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 Status
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and are presented for examination on the merits.
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, 2, and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0379206 to Lee et al., in view of US 2005/0035741 to Elder.
With respect to Claims 1, and 13, Lee teaches a battery management system ([0051-53], power management module), comprising: an electronic device ([0186], 201) comprising a primary battery ([0051-53], battery 211); an auxiliary battery electrically couplable with the electronic device ([0051-53], auxiliary power module ([0055], second cell)); and a charging station ([0051-53]), comprising: a power supply ([0295]); a receiving element to receive and electrically couple with at least one of the primary battery or the auxiliary battery ([0296], wired charging manner); and an electronic communication unit to communicate with the electronic device; the charging station configured to modulate a state of charge of (e.g., charge) at least one of the primary battery or the auxiliary battery based on at least one of the state of charge of the primary battery, the state of charge of the auxiliary battery, or a usage of the electronic device ([0296-98]).
Lee fails to expressly teach, but Elder teaches a processor to monitor a state of charge of the primary battery and the auxiliary battery. [0170] Elder discusses several disadvantages regarding prior art reserve battery systems including using only a trickle charge for recharging, which takes a long time. [0010-11] As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee, to include monitoring the auxiliary battery as well, in order to aid in the recharging of the auxiliary or reserve battery.
With respect to Claim 2, Lee teaches wherein the electronic device comprises a head-mounted display, the head-mounted display comprising: a housing defining an internal volume; a processor disposed in the internal volume and in communication with the charging station, the processor operable to monitor a state of charge of the primary battery and a state of charge of the auxiliary battery; wherein the primary battery is a fixed battery disposed in the internal volume, and the auxiliary battery is removably attachable to the electronic device. [0040];[0042]
With respect to Claim 7, Lee teaches wherein the usage of the electronic device comprises at least one of a calendar event, a location of the electronic device, a power consumption, a proximity of the auxiliary battery, a time of day, or a date. [0040]
With respect to Claim 8, Lee teaches wherein the auxiliary battery comprises a first auxiliary battery and the battery management system further comprises a second auxiliary battery, the second auxiliary battery electrically couplable with the electronic device to: power the electronic device; charge the primary battery; and charge the auxiliary battery ([0055], teaching second cell, capacitor, and the like).
With respect to Claim 9, Lee teaches wherein the primary battery charges the auxiliary battery when the auxiliary battery and the primary battery are electrically coupled with the electronic device. ([0198], where auxiliary is capacitor, it is powered by primary battery)
With respect to Claim 10, Lee teaches wherein the auxiliary battery powers the electronic device in response to the electronic device being in a high-power mode. [0087]
With respect to Claim 11, Lee teaches wherein the charging station modulates a rate of charge of the auxiliary battery based on a rate of discharge of the primary battery when the primary battery is electrically coupled with the electronic device. ([0090-91];[0106])
With respect to Claim 12, Lee teaches wherein the charging station prioritizes a rapid charge of the auxiliary battery over a rapid charge of the primary battery. [0315]
With respect to Claim 14, Lee teaches wherein the charging station transmits a signal to the electronic device corresponding to the state of charge of the auxiliary battery. ([0051-53], conveying information; [0288] teaching transmitting signals)
With respect to Claim 15, Lee teaches wherein the charging station maintains the state of charge of the auxiliary battery in a desired range when the auxiliary battery is electrically coupled with the charging station. [0091];[0149]
With respect to Claim 16, Lee teaches wherein: the electronic device is electrically couplable with the charging station; and the state of charge of the primary battery is modulated by the charging station. [0051-53]
With respect to Claim 17, Lee teaches a head-mounted display ([0040];FIGS. 1, 7), comprising: a head mounting component ([0040], inherent, by definition “head-mounted devices (HMDs)” means that it includes a head mounted component; a “component” is necessarily present); a housing defining an internal volume (FIGS. 1, 7 shows a “housing” is necessary to house the electronic circuitry of the display); a display component (FIGS. 1, 7); an external-facing sensor (FIGS. 1, 7, 9 (940)); an electronic communication unit to communicate with a charging station (FIG. 9, (920)); a primary battery (FIG. 9 (996)); and a processor disposed in the internal volume (FIG. 9 (910)), the processor operable to modulate a state of charge of the primary battery electrically coupled with the charging station based on at least one of the state of charge of the primary battery, the state of charge of the auxiliary battery, or a usage of the head-mounted display ([0051-53], see Claim 1).
Lee fails to expressly teach, but Elder teaches monitoring of the state of charge of the auxiliary battery. [0170] Elder teaches several disadvantages regarding prior art reserve battery systems including using only a trickle charge for recharging, which takes a long time. [0010-11] As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee, to include monitoring the auxiliary battery as well, in order to aid in the recharging of the auxiliary or reserve battery.
With respect to Claim 18, Lee teaches a receiving element to receive and electrically couple with the auxiliary battery ([0051-53]).
With respect to Claim 19, Lee teaches wherein the primary battery is removably connected to the receiving element. FIG. 4
With respect to Claim 20, Lee teaches wherein the usage of the head-mounted display comprises at least one of a calendar event, a location of the head-mounted display, a current power consumption, a typical power consumption, a proximity of the auxiliary battery, a time of day, or a date. [0040]
Claim 3-6 are rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, in view of Elder, and further in view of US 2018/0183252 to Kim et al.
With respect to Claim 3, the combination of Lee and Elder fails to expressly teach, but Kim teaches wherein the processor is configured to maximize a duration that the primary battery has a desired state of charge by modulating the state of charge of the primary battery and the state of charge of the auxiliary battery. ([0202]) Kim discusses several concerns relating to battery safety issues, including overcharging. ([0005]) As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee, to include maximum duration of SoC achieved through desired modulation, in order to address battery safety issues.
With respect to Claim 4, Lee teaches wherein the desired stated of charge is between 20% and 80%. ([0091];[0149]) The specific metric/range is a matter of design choice.
With respect to Claim 5, Lee teaches wherein the processor modulates the state of charge of the primary battery by causing the primary battery to power the electronic device in response to the primary battery exceeding the desired state of charge ([0051-53]).
With respect to Claim 6, Lee teaches wherein the processor modulates the state of charge of the auxiliary battery by causing the auxiliary battery to power the electronic device in response to the primary battery having the desired state of charge ([0051-53]).
Response to remarks
Applicant’s remarks submitted on 3/20/2026 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive where objections/rejections are maintained. The claims are amended primarily to add a processor for monitoring a state of charge of both the primary and auxiliary batteries. Lee teaches a processor for managing the charge/discharge operation of both primary and auxiliary batteries. The term “manage” would teach one of ordinary skill in the art to monitor a state of charge of the batteries, when managing the charge/discharge operation thereof. Nevertheless, Elder has been further added to teach monitoring both the primary and an auxiliary battery. As per Claim 17, Lee shows a mobile device (e.g., smartphone) at least in FIGS. 1, 7; moreover it expressly discloses that the electronic device therein may compose a head-mounted device (HMD). See, ¶ [0040]. It does not discuss the device’s housing, internal circuitry, etc., nor an HMD’s heading mounting component. However, it is inherent that conventional mobile devices contain a housing, internal volume for storing the electronic components/circuitry, a display, etc. and it is inherent that an HMD contains a component for mounting the device on the head of a user. These structures are necessarily present in the thing. That said, FIGS. 1, 7 in Lee are pinpointed herein. Please note that the applied reference(s) need not use the same terminology, or disclose the limitation verbatim, and also that the entirety of a prior art reference is to be applied to the respective claim(s), such that the pinpoint citations above are exemplary and provided for Applicant’s benefit; other locations within the applied reference(s) may further support the rejection. MPEP 2141.02(VI).
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 WILLIAM J JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-3082. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00, alternating Fri. off.
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, Matthew Gart can be reached on 5712723955. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIAM J JACOB/Examiner, Art Unit 3696
Prosecution Insights