made of metal),
wherein the wireless charger comprises a pad disposed on the top surface of the metallic case (See HWANG, Fig.2, Item#160, discloses a cover placed over the rim of the case 150; interpreted as the top surface).
However, HWANG does not disclose a recess is formed on a top surface of the metallic case such that a camera lens of the electronic device is placed in said recess, and
a fan, is located under said recess,
a plurality of through openings are formed on a bottom surface of the recess,
the fan causes an airflow entering into the plurality of through openings for dissipating heat to the outside of the wireless charger,
a first magnet is embedded inside the pad for aligning with a second magnet of the electronic device for wireless charging the electronic device.
BELKIN discloses a wireless charger comprising a recess formed on a top surface of the case, wherein a camera lens of the electronic device placed in said recess (See above figures, disclose the Belkin wireless charger comprising a recess corresponding to the mobile phone camera such that the camera lens is places in the recess).
HWANG and BELKIN are analogous art since they both deal with wireless charging
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG with the teachings of BELKIN by forming a recess in the top surface of the case for the benefit of enhancing the alignment between the charging coil and the receiving coil by allowing the mobile device to lay flat on the charging surface by receiving the mobile phone camera lens.
However, HWANG and BELKIN do not disclose a fan, is located under said recess, wherein a plurality of through openings are formed on a bottom surface of the recess,
the fan causes an airflow entering into the plurality of through openings for dissipating heat to the outside of the wireless charger,
a first magnet is embedded inside the pad for aligning with a second magnet of the electronic device for wireless charging the electronic device.
PINKOS discloses a wireless charger comprising a fan, disposed under the top cover (See Figs.1-2, Item#108 and Par.49, disclose an air movement device comprising a fan),
wherein a plurality of through openings are formed on the cover (See Fig.13, discloses a plurality of openings on the cover 206),
the fan causes an airflow entering into the plurality of through openings for dissipating heat to the outside of the wireless charger (See Figs.13-14, discloses air is sucked in by the fan at the bottom of the charger through the opening 206 and exits out of port 216 to dissipate heat).
HWANG, BELKIN and PINKOS are analogous art since they all deal with wireless chargers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG and BELKIN with the further teachings of PINKOS by adding a plurality of through openings to the cover and a fan in the body of the charger for the benefit protecting the components of the wireless charger against overheating.
However, HWANG, BELKIN and PINKOS do not disclose wherein a first magnet is embedded inside the pad for aligning with a second magnet of the electronic device for wireless charging the electronic device.
HONG discloses a wireless charger comprising a first magnet for aligning with a second magnet of the electronic device (See Fig.2 and Par.76 disclose, discloses a magnet 291 within charger 200 to align with magnet 191 of electronic device 100).
HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS and HONG are analogous art since they all deal with chargers for portable electronics.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG, BELKIN and PINKOS with the teachings of HONG by adding a first magnet to align with a second magnet inside the electronic device for the benefit of enhancing the charging efficiency by aligning the wireless power transmission and reception coils.
However, HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS and HONG do not explicitly disclose the first magnet is embedded inside the top cover.
FAN discloses a charger for charging a portable electronic device, the charger comprising a magnet embedded in the charger cover (See Fig.2 and Col.2, line 62 to Col.3, lines 12, disclose a cover [13+11], the cover comprising receiving chambers 132 for receiving magnets 2 which are used to secure an electronic device [8] to the charger body [A1]).
HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN are analogous art since they all deal with chargers for portable electronic devices.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS and HONG with the teachings of FAN by embedding the first magnets in the cover for the benefit of improving the attraction force between the charger and the electronic device by reducing the gap between the first and the second magnets.
Regarding claim 17, HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN disclose the wireless charger of claim 16 as discussed above, wherein the wireless charger further comprises
a circuit board disposed in the metallic case (See HWANG, Fig.2 and Par.84, disclose a plurality of driving circuits boards) and
a heatsink (See HWANG, Fig.2, Item#140 and Par.104, disclose a heat dissipation plate),
However, HWANG, BELKIN and PINKOS as applied to claim 16 do not disclose the airflow passing through the heatsink for dissipating heat to the outside of the wireless charger
PINKOS further discloses that air passing through the circuit board and is discharged from the bottom of the wireless charger below all components (See PINKOS Fig.14 and Par.51, disclose the air is circulated among the components and discharged out of the exhaust port).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN as applied to claim 16 with the further teachings of PINKOS by removing heat from the circuit board and the heat sink for the benefit of protection the circuit components against damage caused by overheating.
Even though HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN do not explicitly disclose the heat sink is under the circuit board. The examiner explains that the term under is relative (i.e. the heat dissipation plate may be viewed as under the circuits board 170 and 171 when viewed in an inverted orientation). If the applicant disagrees with this interpretation, the examiner also explains that moving an element from one position to another to perform the same function is considered to be an obvious modification to one of ordinary skill in the art by choosing from a finite number of choices [above/below] for the benefit of enhancing the cooling system.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HWANG in view of BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN and in furth view of PARTOVI.
Regarding claim 19, HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN disclose the wireless charger of claim 16 as discussed above,
wherein the wireless charger further comprises a first coil, a second coil (See HWANG, Fig.2, Items#111-112, disclose a first coil and a second coil), and
the fan is disposed at a lateral side of on of the first coil and the second coil (See PINKOS Fig.14, disclose a fan; the fan below the coils is interpreted to meet the limitation laterally [the term is relative to the point of view from which the elements are viewed]. The rejection of claim 16 discloses the charger of HWANG with the recess of BELKIN and the fan disclosed by PINKOS at the bottom. The placement of the fan at the bottom of the wireless charger means that it is below the recess shown in BELKIN at the cover of the charger).
However, HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN as applied to claim 16 do not wherein a third magnet is surrounding the first coil.
PARTOVI discloses a wireless charger comprising a magnet, wherein said magnet surrounding the first coil (See Fig.21 [right figure], discloses a magnet surrounding a coil).
HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG, FAN and PARTOVI are analogous art since they all deal with chargers for portable electronic devices.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN with the further teachings of PARTOVI by adding the annular magnet surrounding the transmitting coil for the benefit of enhancing the charging efficiency by ensuring maximum alignment between the transmitting coil and the receiving coil.
Regarding claim 20, HWANG, HONG, FAN and PARTOVI disclose the wireless charger of claim 16 as discussed,
However, HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN as applied to claim 16 do not disclose the first magnet is an open ring and comprises at least one gap that is located between two different portions of the first magnet.
PARTOVI discloses an alignment magnet, wherein the first magnet is an open ring, and comprises at least one gap that is located between two different portions of the first magnet (See Fig.21 [right figure] discloses a magnet comprising an open ring and Par.92, disclose “A gap in the ring magnet is incorporated to reduce potential eddy currents due to changing magnetic field of the wireless charger/power supply”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by HWANG, BELKIN, PINKOS, HONG and FAN as applied to claim 18 with the further teachings of PARTOVI by using an annular magnet having gaps for the benefit of providing an alignment magnet which also reduces eddy currents (See PARTOVI, Par.92).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 AHMED H OMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7165. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am -7:00 PM EST.
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.
/AHMED H OMAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859