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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show method steps 710-726 as described in the specification paragraphs 0078-0083. 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 Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “for determining the output power to be greater than” and “for determining the output power to be less than” limitations. Examiner would recommend rewording the claim language to “when it is determined that the output power is greater than” and “when it is determined that the output power is less than” for improved clarity of the claim limitations.
Claim 6 recites “the WPU” in line 2, prior to the introduction of the wireless power transmitter recited in lines 3-4. Acronyms should be used after the introduction of the element and not prior to it.
Claims 8 & 20 each recite “for the output power being determined to be greater than” and “for the output power being determined to be less than” limitations”. Examiner would recommend rewording the claim language to “when the output power is determined to be greater than” and “when the output power is determined to be less than” for improved clarity of the claim limitations.
Claim 8 recites “for coupling to the circuit” in lines 9 & 13. Examiner would recommend rewording the claim language to “coupled to the circuit” for improved clarity of the claim limitations.
Claims 2-7 and 9-19 depend from objected claims and are therefore objected for the same reasons.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Such claim limitation(s) is/are indicated in the table below, along with corresponding structure and/or lack thereof:
Claim limitation
Claim Numbers
Structure (PGPUB citation)
Means for inducing the voltage
11
RF rectifier or energy harvester (¶0048)
Means for converting the voltage
11
Power converter (¶0079)
Means for transmitting
14
Antenna (¶0078)
Means for emulating
17
Electrical Circuitry (¶0083)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “for the output power determined to be greater than or equal to the power requirement, cause the first circuit to: transmit a second current to the second circuit; and transmit a third current from the energy storage device to the second circuit”, however the disclosure lacks support for this limitation. Specification paragraphs 0076 & 0077, along with Fig.8, describe the response of the first circuit when the output power is determined to be greater than or equal to the power requirement as a transmission of a first current to the second circuit and the energy storage device, and not a second current to the second circuit and a third current from the energy storage device.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the second circuit" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 does not introduce a “second circuit”, however it does recite the element “another circuit”. It is unclear if this recitation is intended to refer back to the “another circuit” introduced in claim 8, or if it is introducing a new “second circuit”. For the purpose of this examination, examiner interprets this to read as “the another circuit”.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 16, 17, 19, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mao et al. (USPGPN 2020/0076249).
Regarding Claim 1, Mao (Figs. 7-8C) teaches a method comprising:
determining, by a first circuit (342), whether or not an output power associated with a voltage (Vbus/Ibus) induced in response to the first circuit receiving a wireless power signal is greater than or equal to a power requirement (802 & 812; ¶0092: 801 of Iload; ¶0093: 812 Ichg) second circuit (162) coupled to the first circuit; and
for determining the output power to be greater than or equal to the power requirement (0-2ms: 802 is less than 812), transmitting a first current from the first circuit to the second circuit and an energy storage device (152) coupled to the first circuit (¶0093: excess current flows into battery 152); or
for determining the output power to be less than the power requirement:
transmitting a second current from the first circuit to the second circuit; and
transmitting a third current from the energy storage device to the second circuit.
Examiner’s note: As written, due to the usage of the conjunction “or” between the “for determining” steps of the method, these can be reasonably interpreted as alternative limitations, and therefore a prior art only needs to read on a single “for determining” response.
Regarding Claim 5, Mao further teaches inducing, by the first circuit, a first voltage in response to receiving the wireless power signal (Fig.7, Vbus; ¶0056: Vbus is generated from RXIC 246 when RXIC 246 receives power from TXIC 226); and
converting the first voltage to a second voltage after the inducing (¶0093: DC to DC converter 350 has a voltage down conversion of 2:1).
Regarding Claim 7, Mao further teaches emulating, by the first circuit, the energy storage device to the second circuit (Figs.8A & 8C, Ichg 810 is provided to Iload 802, thus emulating a storage device).
Regarding Claim 8, Mao (Figs. 7-8C) teaches an apparatus comprising:
a circuit (246 & 350) configured to:
receive a wireless power signal (246 receives power via L2); and
induce a voltage in response to the circuit receiving the wireless power signal (Vbus); and
a controller (344) coupled to the circuit, wherein the controller is configured to:
determine whether or not an output power associated with the induced voltage (Vbus/Ibus) is greater than or equal to a power requirement (802 & 812; ¶0092: 801 Iload; ¶0093: 812 Ichg) of another circuit (162) for coupling to the circuit; and
for the output power being determined to be greater than or equal to the power requirement (0-2ms: 802 is less than 812), cause a first current to be transmitted from the circuit to the another circuit and an energy storage device (152) for coupling to the circuit (¶0093: excess current flows into battery 152); or
for the output power being determined to be less than the power requirement:
cause a second current to be transmitted from the circuit to the another circuit; and
cause a third current to be transmitted from the energy storage device to the another circuit.
Regarding Claim 11, Mao further teaches wherein the circuit further comprises: means for inducing the voltage as a first voltage in response to receiving the wireless power signal (Fig.7, Vbus; ¶0056: Vbus is generated from RXIC 246 when RXIC 246 receives power from TXIC 226); and
means for converting the first voltage to a second voltage (¶0093: DC to DC converter 350 has a voltage down conversion of 2:1).
Regarding Claim 13, Mao further teaches further comprising an antenna for coupling to the circuit and configured to receive the wireless power signal from a wireless power transmitter (WPT) (Fig.7, L2).
Regarding Claim 16, Mao further teaches comprising one or more input/output ports coupled to the controller for interfacing with at least a portion of the another circuit (Fig.7, 352 connected to 342 at 350).
Regarding Claim 17, Mao further teaches comprising means for emulating the energy storage device to the another circuit (Figs.8A & 8C, Ichg 810 is provided to Iload 802, thus emulating a storage device).
Regarding Claim 19, Mao further teaches comprising means for coupling the circuit to the second circuit and the energy storage device (Fig.7, 352 connected to 342, 152 & 162).
Regarding Claim 20, Mao (Figs.7-8C) teaches one or more non-transitory computer readable media having stored thereon program instructions (¶0135) which, when executed by at least one processor, cause a machine to:
determine whether or not an output power associated with a voltage induced in response to a first circuit (342) receiving a wireless power signal is greater than or equal to a power requirement of a second circuit (162) coupled to the first circuit (802 & 812; ¶0092: 801 Iload; ¶0093: 812 Ichg); and
for the output power determined to be greater than or equal to the power requirement (0-2ms: 802 is less than 812), cause the first circuit to transmit a first current to the second circuit and an energy storage device (152) coupled to the first circuit (¶0093: excess current flows into battery 152); or
for the output power determined to be greater than or equal to the power requirement, cause the first circuit to:
transmit a second current to the second circuit; and
transmit a third current from the energy storage device to the second circuit.
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(s) 2-4, 9, & 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao, in view of Jung et al. (USPGPN 2019/0165613).
Regarding Claim 2, Mao fails to explicitly teach determining, by the first circuit, that the second circuit is receiving a fourth current from an external power supply.
However, Jung teaches a circuit determining if a circuit is receiving a fourth current from an external power supply (Fig.5B, Third Power; ¶0142: wired interface 521).
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 Mao with Jung to include determining if a circuit is receiving a fourth current from an external power supply. Doing so allows the system to include battery charging from a wired source in addition to a wireless source, increasing the possible methods for recharging the battery.
Regarding Claim 3, Mao fails to explicitly teach receiving, by the first circuit, the fourth current from the second circuit; and
transmitting, by the first circuit, the fourth current to the energy storage device.
However, Jung (Fig.5B) teaches receiving the fourth current (Third Power) and transmitting it (First Power) to an energy storage device (510).
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 Mao with Jung to include receiving a fourth current and transmitting it to the energy storage device. Doing so allows the system to include battery charging from a wired source in addition to a wireless source, increasing the possible methods for recharging the battery.
Regarding Claim 4, Mao fails to explicitly teach apportioning, according to one or more configuration settings of the first circuit, the fourth current, and at least one of the first, second, and third currents, for transmission to the second circuit and the energy storage device.
However, Jung (Fig.5B) teaches apportioning a fourth current (Third Power) to at least the first current (First Power) to a second circuit and the energy storage device (First power is provided to SYS and BAT).
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 Mao with Jung to include apportioning a fourth current to a first current to the second circuit and the energy storage device. Doing so allows the system to include battery charging from a wired source in addition to a wireless source, increasing the possible methods for recharging the battery.
Regarding Claim 9, Mao fails to explicitly teach the controller is further configured to: determine that the another circuit is receiving a fourth current from an external power supply; and
cause the fourth current to be transmitted to the energy storage device.
However, Jung (Fig.5B) teaches receiving the fourth current (Third Power) and transmitting it (First Power) to an energy storage device (510).
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 Mao with Jung to include receiving a fourth current and transmitting it to the energy storage device. Doing so allows the system to include battery charging from a wired source in addition to a wireless source, increasing the possible methods for recharging the battery.
Regarding Claim 10, Mao fails to explicitly teach the controller is further configured to cause, according to one or more configuration settings of the circuit, the fourth current, and at least one of the first, second, and third currents, to be apportioned for transmission to the another circuit and the energy storage device.
However, Jung (Fig.5B) teaches apportioning a fourth current (Third Power) to at least the first current (First Power) to a second circuit and the energy storage device (First power is provided to SYS and BAT).
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 Mao with Jung to include apportioning a fourth current to a first current to the second circuit and the energy storage device. Doing so allows the system to include battery charging from a wired source in addition to a wireless source, increasing the possible methods for recharging the battery.
Claim(s) 6, 14, 15, & 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao, in view of Kim et al. (USPGPN 2020/0119581).
Regarding Claim 6, Mao fails to explicitly teach transmitting, by the first circuit, a radio frequency (RF) signal to the WPT; and
receiving, by the first circuit, the wireless power signal from a wireless power transmitter (WPT) in response to transmitting the RF signal to the WPT.
However, Kim teaches that wireless charging occurs after an initial communication between the power source and the power receiving device (¶0199: electric device 501 exchanges information with external device 503 for wireless power transmission, ¶0202: the exchange of charging information occurs prior to transmitting electric power)(examiner equates this to transmitting an RF signal to a WPT, and in response, receiving the wireless power signal).
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 Mao with Kim to include transmitting an RF signal to the WPT and receiving the wireless power signal from the WPT in response to the transmitting the RF signal. Doing so allows the devices to determine if the power receiving device is capable of being wirelessly charged.
Regarding Claim 14, Mao fails to explicitly teach further comprising means for transmitting a radio frequency (RF) signal to the WPT.
However, Kim teaches a means for transmitting a radio frequency (Fig.3, 350).
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 Mao with Kim to provide a means for transmitting a radio frequency. Doing so allows the devices to determine if wireless charging is capable between the devices.
Regarding Claim 15, Mao fails to explicitly teach comprising means coupled to the controller for switching the antenna between a receive mode and a transmit mode.
However, Kim teaches a means (Fig.3, 340) coupled to a controller (Fig.3, 310) for switching the antenna between a receive mode and a transmit mode (¶0084: IC 340 can operate to transmit and receive wireless signals).
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 Kim with Mao to include a means coupled to the controller for switching the antenna between a receive mode and a transit mode. Doing so allows for a single antenna to be used for both transmitting and receiving wireless signals, reducing the number of antennas needed.
Regarding Claim 18, Mao fails to explicitly teach wherein at least a portion of the circuit is formed as a flexible printed circuit board.
However, Kim teaches a circuit may be formed as a flexible printed circuit board (¶0094: substrate may be a flexible PCB).
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 Mao with Kim to include forming a portion of the circuit as a flexible PCB. Doing so allows the circuit to have improved shock absorption.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao, in view of Greene et al. (USPGPN 2019/0181674).
Regarding Claim 12, Mao fails to explicitly teach comprising a visual indicator configured to be energized in response to the wireless power signal being received by the circuit.
However, Greene teaches a device which includes a visual indicator configured to be energized in response to the wireless power signal being received by the circuit (¶0055: indicator assembly 430 includes an indicator 434, and RSSI, received signal strength indicator, monitoring component 432).
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 Mao with Greene to include a visual indicator to be energized in response to the wireless power signal being received. Doing so allows a user to determine the strength of the received signal to determine if recharging can occur.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Takahashi et al. (USPGPN 2017/0098963) teaches a system for charging a battery and providing power to a load via wireless power transmission.
Shevde et al. (USPGPN 2019/013687) teaches a detection system for wireless and wired charging.
Lim et al. (USPGPN 2019/0052100) teaches a system for managing power to and from a battery.
Qu (USPGPN 2022/0329111) teaches a system for managing power received from wired and wireless charging sources.
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