DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
In the communication dated May 26, 2026, claims 1-20 are pending. The claims have not been amended.
Response to Arguments
The applicant argues that Yagura fails to disclose or teach “charge the battery pack with a constant power charge”, as recited in independent claim 1. Instead, Yagura discloses performing constant power charging when it is determine that constant current charging cannot be performed due to insufficient charger output.
However, the claim language at issue requires that charging occurs initially as a constant power. Yagura teaches charging the system at a constant power in order to reach a condition where CCCV charging may be used. It follows that a person of ordinary skill would use CCCV charging as it is typical in the art to perform constant current charging to increase the voltage and constant voltage to maintain the desired voltage (see Yagura; ¶28). The reference of Sakaue teaches the order of CCCV and the reference of Yagura teaches constant power charging in order for the charger to reach an output where constant current charging may be performed.
Thus, the argument is not persuasive.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakaue et al. US20070216349A1 in view of Yagura et al. US20140167774A1
Regarding claim 1. Sakaue discloses a battery pack charger (2) comprising:
a charging circuit (4);
at least one charger terminal (terminals to 2) connected to the charging circuit (4) and configured for providing charging power to a battery pack (1);
a controller (6), the controller configured to:
charge the battery pack (1),
determine a temperature of the battery pack (¶29 - detected value from the temperature sensor 7 is sent to control circuit 6),
switch to a constant current charge when the temperature of the battery pack is greater than or equal to a predetermined temperature threshold (¶30/41 - charging mode switched to a first mode of charging if the detected temperature value exceeds a threshold value; ¶6 - first mode is constant current charging),
switch from the constant current charge to a constant voltage charge when a voltage of the battery pack reaches a predetermined voltage threshold (¶30/41 - switch to second mode when detected temperature is not greater than the threshold; ¶6 - second mode is constant voltage charging), and
charge the battery pack with the constant voltage charge (FIG. 2 - constant voltage charging to the termination of charging).
Although a housing is not explicitly taught by Sakaue, because Sakaue teaches that the battery pack is removably mounted from the charger (¶1) it is implicit that the charger has a housing.
Sakaue does not explicitly teach that the controller includes a processor and a memory; and the battery pack is initially charged with a constant power charge.
Although not explicitly taught by Sakaue, it is customary in the art for the controller to have a processor in order to execute a control method. This is supported by Yagura. Although the controller is arranged in the device-to-be-charged, a controller having a CPU and ROM for memorizing a control program (¶27) may be applied to any controller designated to execute a method.
Yagura teaches that when the output from the charger is not sufficient to perform constant current charging, it performs constant power charging thus initially charge a battery pack with a constant power charge (¶28).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to initially apply constant power charging to the battery, as taught by Yagura, to the charging of Sakaue in order to optimize the charging and bring the output to a level that may charge the battery (¶28).
Regarding claim 8. Sakaue discloses a method for controlling a battery pack charger (2), the method comprising:
determining a temperature of the battery pack (¶29 - detected value from the temperature sensor 7 is sent to control circuit 6);
switching to a constant current charge when the temperature of the battery pack is greater than or equal to a predetermined temperature threshold (¶30/41 - charging mode switched to a first mode of charging if the detected temperature value exceeds a threshold value; ¶6 - first mode is constant current charging),
switching from the constant current charge to a constant voltage charge when a voltage of the battery pack reaches a predetermined voltage threshold (¶30/41 - switch to second mode when detected temperature is not greater than the threshold; ¶6 - second mode is constant voltage charging),; and
charging the battery pack with the constant voltage charge (FIG. 2 - constant voltage charging to the termination of charging).
Sakaue does not explicitly disclose charging a battery pack with a constant power charge.
Yagura teaches that when the output from the charger is not sufficient to perform constant current charging, it performs constant power charging thus initially charging a battery pack with a constant power charge (¶28).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to initially apply constant power charging to the battery, as taught by Yagura, to the charging of Sakaue in order to optimize the charging and bring the output to a level that may charge the battery (¶28).
Regarding claim 15. A battery pack charging system (FIG. 1), the system comprising:
a battery pack (1) including a battery pack terminal (battery has positive and negative terminals); and
a battery pack charger (2) that includes:
a charging circuit (4);
at least one charger terminal (terminals to 2) connected to the charging circuit (4) and configured for providing charging power to a battery pack terminal (terminal connecting 1);
a controller (6) configured to:
determine a temperature (¶29 - detected value from the temperature sensor 7 is sent to control circuit 6),
switch charge to a constant current charge when the temperature of the charger is greater than or equal to a predetermined temperature threshold (¶30/41 - charging mode switched to a first mode of charging if the detected temperature value exceeds a threshold value; ¶6 - first mode is constant current charging),
switch from the constant current charge to a constant voltage charge when a voltage of the battery pack reaches a predetermined voltage threshold (¶30/41 - switch to second mode when detected temperature is not greater than the threshold; ¶6 - second mode is constant voltage charging), and
charge the battery pack with the constant voltage charge (FIG. 2 - constant voltage charging to the termination of charging).
Although a housing is not explicitly taught by Sakaue, because Sakaue teaches that the battery pack is removably mounted from the charger (¶1) it is implicit that the charger has a housing.
Sakaue does not explicitly teach that the controller includes a processor and a memory; determine a temperature of the charger; and charge the battery pack with a constant power charge,
Although not explicitly taught by Sakaue, it is customary in the art for the controller to have a processor in order to execute a control method. This is supported by Yagura. Although the controller is arranged in the device-to-be-charged, a controller having a CPU and ROM for memorizing a control program (¶27) may be applied to any controller designated to execute a method.
Although Sakaue teaches measuring the temperature of the battery rather than the charger, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to rearrange the temperature sensor in order to prevent the device from being over or under temperature optimal for charging (Sakaue; ¶5).
Yagura teaches that when the output from the charger is not sufficient to perform constant current charging, it performs constant power charging thus initially charge a battery pack with a constant power charge (¶28).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to initially apply constant power charging to the battery, as taught by Yagura, to the charging of Sakaue in order to optimize the charging and bring the output to a level that may charge the battery (¶28).
Regarding claim 2 and claim 9 and claim 16 . Sakaue does not explicitly teach that during the constant power charge, a charging current to the battery pack decreases as the voltage of the battery pack increases.
Yagura discloses using constant power charging, by definition it teaches during the constant power charge, a charging current to the battery pack decreases as the voltage of the battery pack increases. In the equation P=IV or I=P/V, when the power is constant and the voltage increases, then the current will decrease.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to initially apply constant power charging to the battery, as taught by Yagura, to the charging of Sakaue in order to optimize the charging and bring the output to a level that may charge the battery (¶28).
Regarding claim 3 and claim 10 and claim 17. Sakaue discloses that during the constant voltage charge, a charging current of the battery pack decreases until the charging current reaches a predetermined cutoff value and charging is terminated (FIG. 2 – during the constant voltage charging, current is decreased until reaching I3 where the charging is terminated).
Regarding claim 4 and claim 11 and claim 18. Sakaue does not explicitly teach an input power to the battery pack decreases until the charging current reaches the predetermined cutoff value and charging is terminated.
However, because it is known that P=I*V and after the constant power charging there is constant voltage charging, thus, in the figure above, because current is decreasing the power is likewise decreasing.
Regarding claim 5 and claim 12 and claim 19. Sakaue discloses that the at least one charger terminal includes a first charger terminal that is a positive power terminal (see annotated and reproduced FIG. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
486
740
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6 and claim 13 and claim 20. Sakaue discloses that the at least one charger terminal includes a second charger terminal that is a negative power terminal (see annotated and reproduced FIG. 1 above).
Regarding claim 7 and claim 14. Sakaue discloses that the controller (6) is located within the housing (FIG. 1 – controller 6 is arranged within the charger 2; Although a housing is not explicitly taught by Sakaue, because Sakaue teaches that the battery pack is removably mounted from the charger (¶1) it is implicit that the charger has a housing).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Stewart et al. US20110298417A1 teaches that various charging stages include a constant current, constant voltage and constant power stage and a combination fo these stages are used (¶21).
Park et al. US20140084851A1 teaches that “the early charging mode may charge the battery by means of a constant-power manner, a constant-current manner, a constant-voltage manner, or their mixtures” (¶10)
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.
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 on 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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights