Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/195,433

BIDIRECTIONAL PORTABLE EV CHARGING CABLE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 10, 2023
Examiner
CASS, JEAN PAUL
Art Unit
3666
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hagerenergy GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
719 granted / 984 resolved
+21.1% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
83 currently pending
Career history
1067
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§103
56.8%
+16.8% vs TC avg
§102
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 984 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102018114085A1 to Giebel et al. (US20190381906A1) and in view of German Patent Pub. NO.: DE 102012212291 A1 to Langemeyer that was filed in 2012. PNG media_image1.png 536 1108 media_image1.png Greyscale GIEBEL discloses “...1. A single-phase charging cable for an electric vehicle, the single-phase charging cable comprising: (see claim 1 where the charging device can provide power to an electrical power traction battery via a charging plug and a vehicle plug and this can be provided to an AC network in paragraph 7) a single-phase mains plug including a charging plug which can be locked in the electric vehicle, (see paragraph 68 where the vehicle has charging plug that forms the circuit) GEIBEL is silent but LANGEMEYER teaches “...and including charging electronics arranged electrically between the mains plug and the charging plug; wherein” (see interface module 7 that has this circuitry; 1 shows an embodiment of a conventional device. 1 shows a device for DC electric rapid charging of energy storage devices 11 Particularly positioned in electric vehicles, wherein the charging according to the energy storage devices 11 associated with each charging standards is executed. The device has an electrical power supply network 1 electrically coupled AC / DC converter module 3 on, to the 2 DC / DC controller modules 5 are electrically connected. To the first DC / DC controller module 5 is an interface module 7 electrically connected, which conforms to the conventional charging standard CHAdeMO and by means of a plug-socket system 9 in each case an energy storage device corresponding to this charging standard 11 in an electric vehicle 13 loads or unloads. 2 shows an embodiment of a device according to the invention. In this case, the device according to 2 all ingredients in one strand in 1 on. In contrast to the prior art, a conventional DC / DC controller module 5 into a DC / DC buck converter module 15 without galvanic isolation and a DC / DC resonant converter module 17 split for galvanic isolation. By means of this device, a mobile energy storage device 11 be charged effectively and inexpensively. In addition, the energy of an energy storage device 11 can be used for other applications, such an energy storage device 11 by means of the interface module 7 and a DC / DC boost / buck converter module 15a instead of the DC / DC buck converter module 15 and an equally bidirectional AC / DC converter module. For a mere fast charging of an energy storage device 11 is a unidirectional AC / DC converter module 3 sufficient. An interface module 7 Advantageously, a control device S for the corresponding control of a fast charging or fast discharging. 3 shows a second embodiment of a device according to the invention. In this case, the device is similar to 3 the the 2 , Only the interface module 7 according to the 3 now complies with the CHAdeMO charging standard instead of the IEC charging standard 2 , According to 2 and 3 is the DC / DC resonant converter module 17 a fully resonant DC / DC converter. The fully resonant DC / DC converter 17 is only responsible for the galvanic isolation required by any charging standard for electric vehicles and has a fixed input / output voltage ratio. The output voltage of the interface module 7 to the vehicle, during the so-called pre-charging at the IEC standard, and the charging current during the actual charging process, are using the output voltage of the DC / DC buck converter module 15 or alternatively the DC / DC boost / buck converter module 15a , each directly to the AC / DC converter 3 are electrically connected, adjusted or regulated.) GIEBEL discloses “..the charging electronics include a bidirectional AC/DC converter and at least one bidirectional DC/DC converter. (see paragraph 3 and claims 1-7 where the device has 1. Charging electronics to charge the batter and has 2. A bi-directional DC DC buck boos converter module connected to a AC-DC converter and see paragraph 70 where this can provide power from the AC network and draw power or feed power to the AC network) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of LANGEMEYER with a reasonable expectation of success since LANGEMEYER teaches that an electric vehicle can be charged and safely pulling out the charging plug where a plug charging is terminated when it is detected to be interrupted. See abstract. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102018114085A1 to Giebel et al. (US20190381906A1) and in view of German Patent Pub. NO.: DE 102012212291 A1 to Langemeyer that was filed in 2012 and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US 20160079749A1 to Jung. Jung teaches “...2. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the charging electronics are housed in a housing connected to a vehicle-side cable and to a mains-side cable in a waterproof and dustproof manner”. (see paragraph 38 where the plug can be used with water craft and paragraph 54 and the power is blocked) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of JUNG with a reasonable expectation of success since JUNG teaches that a plug that is water proof and that has a circuit breaker and that terminates the charging when a detachment occurs. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102018114085A1 to Giebel et al. (US20190381906A1) and in view of German Patent Pub. NO.: DE 102012212291 A1 to Langemeyer that was filed in 2012 and in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102013210707A1 to Hausrath that was filed in 2013 and in view of Ang. HAUSRATH teaches “...3. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the power plug is a lockable power plug” (see abstract and claims 1-2). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of HAUSRATH of BMW with a reasonable expectation of success since HAUSRATH teaches that an electric vehicle can be charged and safely. In particular, if the ICCB is near the household power outlet during charging, the user may be guided so that he can conveniently turn off the charging current before disconnecting the cable. The interruption of the charging current ensures that no spark or arcing occurs when the plug is pulled out. Ang teaches it is lockable. See Fig. 5. Claims 4-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102018114085A1 to Giebel et al. (US20190381906A1) and in view of German Patent Pub. NO.: DE 102012212291 A1 to Langemeyer that was filed in 2012 and in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No.: US20140002024A1 to Ang that was filed in 2011. PNG media_image2.png 740 1020 media_image2.png Greyscale Ang teaches “...4. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the bidirectional AC/DC converter (see paragraph 106) is connectable to a low-voltage grid with one phase and a nominal voltage of about 220 V to about 240 V or to a single-phase three-wire grid and a nominal voltage of about 120 V or about 240 V, respectively. (see 4 where the vehicle can be charged with a high power supply 402 via a dc grid in paragraph 43 or a low power electrical device 700 at 100 volts in paragraph 102-105) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. Ang teaches “...5. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the at least one bidirectional DC/DC converter is connectable to an electrically operated motor vehicle with a DC voltage of about 200 V to about 920 V. (see 4 where the vehicle can be charged with a high power supply 402 via a dc grid in paragraph 43 or a low power electrical device 700 at 100 volts in paragraph 102-106) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. Ang teaches “...6. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 5, wherein the charging electronics include a communication interface for bidirectional communication a battery management system of the electrically operated motor vehicle. (see paragraph 65-68 and 105-120) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. Ang teaches “..7. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the charging electronics include a communication interface for bidirectional communication with a mains connection. (see paragraph 100-103 65-68 and 105-120 and FIG. 4 where there is a communication with the main connection 402 to the power communication device or an electrical device 700 and if a leakage is detected a signal is provided to stop the charging ) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. Ang teaches “..8. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the bidirectional AC/DC converter is connected to a first DC/DC converter, and the first DC/DC converter is connected to a second DC/DC converter. (see paragraph 87 where the processor in FIG.4 communicates with two converters 160, 160) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. GEIBEL discloses “...9. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 8, wherein the first DC/DC converter is a galvanically nonisolating DC/DC converter with a variable voltage ratio between input voltage and output voltage of about 1:3 to about 1:5”. (see paragraph 93-103 and 105-109 where the boost converter can boost the traction battery 11 from the AC network in a boost mode 1 and in paragraph 118 operates a boost mode 1, 2, and discharge mode 1-3) GEIBEL discloses “..10. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 8, wherein the second DC/DC converter is a galvanically isolating DC/DC converter with a voltage ratio between input voltage and output voltage of about 1:1 to about 1:2. (see paragraph 93-103 and 105-109 where the boost converter can boost the traction battery 11 from the AC network in a boost mode 1 and in paragraph 118 operates a boost mode 1, 2, and discharge mode 1-3) GEIBEL discloses “..11. The single-phase charging cable according to claim 1, wherein the second DC/DC converter is an LLC converter. (see paragraph 118-125). GEIBEL discloses “..12. A charging device comprising: the single-phase charging cable according to claim 1; and a single-phase socket connected to a terminal circuit. (see paragraph 28 and 7, 10, 46 and claims 1) Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102018114085A1 to Giebel et al. (US20190381906A1) and in view of German Patent Pub. NO.: DE 102012212291 A1 to Langemeyer that was filed in 2012 and in view of German Patent Pub. No.: DE102013210707A1 to Hausrath that was filed in 2013 and in view of Ang. Ang teaches “...13. The charging device according to claim 12, wherein the single-phase socket is a mechanically or electrically lockable socket”. (see claims 1-5 and Fig. 5). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. Hausrath teaches “...14. A mobile power supply device comprising: the single-phase charging cable according to claim 1; and an adapter to which at least one single-phase socket is connected”. (see claims 1-5) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of ANG of TOTOTA with a reasonable expectation of success since ANG teaches that an electric vehicle can provide a bi directional leak detection. See claim 1. This can provide a problem of a fire and the item can be shut down. See claims 1-13. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the disclosure of GIEBEL with the teachings of HAUSRATH of BMW with a reasonable expectation of success since HAUSRATH teaches that an electric vehicle can be charged and safely. In particular, if the ICCB is near the household power outlet during charging, the user may be guided so that he can conveniently turn off the charging current before disconnecting the cable. The interruption of the charging current ensures that no spark or arcing occurs when the plug is pulled out. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN PAUL CASS whose telephone number is (571)270-1934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 am to 7 pm; Saturday 10 am to 12 noon. 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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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. /JEAN PAUL CASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 10, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593752
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING HARVESTING IMPLEMENT OPERATION OF AN AGRICULTURAL HARVESTER BASED ON TILT ACTUATOR FORCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596986
GLOBAL ADDRESS SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590801
REAL TIME DETERMINATION OF PEDESTRIAN DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583572
MARINE VESSEL AND MARINE VESSEL PROPULSION CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571183
EXCAVATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 984 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month