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 .
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of the amendment filed on 12/5/2025 in which claims 1, 5, 16, and 20 were amended. No claims were cancelled and no new claims were added. The amendments overcome the drawing and specification objections, and the 35 USC § 112 rejections. Therefore, claims 1-20 are pending examination below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/5/2025, have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as necessitate by the amendment.
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.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf et al. US 20100244783 in view of Faulk US 6118254.
With regards to claims 1, 16, and 20 Wolf discloses, a charging control method [Abstract “Circuits and methods to charge batteries”], applied to an energy storage module [Fig. 1 Battery 6] of a powered device [Fig. 1 discloses a powered device],
wherein the energy storage module comprises a direct current-direct current (DC-DC) unit [Supply Regulator 2, ¶19 “a DC power source connected at its output to a supply regulator, and said supply regulator regulating its output voltage”, ¶19 “wherein the output of the supply regulator is supplying the operation of the portable device and its voltage corresponds to the supply voltage level required the portable device”, and ¶26 “the voltage to supply the operation of the portable device, is controlled by a supply regulator 2; this can be e.g. a linear regulator (LDO) with a current limit or a switched regulator with current limit (buck, boost, buckboost type)”] and an energy storage unit [Battery 6];
the powered device further comprises an input source [Power source 1] and a load [System load 3], and the input source is separately connected to the energy storage module and the load [Fig. 1 shows the input source being connected "separately" to both the load and the battery], and separately supplies power to the energy storage module and the load [Abstract "Circuits and methods to charge batteries of a portable device simultaneously with supplying power to the device for its operation"]; and the method comprises:
obtaining, at the beginning of each of a plurality of processing periods [fig 2 discloses a plurality of processing periods as the method disclosed is shown to continuously cycle], a sampling voltage of an input port of the DC-DC unit [(¶29 “When the sum of the system load current ISL and of the charging current ICH exceeds the current limit of the supply regulator 2, the voltage at the VSYSTEM node starts to drop below its nominal voltage level because there is less current (it's limited) flowing into the capacitance than is drawn out of the capacitance by ICH and ISYSTEM. At a defined threshold voltage VTRIP, which is below the nominal voltage level of VSYSTEM node, the comparator 8, comparing voltage level VSYSTEM with the threshold voltage VTRIP, indicates the voltage drop of VSYSTEM node voltage to the digital control 8 of the charger 5. After receiving the indication of a voltage drop of voltage VSYSTEM below threshold voltage VTRIP, the digital control unit, controlling charger 5, decreases the charge current ICH until voltage VSYSTEM comes back until a voltage level above threshold voltage VTRIP is reached. After the comparator 7 indicates to the digital control unit 8 that VSYSTEM voltage is higher than threshold voltage VTRIP, the digital control unit 8 is increasing charge current ICH via charger 5 until the current limit of the supply regulator 2 is reached and VSYSTEM run voltage falls again” disclosing that a voltage sample of the input is obtained];
determining a charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the sampling voltage of the input port of the DC-DC unit [Fig. 2 Steps 23-27 where a charging current parameter is determined] and a preset constant voltage [Fig. 1 Vtrip which is a preset constant voltage] of the input port of the DC-DC unit, wherein a sum of a charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter and a charging electricity quantity of the load is equal to a maximum output electricity quantity of the input source [Abstract "The control takes care that the sum of the charging current and of the current to run the portable device does not exceed the maximum allowable current of the power source" disclosing that the input source maximum output is divided between the load and battery]; and
charging the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter [¶14 "to achieve methods and systems to charge batteries of portable devices simultaneously with supplying power to these devices for their operations" disclosing that a charging parameter charges the battery].
Wolf fails to disclose, each processing period being set such that the input voltage remains stable during the processing period.
However, Faulk discloses, each processing period being set such that the input voltage remains stable during the processing period [fig 3 and column 3 lines 34-40 “If no current is being drawn, the primary power supply drives the bus to a first voltage setpoint (e.g. 19V in FIG. 3), and the battery-charging regulator will never draw enough current to pull the power bus below a second voltage setpoint (e.g. 18V in FIG. 3, which is at or near a point of maximum power output on the characteristic curve shown)” which teaches the input voltage stability where the power supply and regulator cooperate to maintain a stable input voltage].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the systems of Wolf with Faulk in order to maximize charging current without exceeding the power sources capacity and to optimize power utilization.
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected for similar reasons as claim 1 above, a detailed discussion is avoided for brevity.
With regards to claim 2 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 1, wherein, when the energy storage unit is charged by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter, a difference between an input voltage of the input port of the DC-DC unit and the preset constant voltage is maintained within a preset range (Wolf ¶26 "The system voltage node VSYSTEM, i.e. the voltage to supply the operation of the portable device, is controlled by a supply regulator 2" where the supply regulator (dc-dc unit) maintains the voltage required by the device) based on at least one of the following: internal resistance of the input source, line impedance between the input port of the DC-DC unit and the input source and charging power of the energy storage module actively limited by the DC-DC unit (Abstract "The current required to run the portable device has precedence over the charging current" disclosing that the load has precedence over the charging function of the battery).
With regards to claim 3 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 1, wherein determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the sampling voltage of the input port of the DC-DC unit and the preset constant voltage of the input port of the DC-DC unit further comprises: determining a voltage difference between the sampling voltage and the preset constant voltage (Wolf Comparator 7 determines a difference between system voltage Vsystem and the preset constant voltage Vtrip); and determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference (Fig. 2 Steps 23-27 where the voltages are compared and then depending on the outcome (positive or negative difference between the voltages) the charging current for the battery is determined).
With regards to claim 4 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 3, wherein determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: when the voltage difference between the sampling voltage and the preset constant voltage is a positive value (Wolf Fig. 2 Step 23 where Vtrip is greater than Vsystem (positive value)), determining that the charging parameter is greater than a charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit in a previous period (Step 25 increase the charging current Ichg meaning that the charging parameter would be greater than a previous period).
With regards to claim 5 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 3, wherein determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: when the voltage difference between the sampling voltage and the preset constant voltage is a negative value (Wolf Fig. 2 Steps 23 where Vtrip is less than Vsystem (negative value)), determining that the charging parameter is less than a charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit in a previous period (step 27 Ichg is decreased so the charging parameter Ichg is less than a previous period).
With regards to claim 6 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 3, wherein determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: determining a target charging current (Wolf Fig. 2 Ichg is the charging current) of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference (Fig. 2 Steps 23-27 where the charging current is based on the voltage difference); and using the target charging current as the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit (Fig. 1 and 2 where the charge current Ichg is determined and used to charge the battery).
With regards to claim 8 Wolf fails to disclose, the charging control method according to claim 6, wherein charging the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter further comprises: determining, based on the target charging current and a sampling current of the input port of the DC-DC unit, a pulse width modulation PWM duty cycle for charging the energy storage unit; and charging the energy storage unit by using the PWM duty cycle.
However, Faulk discloses, the charging control method according to claim 6, wherein charging the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter further comprises: determining, based on the target charging current and a sampling current of the input port of the DC-DC unit, a pulse width modulation PWM duty cycle for charging the energy storage unit (Col 5 lines 16-17 "The signal I.sub.S is input to PWM for comparison with a fixed reference current IMAX"); and charging the energy storage unit by using the PWM duty cycle (Col 5 lines 17-20 "To regulate battery charge, PWM controls Q1 (thereby controlling the magnitude of charge current to batter BA) via an output signal OUT").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wolf with Faulk to utilize a PWM duty cycle to further control the charging parameter in order to improve battery life.
With regards to claim 9 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 3, wherein determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: determining a target charging voltage of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference (Wolf ¶19 "wherein the output of the supply regulator is supplying the operation of the portable device and its voltage corresponds to the supply voltage level required the portable device"); and using the target charging voltage as the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit (¶26 "The voltage level of VSYSTEM is defined by the voltage level required for the operation of the portable device").
With regards to claim 10 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 9, wherein charging the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter further comprises: determining, based on the target charging voltage and the sampling voltage of the input port of the DC-DC unit, a pulse width modulation PWM duty cycle for charging the energy storage unit (Faulk Col 5 lines 23-28 "PWM will regulate the charge such that the voltage bus VBUS is maintained at 18 Volts, 1 Volt lower than the CV source 110 normal regulation point of 19 Volts. This holds the charge source 110 at its maximum power and ensures that the battery BA gets the maximum rate of charge and dynamically controls this as computer 120 load changes"); and charging the energy storage unit by using the PWM duty cycle (Col 5 lines 17-20 above).
With regards to claim 11 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 3, wherein determining the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: determining, based on the voltage difference, a PWM duty cycle for charging the energy storage unit by the DC-DC unit (Faulk Col 5 lines 23-28 above); and using the PWM duty cycle as the charging parameter of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit (Col 5 lines 17-20 above).
With regards to claim 12 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 11, wherein charging the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter further comprises: charging the energy storage unit by using the PWM duty cycle (Faulk Col 5 lines 17-18 "To regulate battery charge, PWM controls Q1" where the PWM regulates the charge to the battery).
With regards to claim 13 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 1, wherein charging the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter further comprises: charging, based on closed-loop control, the energy storage unit by using the charging electricity quantity reflected by the charging parameter (Wolf Fig. 1 and ¶29 "After receiving the indication of a voltage drop of voltage VSYSTEM below threshold voltage VTRIP, the digital control unit, controlling charger 5, decreases the charge current ICH until voltage VSYSTEM comes back until a voltage level above threshold voltage VTRIP is reached. After the comparator 7 indicates to the digital control unit 8 that VSYSTEM voltage is higher than threshold voltage VTRIP, the digital control unit 8 is increasing charge current ICH via charger 5 until the current limit of the supply regulator 2 is reached and VSYSTEM run voltage falls again" disclosing a "closed-loop" control where the internal parameters are used in order to control charging of the battery).
With regards to claim 14 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 1, wherein preset constant voltage is a constant voltage in a preset time or a preset working condition (Wolf Vtrip is the constant voltage in a preset time).
With regards to claim 15 the combination discloses, the charging control method according to claim 14, wherein preset constant voltage is obtained by using a communication command indication from a host machine; or the preset constant voltage is obtained based on a preset correspondence between an energy storage unit and a preset constant voltage; or the preset constant voltage is obtained based on a preset correspondence between a real-time parameter and a preset constant voltage, wherein the real-time parameter comprises at least one of a charging voltage, a charging current, and a charging capacity; or the preset constant voltage is a preset value (Wolf ¶29 "At a defined threshold voltage VTRIP" which discloses that the Vtrip value is a preset value).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf et al. US 20100244783 in view of Faulk US 6118254 further in view of Bucur US 20050189916.
With regards to claim 7 Wolf in view of Faulk fail to disclose, the charging control method according to claim 6, wherein determining the target charging current of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: determining the target charging current based on the voltage difference and impedance of the energy storage module.
However, Bucur discloses, the charging control method according to claim 6, wherein determining the target charging current of the DC-DC unit for the energy storage unit based on the voltage difference further comprises: determining the target charging current based on the voltage difference and impedance of the energy storage module (¶17 "Battery charging current is sensed across the sense resistor (or impedance) Rsch").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine Wolf in view of Faulk with Bucur to include an impedance determination in order to more accurately charge the battery towards the end of the charging cycle and for more accurate charge termination.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf et al. US 20100244783 in view of Faulk US 6118254 further in view of Zhang et al. US 20180241231.
With regards to claim 17 Wolf in view of Faulk disclose, the energy storage module according to claim 16, wherein the DC-DC unit further comprises a DC-DC power circuit (Wolf Fig. 1 discloses a DC-DC power circuit), an auxiliary circuit (Fig. 1 discloses the auxiliary circuit comprised of the supply regulator 2, control 8, and charger 5).
The combination fails to disclose a communication circuit, and a control unit.
However, Zhang discloses, a communication circuit (Fig. 19 communication unit 205), and a control unit (Fig. 19 power adapter 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine Wolf in view of Faulk with Zhang to include the communication circuit and control unit to control the power within the system in order to improve the safety and reliability of charging to the battery.
With regards to claim 18 the combination discloses, the energy storage module according to claim 17, wherein the control unit further comprises a sampling unit (Zhang Fig. 19 power adapter 1 comprises voltage/current sampling 106), a calculation unit (power adapter 1 comprises a control unit 107 and ¶48 "the control unit 107 is configured to calculate a voltage sampling value and/or a current sampling value"), and a protection unit (power adapter 1 comprises a switch unit 102 in which the primary function is to protect the circuit).
With regards to claim 19 the combination discloses, the energy storage module according to claim 17, wherein the auxiliary circuit further comprises a sampling circuit (Wolf Fig. 1 comparator 7 and the capacitor 4 (not numbered in the figure) which both take samples), a drive circuit (Fig. 1 charger 5 which “drives” the power within the battery circuit), and a control circuit (Fig. 1 control 8).
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 Nathan Instone whose telephone number is (571)272-1563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 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, 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.
/NATHAN J INSTONE/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859