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 .
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.
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) 1-7, 10-15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (US 2017/0207647 A1, hereinafter ZHANG) in view of FUHRER (US 2019/0375309 A1, hereinafter FUHRER).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 19 (claim 1 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), a mobile computing device (See Fig.4, Item#300 and Par.17, disclose the electronic device may be a mobile phone); comprising:
a physical connector configured to receive a charging cable (See Fig.4, Item#320, discloses an interface for receiving charging cable of power adapter);
a plurality of temperature sensors (See Fig.2, discloses a first temperature measurement element #A1 and a second temperature measurement element #A2); and
a controller (See Fig.3, Item#220) configured to:
responsive to detecting the occurrence of the overheat event, reduce an amount of electrical current flowing through the physical connector (See Pars.88 and 93, discloses that when an overheating condition is detected, the amount of current is reduced).
However, ZHANG does not disclose the controller is configured to:
detect, based on a difference between a temperature measured by a first temperature sensor of the plurality of temperature sensors and a temperature measured by a second temperature sensor of the plurality of temperature sensors, an occurrence of an overheat event in the physical connector, wherein a distance between the first temperature sensor and the physical connector is less than a distance between the second temperature sensor and the physical connector.
FUHRER discloses a temperature monitored system comprising a controller configured to:
detect, based on a difference between a temperature measured by a first temperature sensor of a plurality of temperature sensors and a temperature measured by a second temperature sensor of the plurality of temperature sensors, an occurrence of an overheat event in the physical connector (See Fig.1, discloses a first sensor 12 in the charging connector 10 and a second temperature sensor 33 in the body of the electronic device 30. Par.9 further discloses “Furthermore, the electronic control device is designed to ascertain a differential temperature between the temperature of the current-carrying component and the ambient temperature based on the temperature measurement data and the ambient temperature measurement data and to output a control signal for the purpose of controlling the charging current based on the ascertained differential temperature.”. Par.24 and 47 disclose how the difference in temperature measurements is used to control the charging current when the difference in temperature exceeds a threshold), wherein a distance between the first temperature sensor and the physical connector is less than a distance between the second temperature sensor and the physical connector (See Fig.1, discloses the first sensor 12 is closer to the charging connector 10 [embedded in the connector 10 and closer to terminals 11] than the sensor 33).
ZHANG and FUHRER are analogous art since they both deal with circuits for protecting connectors against overheating.
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 ZHANG with the teachings of FUHRER by adding a plurality of temperature sensors at different distances from the connector for the benefit of preventing a premature activation of the connector protection circuit (See FUHRER, Par.11).
Regarding claims 2 and 11 (claim 2 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 1, wherein, to detect the occurrence of the overheat event, the controller is configured to detect the occurrence of the overheat event responsive to the difference between the temperature measured by the first temperature sensor and the temperature measured by the second temperature sensor being greater than a threshold temperature (See FUHRER, Par.18, discloses “The charging system is preferably designed in such a way that the electronic control device is designed to output a control signal for the purpose of controlling the charging current when a prespecified limit differential temperature is exceeded by the differential temperature.”).
Regarding claims 3 and 12 (claim 3 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 1 as discussed above, further comprising: a circuit board, wherein the plurality of temperature sensors and the physical connector are attached to the circuit board (See ZHANG, Fig.2 and Pars.43-44 and 49, disclose a conductive substrate on which the temperature sensors and the physical connector are attached. The examiner explains that ZHANG as modified by FURHRER would include second temperature sensor on the same substrate but at a different location to account for ambient temperature away from the connector).
Regarding claim 4, ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 3 as discussed above, further comprising:
one or more components attached to the circuit board that generate heat during operation (See ZHANG, discloses an electronic device, is it inherent that the electronic device comprises a charging circuit and electronics which generate heat).
Regarding claims 5 and 13 (Claim 5 is considered more representative for limitation matching purposes), ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 4 as discussed above, However, ZHANG and FUHRER as applied to claim 4 do not disclose wherein a distance between at least one of the one or more components and the connector is less than the distance between the second temperature sensor and the physical connector.
FUHRER further teaches a distance between at least one of the one or more components (See Fig.1, Item#31) and the connector is less than the distance between the second temperature sensor and the physical connector (See Fig.1, discloses the distance between the distance between the control device 31 and the connector 10 is less than the distance between the temperature sensor 33 and the connector 10).
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 ZHANG and FUHRER as applied to claim 4 with the teachings of FUHRER by placing the second temperature sensor further from the physical connector that other heat generating components for the benefit of reducing the effect of the temperature of the physical connector on the second temperature sensor.
Regarding claims 6, 14 and 20 (claim 6 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 1, wherein, to reduce the amount of electrical current flowing through the physical connector, the controller is configured to:
output, via the charging cable, a signal to a power supply requesting that the power supply reduce an amount of power provided to the mobile computing device (See ZHANG, Par.88, disclose when the temperature of the charging interface is greater than or equal to a first temperature threshold, sending an instruction to the power adapter via the charging cable for instructing the power adapter to reduce a current value of the charging current or reduce a voltage value of the charging current).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 6, wherein, to output the signal, the controller is configured to:
output, via the charging cable, a signal to the power supply requesting that the power supply cease providing power to the mobile computing device (See ZHANG, Pars.89 and 133, disclose when the temperature of the charging interface is greater than or equal to a second temperature threshold, forbidding charging a rechargeable battery in the electronic device or forbidding providing power to electronic components of the electronic device, in which the second temperature threshold is greater than the first temperature threshold).
Regarding claim 18, ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the method of claim 10 as discussed above, further comprising:
charging, using the electrical power received via the physical connector, a power storage device of the mobile computing device (See ZHANG, Par.118, discloses the electronic device comprising a rechargeable battery which is charged via power adapter shown in Figs.4-5).
Claim(s) 8-9 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG in view of FUHRER and in further view of STENGER et al. (US 2017/0141608 A1, hereinafter STENGER).
Regarding claims 8 and 16 (claim 8 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 7 as discussed above, wherein the threshold temperature is a first threshold temperature, and wherein the controller is further configured to:
detect an end of the overheat event responsive to the difference between the temperature measured by the first temperature sensor and the temperature measured by the second temperature sensor being less than a second threshold temperature, the second threshold temperature being lower than the first threshold temperature; and
responsive to detecting the end of the overheat event, output, via the charging cable, a signal to the power supply requesting that the power supply resume providing power to the mobile computing device.
STENGER discloses a power charging module wherein an overheating event is detected and amount of power is reduced when an overheating event is detected (See Fig.3, Steps#80 and 81), detect an end of an overheat event and operating the charging at the normal power level (See Fig.3, disclose after step 81, the process returns back to step#73 where the temperature is detected and when the temperature is within normal range then the process moves to step#76 where the operation is performed at standard operating criteria including maximum power. The examiner further explains as applied to claims 6-7 ZHANG discloses the electronic device sends a signal to the charger to reduce the charging current and ZHANG and FUHRER as modified by STENGER would provide a charger which after an overheating event ends, a signal is sent to the charger to restore the normal charging output).
ZHANG, FUHRER and STENGER are analogous art since they all deal with thermal protection.
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 ZHANG and FUHRER with the further teachings of STENGER by restoring the charging current when an overheating event ends for the benefit of reducing charging time by charging with the highest allowable charging current while protecting the electronic device against damage.
Regarding claims 9 and 17 (claim 9 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), ZHANG and FUHRER disclose the mobile computing device of claim 1 as discussed above, disclose a USB interface wherein the physical connector is a universal serial bus connector (See ZHANG, Par.97).
However, ZHANG and FUHRER do not explicitly disclose the physical connector is a USB type-C connector.
STENGER further discloses an electronic device using a USB type-C (See Par.37).
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 ZHANG and FUHRER with the teachings of STEGER by using a USB type-C connector for the benefit of increasing the compatibility of the electronic device since USB type-c connecters are widely used.
Conclusion
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/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859