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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings, in particular FIGS. 1-2 and 4, are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show descriptive labels as described in the specification. For instance, the structure 140 in FIG. 4 should include the label “control device”, as described on page 9, line 15 of the specification s filed. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wallans et al. US10500452B2.
Regarding claim 1. Wallans discloses a smart sports equipment charging system (FIG. 29) comprising:
a storage vessel (1520) for storage of sports equipment (FIG. 29), the storage vessel comprising:
an aperture (on the top) configured to receive sports equipment (100) therethrough for storage of the sports equipment (100) within the storage vessel (1520) (FIG. 29);
a closed end (1522) opposite the aperture (FIG. 29); and
a separator configured to separate an internal volume of the storage vessel between the aperture and the closed end (1522) into at least two sections (column 88, lines 30-44 - the opening may be an opening separate from the container of the golf bag, for example a first container and a second container where the second container is used to inductively charge);
a charging area (1524) arranged at the closed end of the storage vessel (bottom), the charging area including at least two charging portions (column 88, lines 30-44 - the second container is used to inductively charge), wherein each of the at least two charging portions are aligned with a respective section of the storage vessel such that sports equipment including a rechargeable power source stored within a section of the storage vessel is chargeable with the respective charging portion (column 88, lines 30-44); and
a power storage device (1550) configured to supply power to the charging area (column 87, lines 19-34 – the battery may supply the necessary electrical current to the induction coil to inductively charge the power source).
Regarding claim 2. Wallans discloses that the sports equipment (100) is a smart golf club (column 89, lines 20-28 – golf club includes a monitoring device 1501) and the storage vessel (1520) is a golf bag (FIG. 29) configured to store and charge the smart golf club therein (column 89, lines 8-41).
Regarding claim 3. Wallans discloses that the charging portions each comprise a wireless charging coil (induction coil 1524) configured to wirelessly charge sports equipment including a corresponding coil (column 3, line 62-column 4, line 26).
Regarding claim 4. Wallans discloses that each charging area comprises an alignment device configured to align sports equipment with the respective charging portion (column 88, lines 30-44: golf bag has individual openings each with an induction coil).
Regarding claim 6. Wallans discloses that the charging portions each comprise a conductive charging contact configured to charge sports equipment including a corresponding contact (column 62, lines 42-67).
Regarding claim 8. Wallans discloses each charging portion includes a controller configured to modulate an amount of power delivered to the respective charging portion (column 88, line 45 – Column 89, line 7 - the processor 204 of the monitoring device 1501 may assist in controlling the charging process, because the there is a monitoring device for each club, it follows that there is a controller for each club).
Regarding claim 9. Wallans discloses a processor (1555) operably connected to the charging area (column 89, lines 8-41), wherein the processor is configured to:
detect sports equipment within charging range of a charging portion (column 89, lines 20-22);
determine a status of the sports equipment (column 89, lines 1-7); and
control operation of the charging area according to the status of the sports equipment (column 89, lines 22-25).
Regarding claim 10. Wallans discloses that the status of the sports equipment includes a charge level of a rechargeable power source of the sports equipment (column 89, lines 1-7 – communicate whether fully charged).
Regarding claim 11. Wallans discloses controlling operation of the charging area includes suppling power to the charging portion adjacent to the sports equipment if a status of the sports equipment includes a charge level below full capacity (FIG. 29 the bag is connected to an outlet adjacent to the bag).
Regarding claim 12. Wallans discloses a mains power connector (cable 1544) configured to be connectable to a mains power supply (wall outlet 1548) and charge the power storage device (column 87, lines 35-51 - connected via socket 1540 on the bag).
Regarding claim 13. Wallans discloses that the power storage device comprises a battery (1550).
Regarding claim 14. Wallans discloses that the power storage device is arranged within the storage vessel (FIG. 29 – the battery 1550 is arranged in the golf bag 1520).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallans et al. US10500452B2 further in view of Tan US20150018113A1.
Regarding claim 5. Wallans does not explicitly disclose that each alignment device comprises a magnetic alignment device.
Tan discloses that each alignment device (3) comprises a magnetic alignment device (4).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a magnetic attraction as taught by Tan to the golf bag of Wallans to avoid golf iron collision during movement of the golf bag (Tan; ¶5)
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallans et al. US10500452B2.
Regarding claim 7. Wallan discloses that the separator is configured to separate the internal volume of the storage vessel into sections, and the charging area includes charging portions (column 88, lines 30-44).
Although Wallan does not explicitly disclose 14 sections, absent a showing of unexpected results or criticality, because Wallen teaches a plurality of separations, a person of ordinary skill in the art would know it include up to 18 sections because under traditional golf rules, a golfer may carry a maximum of 14 golf clubs.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallans et al. US10500452B2 further in view of Wempe et al. US20060138161A1.
Regarding claim 15. Wallans does not explicitly teach that the power storage device is removable from the storage vessel for charging, replacement or maintenance.
Wempe teaches that the power storage device (110) is removable from the storage vessel for charging, replacement or maintenance (FIG. 1 and 3; ¶29/40).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the battery of Wallans removeable, as taught by Wempe in order to allow for easier charging and/or replacement.
Related Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Onuki et al. US20190314703A1 demonstrates a charging system in a golf bag.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM..
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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859