DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to amendment and response filed on 9/15/25. Claims 1, 11-14, 18 were amended. Claims 10 and 20 were cancelled. Claims 21-22 are new. Claims 1-9, 11-19 and 21-22 are pending and examined.
Response to Arguments
101: Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The claims were amended substantively. Per example, claim 1 recites additional elements (e.g.: “[in response to a determination that the power input terminal cable is disconnected], controlling, by the controller, the power converter to stop supplying charging current from the vehicle battery to the second vehicle”). The controlling step is an additional element that integrates the abstract idea into a practical application because the controller operates the power converter to stop charging the secondary vehicle from the first vehicle when the first vehicle is disconnected from a power supply such as an external charger. As such, the controlling step is an improvement of technology.
Therefore, the rejection is withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13, 16, 18-19 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200148070 A1 (Takebay) in view of US 20230234458 A1 (Salter) in further view of KR 101654714 B1 (Ha).
As to claims 1, 11 and 21,
Takebay teaches,
detecting, by the controller, connection of a charging cable between a power input terminal and an external charger (FIG. 5, S504, para. 58 “detects connection of the charging plug to the quick charging port”);
determining, by the controller, whether a second vehicle connected to a power output terminal of the vehicle via a cable is an authenticated vehicle (FIG. 9. S901, para. 78 “determines whether power provision is received from the charging port ”);
when authenticated, controlling, by the controller, the power converter to supply charging current from a vehicle battery to the second vehicle through the power output terminal (FIG. 8, item S804, S805, para. 75 “the control unit 201 permits the use of the charging port (for example, the quick charging port 209), and unlocks the cover (not shown) of the charging port”, para. 35 “A quick charging port 209 is a charging port capable of providing power to another vehicle”);
communicating information with a server or the second vehicle, the information related to the power charged to the vehicle and the second vehicle (para. 38 “the recording unit 212 records information of the amount of power provided by the control unit 201 from the quick charging port 209 to an external vehicle and information of payment concerning the provided power”);
wherein communicating the information with the server or the second vehicle (para. 38 “the amount of power provided …”) comprises:
transmitting by the communication circuit, charged power amount information of the vehicle and the second vehicle to the server (para. 38 “the recording unit 212 records information of the amount of power provided by the control unit 201 from the quick charging port 209 to an external vehicle and information of payment concerning the provided power.”), and
receiving, by the communication circuit, charged power cost information of the vehicle from the server (para. 38 “information of payment concerning the provided power”), and
wherein the charged power cost information is determined by the server based on the charged power amount information and preset per-vehicle power charging rates (para. 38 “information of the amount of provided power and information of payment concerning the provided power”).
Takebay does not teach,
determining, by the controller, whether a power input terminal cable connected to the external charger is disconnected;
in response to a determination that the power input terminal cable is disconnected, controlling, by the controller, the power converter to stop supplying charging current from the vehicle battery to the second vehicle;
however, Ha teaches,
determining, by the controller, whether a power input terminal cable connected to the external charger is disconnected (english translation, page. 5 “At this time, the bidirectional charge management unit 20 determines whether the commercial power outlet 51 or the charge cable 52 is disconnected from the bidirectional charge management unit 20, the commercial power is interrupted”);
in response to a determination that the power input terminal cable is disconnected (page 5 “the charge cable 52 is disconnected from the bidirectional charge management unit 20”) controlling, by the controller, the power converter to stop supplying charging current from the vehicle battery to the second vehicle (page. 5 “the commercial power is interrupted”, “the bidirectional charge management unit 20 switches the switching unit 23 to the " off " state”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine bi-directional vehicle charging of Takebay with power delivery interruption mitigation of Ha because power delivery interruption mitigation improves bi-directional vehicle charging by mitigating “a power failure”, see Ha, page 5.
combination of Takebay and Ha do not teach,
determining, by the controller, whether to resume supplying the charging current to the second vehicle; and
resuming or ending supplying the charging current to the second vehicle, by the controller, based on a result of a determination of whether resuming charging the second vehicle is approved by a user.
however, Salter teaches,
determining, by the controller, whether to resume supplying the charging current to the second vehicle (para. 65 “The pause would maintain the connected vehicles of the system 10 in a paused state until a precharge sequence has been completed”);
resuming or ending supplying the charging current to the second vehicle, by the controller (para. 65 “the pause would maintain the connected vehicles of the system 10 in a paused state until a precharge sequence has been completed. During the pause (e.g., about 100 milliseconds)”), based on a result of a determination of whether resuming charging the second vehicle is approved by a user (para. 66 “allow for a targeted amount (e.g., 40 amps) of charge energy to be transferred to each connected unit of the system 10. The targeted amount may be either calibratable or programmed by a user”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine bi-directional vehicle charging of Takebay with power delivery interruption mitigation of Ha with temporary power delivery pause of Salter because temporary power delivery pause improves bi-directional vehicle charging with “a momentary pause” to manage “transfer sequencing”, see Salter, para. 65.
Additionally with respect to claim 1,
Takebay teaches,
a controller, a vower converter, and a communication circuit (FIG. 2, item 201, 207, 210, para. 31, 34, 36).
Additionally with respect to claim 11,
Takebay teaches,
A vehicle capable of sharing power from an external charger with a second vehicle, the vehicle (FIG. 2, item 100, para. 30) comprising:
a power input terminal configured to receive power from the external charger (FIG. 2, item 120, para. 32);
a power output terminal configured to supply power to the second vehicle (FIG. 2, item 209, 152 para. 35);
a processor (FIG. 2, item 202, para. 31) configured to;
a communication circuit configured to ().
Additionally with respect to claim 21,
Takebay teaches,
An apparatus (FIG. 2, item 201) for a first vehicle (FIG. 2, item 100), comprising:
a power input terminal configured to receive power from an external charger (FIG. 2, item 120, para. 32);
a power output terminal configured to supply power to a second vehicle (FIG. 2, item 209, 152 para. 35);
at least one processor (FIG. 2, item 202, para. 31); and
a memory (FIG. 2, item 203) with instructions store thereon, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, enable the apparatus (para. 31) to
As to claims 2, 12 and 22, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all limitations of claims 1, 11 and 21.
Takebay also teaches,
transmitting charged power cost payment information of the vehicle to the server (para. 38 “holds information of the amount of provided power and information of payment concerning the provided power”).
As to claims 3 and 13, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all limitations of claims 1 and 11.
Takebay also teaches,
transmitting charged power cost payment information of the vehicle and the second vehicle to the server (para. 38).
As to claims 6 and 16, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 11.
Takebay teaches,
wherein determining whether the second vehicle is the authenticated vehicle comprises determining whether the second vehicle is the authenticated vehicle based on whether the second vehicle is subscribed to a platform of a charging service provider or whether the second vehicle is capable of using a charging service (para. 144, para. 145 “a control unit (for example, 201) configured to control, in accordance with an authentication result of the authentication unit, power provision to the other vehicle using the charging port configured to provide the power based on power provided from the charger to the electric vehicle”).
As to claims 8 and 18, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 11.
Takebay teaches,
receiving from a user whether to permit charging the second vehicle and an allowed charging time (FIG. 8, item S801, S804, S805, para. 75 “permits the use of the charging port” Examiner interprets charge buyer’s phone proximity and associated authentication of buyer’s phone and permit/unlock use of charging port as buyer’s permit to charge 2ndary vehicle);
determining whether the second vehicle is currently permitted for charging (FIG. 8, item S801, S804, S805, para. 73-75); and
in response to a determination that the second vehicle is currently permitted for charging (FIG. 8, item S801, S804, S805, para. 73-75), unlocking the power output terminal cover and displaying that the vehicle is currently in a chargeable state (FIG. 8, item S805, para. 75, FIG. 11, item 1114, para. 86).
As to claims 9 and 19, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 11.
Takebay teaches,
in response to a determination that the second vehicle is not the authenticated vehicle (FIG. 8, item S804, para. 74 “the authentication processing unit 211 determines whether the received electronic key is valid”, para. 75 “if the electronic key is invalid”), setting off a warning alarm and stop power sharing (para. 75 “if the electronic key is invalid (or the status does not match the predetermined condition), the control unit 201 does not permit the use of the charging port, and maintains the lock of the cover (not shown) of the charging port”).
Claims 4-5 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takebay in view of Salter in view of Ha in further view of US 20200215929 A1 (Javaid).
As to claims 4 and 14, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 11.
Takebay teaches,
transmitting charged power amount information of the vehicle and the second vehicle to the server (para. 38).
transmitting charged power cost payment information of the vehicle to the server (para. 38).
combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter do not teach,
receiving deposit payment information from the second vehicle;
receiving charged power cost information of the vehicle and the second vehicle from the server;
transmitting refund payment information to the second vehicle.
however, Javaid teaches,
receiving deposit payment information from the second vehicle (para. 41 “creation … of user accounts… The user account may also be linked to financial information for the user in order to facilitate disbursement and receipt of payment associated with a dynamic charge transaction”);
receiving charged power cost information of the vehicle and the second vehicle from the server (para. 43 “displays a buy status 78 with the amount of charge and the cost per unit of power that the user has opted to purchase”);
transmitting refund payment information to the second vehicle (para. 53 “After delivery of the agreed-upon amount of electric power is delivered, … the financial transaction may be completed”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine bi-directional vehicle charging of Takebay with power delivery interruption mitigation of Ha with temporary power delivery pause of Salter with bi-directional charging financial transaction management of Javaid because financial transaction management improves bi-directional vehicle charging with “ allowing the vehicle to conclude the trip with a desirable power level while not significantly affecting overall travel time”, see Javaid, para. 60.
As to claims 5 and 15, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all the limitations of claims 1, 2 and 11, 12.
combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter do not teach,
wherein costs of the power charged to the vehicle and the second vehicle are determined at different rates.
however, Javaid teaches,
wherein costs of the power charged to the vehicle and the second vehicle are determined at different rates (para. 44 “a maximum price per kilowatt hour of energy he is willing to pay in a buy mode, or a minimum price per kilowatt hour in a sell mode”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine bi-directional vehicle charging of Takebay with power delivery interruption mitigation of Ha with temporary power delivery pause of Salter with bi-directional charging financial transaction management of Javaid because financial transaction management improves bi-directional vehicle charging with “ allowing the vehicle to conclude the trip with a desirable power level while not significantly affecting overall travel time”, see Javaid, para. 60.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takebay in view of Salter in view of Ha in further view of US 20230226934 A1 (Chapeau).
As to claims 7 and 17, combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter teach all the limitations of claims 1 and 11.
combination of Takebay, Ha and Salter do not teach,
entering a vehicle wheel drive lock mode before charging the second vehicle;
releasing the vehicle wheel drive lock mode after charging the second vehicle is finished.
however, Chapeau teaches,
entering a vehicle wheel drive lock mode before charging the second vehicle (para. 25 “existing vehicles comprising park release emergency valves may be reconfigured such that they may be reliably immobilised when it is detected that a charging cable remains engaged to the vehicle”);
releasing the vehicle wheel drive lock mode after charging the second vehicle is finished (para. 105 “Upon determining that the charging cable is disconnected, or that there is no charging cable connected to the electric charging connector 26, the controller 24 will send a signal to the release valve 60 such that it is deactivated. When the release valve 60 is no longer actuated, compressed air is supplied to the park release emergency valve 36 such that the parking brake is disengaged”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine bi-directional vehicle charging of Takebay with power delivery interruption mitigation of Ha with temporary power delivery pause of Salter with vehicle immobilization of Chapeau because vehicle immobilization improves bi-directional vehicle charging “by immobilising the vehicle when an electric charging cable is engaged to the vehicle, use of electric charging equipment for charging vehicles and equipment thereon may be made safer”, see Chapeau, para. 9.
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 BROCK E TURK whose telephone number is (571)272-5626. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM 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, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. 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.
/BROCK E TURK/Examiner, Art Unit 3692
/RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692