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 with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 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
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 11-13, 15, 16, & 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiCarlo et al. (USPGPN 20160064960 A1), in view of Zhang (WIPO Publication WO 2018120236 A1), Kim et al. (USPGPN 20200280205 A1), and Xu et al. (WIPO Publication WO 2022218046 A1 – effectively filed Apr. 2021).
Regarding Claim 1, DiCarlo teaches an electronic device comprising:
a charging circuit (Fig.1, 104);
a battery (Fig.1, 110);
a memory (¶0027: the method described is stored on a storage medium), comprising one or more storage media, storing instructions; and
one or more processors (Fig.1, 106) communicatively coupled to the charging circuit, the battery, and the memory,
wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
charge the battery with a first voltage corresponding to a first charging level (¶0010: maximum charge-termination voltage),
when the number of times that the charging is performed exceeds a first specified number of times, configure a charging level for charging the battery to a second charging level configured to be lower than the first voltage of the first charging level (¶0010: maximum charge-termination may decrease as cycle count increases),
reset the number of times that the charging is performed (Fig.3, 312), and
change the first specified number of times to a second specified number of times that corresponds to the second charging level (¶0062: tracking period and thresholds may be adjusted in successive periods).
control the charging circuit to adjust a voltage output from a power transmission device to a second voltage corresponding to the second charging level and charge the battery with the second voltage (¶0011: charge-termination levels correspond to voltage levels),
configure the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level (Fig.3, 308), and
when reconnection with the power transmission device is identified, adjust the voltage received from the power transmission device through the charging circuit to a first voltage corresponding to the first charging level, and charge the battery with the first voltage (Fig.3, 308: adjusting charge termination voltage also adjusts charging voltage).
DiCarlo fails to explicitly teach the processor identify a number of times that supplementary charging is performed, after the electronic device is detected to be in a fully-charged state, measuring an elapsed time after the detachment of the power transmission device is detected, adjusting the charging level based on the measured elapsed time exceeding a specified time, and wherein the second specified number of times is greater than the first specified number of times.
However, Zhang teaches that it is common for a battery to receive a supplemental charge after reaching a fully charged state, after natural discharge reduces the state of charge below a threshold (Fig.3; Page 12, Full Paragraph 3: battery is recharged to stay close to a full charge state).
DiCarlo and Zhang are considered analogous to the claimed invention since they both pertain to charging methods for mobile terminals. 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 DiCarlo with Zhang to include supplemental charging after a fully charged state to maintain the mobile device in a nearly full charged state so a user can maximize their usage time of the device.
Moreover, Kim teaches measuring the amount of time a device is disconnected from a power source (¶0076: power source is disconnected and reconnected within 2 hours indicating a measurement of time regarding the time associated with the device being disconnected), and resetting the process if the device is disconnected longer than a time threshold (¶0076: connection holding time can continuously accumulate if connection occurs within the time limit, which also indicates the connection holding time, and subsequent charging voltage value, would be reset to the default value).
DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, and Kim are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since they both pertain to charging methods for a mobile device. 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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, with Kim to include a time measurement associated with the device being disconnected from the power source, and using that time measurement to determine if charging voltage should be increased back to the default level. Doing so would assist in reducing damage to the battery by ensuring the voltage level is not increased due to a short disconnection of the charging source.
Lastly, Xu teaches a battery charging system where an electronic device is recharged until a first specified number of times is reached, lowers the charging level to a second charging level, and then changes the first specified number of times to a second specified number of times, wherein the second specified number of times is greater than the first specified number of times (Fig.13: battery recharges once from Q12 to Q11, charging level is changed to Q21, battery recharges twice from Q22 to Q21 before charging level is reduced again).
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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang and Kim, with Xu to have the second specified number of times supplementary charging is performed be greater than the first specific number of times. Doing so helps reduce the risk of battery swelling, as evidenced by Xu (Abstract: safety risks such as battery swelling can be avoided).
Regarding Claim 2, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches wherein the instructions further cause the electronic device to determine when the number of times that the supplementary charging is performed exceeds the first specified number of times, identify a time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device (¶0055: processor determines a tracking period during charging), and
configure the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level configured to be lower than the first voltage of the first charging level (as described in the rejection of claim 1).
DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach setting the second charge level when the time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device exceeds a specified time period.
However, Zhang teaches a measurement of how long the device is connected to a charger (Page 11, Full Paragraph 4: processor starts timing when the external charger is connected) and adjusted the charging profile when a time threshold is exceeded (Page 11, Full Paragraph 6: after timing reaches the threshold, a second charging mode is performed).
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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, with Zhang to include the use of a timer associated with the connection to the charger, to determine a second charging mode, and subsequent charging voltage. Doing so assists in improving the safety of a battery, as evidenced by Zhang (Page 2, Paragraph 4)
Regarding Claim 3, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches wherein the instruction further cause the electronic device to:
after configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level, reset the time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device (Fig.3, 312), and
reconfigure the specified time period to a specified time period which corresponds to the second charging level (¶0062: tracking period and thresholds may be adjusted in successive periods).
Regarding Claim 5, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches wherein the instruction further cause the electronic device to:
after detachment of the power transmission device is detected, identify whether reconnection with the power transmission device is made (¶0069: charging connection and disconnection may be tracked),
when the reconnection with the power transmission device is identified, identify an amount of discharge of the battery (Fig.3, 304),
when the amount of discharge of the battery is less than a specified level, configure the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level (Fig.3, 308), and
when the reconnection with the power transmission device is identified, control the charging circuit to adjust the voltage output from the power transmission device to the first voltage corresponding to the first charging level, and charge the battery with the first voltage (Fig.3, 308: adjusting charge termination voltage also adjusts charging voltage).
Regarding Claim 6, DiCarlo, as modified, teaches wherein the instructions further cause the electronic device to:
Determine when the amount of discharge of the battery is less than the specified level (Fig.3, 304), and
configure the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level (Fig.3, 308).
DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach measuring an elapsed time after the detachment of the power transmission device is detected, and adjusting the charging level based on the measured elapsed time exceeding a specified time.
However, Kim teaches measuring the amount of time a device is disconnected from a power source (¶0076: power source is disconnected and reconnected within 2 hours indicating a measurement of time regarding the time associated with the device being disconnected), and resetting the process if the device is disconnected longer than a time threshold (¶0076: connection holding time can continuously accumulate if connection occurs within the time limit, which also indicates the connection holding time, and subsequent charging voltage value, would be reset to the default value).
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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Zu, with Kim to include a time measurement associated with the device being disconnected from the power source, and using that time measurement to determine if charging voltage should be increased back to the default level. Doing so would assist in reducing damage to the battery by ensuring the voltage level is not increased due to a short disconnection of the charging source.
Regarding Claim 8, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches wherein the instructions further cause the electronic device to:
identify an amount of charge of the battery while charging the battery with the first voltage (Fig.3, 304: state of charge is monitored during charging with maximum-charge termination voltage), and
when the amount of charge of the battery exceeds a second specified level (100% state of charge), configure the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level (adjustment from the first charging level to a second charging level occurs after the battery reaches a full charge based on supplemental charging).
Regarding Claim 11, DiCarlo teaches a charging method of an electronic device, the method comprising:
charging a battery with a first voltage corresponding to a first charging level (¶0010: maximum charge-termination voltage);
when the number of times that the charging is performed exceeds a first specified number of times, configuring a charging level for charging the battery to a second charging level configured to be lower than the first voltage of the first charging level (¶0010: maximum charge-termination may decrease as cycle count increases);
resetting the number of times that the charging is performed (Fig.3, 312), and
changing the first specified number of times to a second specified number of times that corresponds to the second charging level (¶0062: tracking period and thresholds may be adjusted in successive periods).
controlling a charging circuit to adjust a voltage output from a power transmission device to a second voltage corresponding to the second charging level and charging the battery with the second voltage (¶0011: charge-termination levels correspond to voltage levels);
configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level (Fig.3, 308), and
when reconnection with the power transmission device is identified, controlling the charging circuit to adjust the voltage output from the power transmission device through the charging circuit to a first voltage corresponding to the first charging level, and charging the battery with the first voltage (Fig.3, 308: adjusting charge termination voltage also adjusts charging voltage).
DiCarlo fails to explicitly teach the identifying a number of times that supplementary charging is performed, after the electronic device is detected to be in a fully-charged state, measuring an elapsed time after the detachment of the power transmission device is detected, and adjusting the charging level based on the measured elapsed time exceeding a specified time.
However, Zhang teaches that it is common for a battery to receive a supplemental charge after reaching a fully charged state, after natural discharge reduces the state of charge below a threshold (Fig.3; Page 12, Full Paragraph 3: battery is recharged to stay close to a full charge state).
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 DiCarlo with Zhang to include supplemental charging after a fully charged state to maintain the mobile device in a nearly full charged state so a user can maximize their usage time of the device.
Moreover, Kim teaches measuring the amount of time a device is disconnected from a power source (¶0076: power source is disconnected and reconnected within 2 hours indicating a measurement of time regarding the time associated with the device being disconnected), and resetting the process if the device is disconnected longer than a time threshold (¶0076: connection holding time can continuously accumulate if connection occurs within the time limit, which also indicates the connection holding time, and subsequent charging voltage value, would be reset to the default value).
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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, with Kim to include a time measurement associated with the device being disconnected from the power source, and using that time measurement to determine if charging voltage should be increased back to the default level. Doing so would assist in reducing damage to the battery by ensuring the voltage level is not increased due to a short disconnection of the charging source.
Regarding Claim 12, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches wherein the configuring of the charging level to the second charging level comprises:
when the number of times that the supplementary charging is performed exceeds the specified number of times, identifying a time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device (¶0055: processor determines a tracking period during charging); and
configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level (as described in the rejection of claim 1).
DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach setting the second charge level when the time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device exceeds a specified time.
However, Zhang teaches a measurement of how long the device is connected to a charger (Page 11, Full Paragraph 4: processor starts timing when the external charger is connected) and adjusted the charging profile when a time threshold is exceeded (Page 11, Full Paragraph 6: after timing reaches the threshold, a second charging mode is performed).
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 method taught by DiCarlo, in view of Zhan, Kim, and Xu, with Zhang to include the use of a timer associated with the connection to the charger, to determine a second charging mode, and subsequent charging voltage. Doing so assists in improving the safety of a battery, as evidenced by Zhang (Page 2, Paragraph 4)
Regarding Claim 13, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches comprising: after configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level, resetting the time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device (Fig.3, 312), and
reconfiguring the specified time period to a specified time period which corresponds to the second charging level (¶0062: tracking period and thresholds may be adjusted in successive periods).
Regarding Claim 15, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches comprising: after detachment of the power transmission device is detected, identifying whether reconnection with the power transmission device is made (¶0069: charging connection and disconnection may be tracked);
when the reconnection with the power transmission device is identified, identifying an amount of discharge of the battery (Fig.3, 304);
when the amount of discharge of the battery is less than a specified level, configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level (Fig.3, 308); and
when the reconnection with the power transmission device is identified, controlling the charging circuit to adjust the voltage output from the power transmission device to the first voltage corresponding to the first charging level, and charging the battery with the first voltage (Fig.3, 308: adjusting charge termination voltage also adjusts charging voltage).
Regarding Claim 16, DiCarlo, as modified, teaches wherein configuring the charging level to the first charging level comprises:
Determining when the amount of discharge of the battery is less than the specified level (Fig.3, 304), and
configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level (Fig.3, 308).
DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach measuring an elapsed time after the detachment of the power transmission device is detected, and adjusting the charging level based on the measured elapsed time exceeding a specified time.
However, Kim teaches measuring the amount of time a device is disconnected from a power source (¶0076: power source is disconnected and reconnected within 2 hours indicating a measurement of time regarding the time associated with the device being disconnected), and resetting the process if the device is disconnected longer than a time threshold (¶0076: connection holding time can continuously accumulate if connection occurs within the time limit, which also indicates the connection holding time, and subsequent charging voltage value, would be reset to the default value).
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 method taught by DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, with Kim to include a time measurement associated with the device being disconnected from the power source, and using that time measurement to determine if charging voltage should be increased back to the default level. Doing so would assist in reducing damage to the battery by ensuring the voltage level is not increased due to a short disconnection of the charging source.
Regarding Claim 18, DiCarlo, as modified, further teaches comprising: identifying an amount of charge of the battery while charging the battery with the first voltage (Fig.3, 304: state of charge is monitored during charging with maximum-charge termination voltage); and
when the amount of charge of the battery exceeds a second specified level (100% state of charge), configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level (adjustment from the first charging level to a second charging level occurs after the battery reaches a full charge based on supplemental charging).
Claim(s) 4 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, as applied to claims 2 & 12 above, and further in view of Dharia et al. (US Patent 1066077 B1).
Regarding Claim 4, DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the instruction further cause the electronic device to:
obtain a first score, based on the identified number of times that the supplementary charging is performed,
obtain a second score, based on the identified time period during which the power transmission device is connected to the electronic device, and
when a sum of the first score and the second score exceeds a specified value, configure the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level.
However, Dharia teaches a determination step which uses a number value for elapsed time, a number value for charge cycles, and a calculation using those values to determine a charging voltage (Fig.3, 340; Col. 11, line 63 – Col. 12, line 10: a multiplied value of time and cycle count is compared with a threshold to determine a charging voltage value).
DiCarlo and Dharia are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since they both pertain to the charging method for a mobile device. 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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, with Dharia to include a determination of a charging profile used a combined measurement of the charging time and the cycle count. Doing so helps avoid damage to the battery, as evidenced by Dharia (Col. 1, lines 8-11).
DiCarlo, as modified, teaches a multiplication formula for determining a value to be compared to a threshold, whereas the claimed invention uses an addition formula for determining a value to be compared to a threshold. However, the process taught in the prior art is to be considered equivalent to the process claimed, since they are performing the same function of determining a neutral value, using two separate measurements, which can be compared to a preset value for the purposes of determining a charging level for a device.
Regarding Claim 14, DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the configuring of the charging level to the second charging level comprises:
obtaining a first score, based on the identified number of times that the supplementary charging is performed;
obtaining a second score, based on the identified time of being connected to the power transmission device; and
when a sum of the first score and the second score exceeds a specified value, configuring the charging level for charging the battery to the second charging level.
However, Dharia teaches a determination step which uses a number value for elapsed time, a number value for charge cycles, and a calculation using those values to determine a charging voltage (Fig.3, 340; Col. 11, line 63 – Col. 12, line 10: a multiplied value of time and cycle count is compared with a threshold to determine a charging voltage value).
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 method taught by DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, with Dharia to include a determination of a charging profile used a combined measurement of the charging time and the cycle count. Doing so helps avoid damage to the battery, as evidenced by Dharia (Col. 1, lines 8-11).
DiCarlo, as modified, teaches a multiplication formula for determining a value to be compared to a threshold, whereas the claimed invention uses an addition formula for determining a value to be compared to a threshold. However, the process taught in the prior art is to be considered equivalent to the process claimed, since they are performing the same function of determining a neutral value, using two separate measurements, which can be compared to a preset value for the purposes of determining a charging level for a device.
Claim(s) 9 & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, as applied to claims 5 & 15 above, and further in view of Marty et al. (USPGPN 20110057603 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the instructions further cause the electronic device to accumulate the identified amount of discharge of the battery and store the accumulated amount of discharge in the memory.
However, Marty teaches a battery charging system in which the amount of discharge of the battery is determined and stored in memory (¶0011: battery comprises memory and memory stores usage history; ¶0030: usage history includes the amount of energy used).
DiCarlo and Marty are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since they both pertain to the charging a portable battery device. 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 DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, with Marty to include recording the energy usage history in memory as to allow for an improvement in the lifetime of the battery, as evidenced by Marty (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 19, DiCarlo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach comprising: accumulating the identified amount of discharge of the battery and storing the accumulated amount of discharge in a memory of the electronic device.
However, Marty teaches a battery charging system in which the amount of discharge of the battery is determined and stored in memory (¶0011: battery comprises memory and memory stores usage history; ¶0030: usage history includes the amount of energy used).
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 method taught by DiCarlo, in view of Zhang, Kim, and Xu, with Marty to include recording the energy usage history in memory as to allow for an improvement in the lifetime of the battery, as evidenced by Marty (Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 17 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 7 & 17 both recite steps for determining whether a charging voltage should be increased from a second charging level to a higher first charging level, and this process of increasing the charging voltage is well known in the art. It is also disclosed in prior art that the application of this process may be determined by either the amount of discharge of a battery or the elapsed time in which a battery is disconnected from a charging source. However, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest “when a sum of the first score and the second score exceeds a specified value, configure the charging level for charging the battery to the first charging level”, in addition to all other limitations recited in the claim.
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