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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 05/16/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
“external power source” (claim 1)
“first end” (claim 1)
“vehicle” (claim 1)
“charging facility” (claim 3)
“a first terminal”, “a second terminal”, and “a third terminal” (claim 4) – Though these terminals of the first switch (item 221) are drawn in Figs. 2-3, they are not labelled. Revise the drawings to label each terminal of the first switch, such as with item numbers 221a, 221b, & 221c. Ensure the specification (¶ [57]) is also updated to include references to the drawing item numbers for the three terminals.
“the first switch includes: a first terminal connected to the first connector” (claim 4) – Figs. 2-3 show no terminals of the first switch (item 221) being connected to the first connector (item 210).
“system power source” (claim 9)
“recognition pin” (claim 9)
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following features not mentioned in the description:
“L1-FIRST MODE” (Fig. 2)
“N-FIRST MODE” (Fig. 2)
“PE” (Figs. 2-3)
“CP-MODE 3” (Fig. 2)
“L2-FIRST MODE” (Fig. 3)
“N-SECOND MODE” (Fig. 3)
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) and/or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 should be revised to be clearer, such as follows:
“a first terminal connected to the first connector of the control box” (from spec. ¶ [46])
“a third terminal connected to the output terminal of the control box” (from spec. ¶ [57])
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-12 are 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 1, line 4 is indefinite as to which feature is being modified by the claim language “having a plurality of connection pins”. For examination purposes, it is interpreted this language is intended to modify the “plug”.
Claim 1, lines 2-4 are indefinite as to which feature is intended to be modified by “having a plurality of connection pins”. It may be interpreted this limitation modifies the “first connector” (interpretation for examination purposes). Alternatively, it may be interpreted this limitation modifies the “plug”.
Claim 1, line 10 recites “a signal is input from the first connector”, line 13 recites “receive signals to and from a vehicle”, and line 15 recites “a signal is not input from the first connector”. The claim language is unclear as to whether each of these signal or signals is the same or different. For examination purposes, the language is broadly interpreted such that each of these signals may be the same or different.
Claim 2 recites “an output cable connected to the output terminal and configured to output power and signals provided through the supply cable to the vehicle”.
Firstly, this language is indefinite as to whether the “signals” are the same or different from the multiple signals introduced prior in claim 1. For examination purposes, the language is broadly interpreted such that the claim 2 signals may be the same or different from any of the signals introduced prior in claim 1.
Further, this language is indefinite as to which cable (“output cable” vs. “through the supply cable”) is providing the output power and signals to the vehicle. The language appears to conflict. For examination purposes, it is interpreted that the output cable is providing the power and signals to the vehicle.
Claim 8 twice recites “a signal”. The language is indefinite as to whether each of these signals is the same or different from the “signal” introduced in claim 1. For examination purposes, it is interpreted that the “signal” referred to in claim 8 is intending to refer to the same “CP” signal drawn in the applicant’s Fig. 2.
Claim 9 is indefinite as to which feature is intended to be modified by the language “configured to recognize resistance of the plug of the plurality of connection pins”. It may be interpreted this language modifies the “at least one recognition pin”. Alternatively, and for examination purposes, it is interpreted this language modifies the “control box”.
Claims 3-7 and 10-12 are further rejected for their dependency on other rejected claims.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2021/0184478 A1) in view of the AdvancedPCB article (AdvancedPCB, Benefits of Printed Circuit Boards, 03/13/2020, advancedpcb.com) (hereinafter “Adv”).
NOTE: The AdvancedPCB article is currently accessible at the following hyperlink.
https://www.advancedpcb.com/en-us/resources/blog/benefits-of-printed-circuit-boards/
Regarding Claim 1, Jung discloses a control box (“controller 200”; Figs. 1-3) for charging, comprising the following features.
Jung further discloses a first connector (combo of “screw thread 1001” and “male terminal 1002”; Figs. 6A-6C, 7) connected to a supply cable (“cable 201”; Fig. 1) having a plug (“power source connector 100”, including each of “first power source connector 101” and “second power source connector 102”; Figs. 1-3, 6A-6C, 7), which is connected to an external power source (“power source 2”; Fig. 1), at a first end, and having a plurality of connection pins (1002).
PNG
media_image1.png
931
1573
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jung further discloses a control unit (200) including a first switch (“CP circuit 401”; Fig. 3) mounted therein.
Jung further discloses the control unit (200) is configured to: control the first switch (401) in a first state (“401” is opened; ¶ [58]: “when … the first power source connector 101 is connected to the power source 2, the controller 200 controls the charge breaker 400 not to generate a CP signal, and as a result, the CP circuit 401 is opened, and the relay 402 is connected”) such that an input signal (“CP signal”; Fig. 3) is transmitted to an output terminal (output interface of “200”, comprising signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”; Fig. 3) of the control box (200) for charging when power is supplied in a first mode (Fig. 4, step 2104: “charging supply current as first mode”; occurs when power is supplied from “first power source connector 101”;¶ [58, 89-90]) in which a signal (“CP signal”; Fig. 3) is input from the first connector (first connector pin “1002” receives “CP” from plug “100” when power is from “first power source connector 101”).
Jung further discloses the control unit (200) is configured to control the first switch (401) in a second state (“401” is closed; ¶ [59]: “When the second power source connector 102 is connected, the controller 200 may control the charge breaker 400 so that the CP circuit 401 is connected”) to transmit and receive signals (“CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”) to and from a vehicle (“vehicle 1”; Fig. 1) connected (via output cable “300”) to the output terminal (output interface of “200” with signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”) when power is supplied in a second mode (Fig. 4, step 2105: “charging supply current as second mode”; occurs when power is supplied from “second power source connector 102”; ¶ [59, 92-93]) in which a signal is not input (“CP” signal is not input when in second mode because “102” does not include “CP”; Fig. 3) from the first connector (first connector pins “1002” do not receive “CP” from plug “100” when power is from “second power source connector 102”).
PNG
media_image2.png
933
1308
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Though Jung discloses a control unit with various electronic components, Jung does not disclose “a control board”.
Adv teaches a control board (“printed circuit board (PCB)”) as being a preferred mechanical structure for electronic assemblies. Adv further teaches that PCB-based electronic assemblies are more compact (pp 1: “A Compact Solution”), faster to assemble (pp 1: “Saving Time and Energy”), more reliable (pp 2: “No Loose Connections” and “A Reliable Option”), and cheaper (pp 2: “Low Costs”) than other types of electronic assembly options.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the control box disclosed by Jung to incorporate a control board to mount the first switch and other electronic components, as taught by Adv, to ensure the control box assembly is compact, easy to assemble, reliable, and low-cost.
Regarding Claim 2, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 1.
Jung further discloses the control box (200) further comprising an output cable (“charging connector 300”; Figs. 1-3) connected to the output terminal (output interface of “200” with signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”) and configured to output power and signals (“CP”, “L”, “N”, “GND”) provided through the supply cable (201) to the vehicle (1).
Regarding Claim 3, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 1.
Jung further discloses the first mode (power supplied from “101” with “CP” signal supplied) is a mode in which the plug (100, 101, 102) of the supply cable (201) is connected to a charging facility (¶ [51]: “101 … connected to a charging station power source”)
Jung further discloses the second mode (power supplied from “102” with no “CP” signal supplied) is a mode in which the plug (100, 101, 102) of the supply cable (201) is connected to a system power source (¶ [51]: “101 … connected to a commercial power source”).
Regarding Claim 6, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 1.
Jung further discloses that when power is supplied in the first mode (power supplied from “101” with “CP” signal supplied), at least one first power pin (“GND” input pin “1002” of “200” from “101”) corresponding to the first mode of the plurality of connection pins (1002) of the first connector (1001, 1002) is directly connected (Fig. 3 shows “200” has a direct connection of input “GND” to output “GND”) to the output terminal (output interface of “200” with signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”).
Regarding Claim 7, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 1.
The combo of Jung & Adv teaches that when power is supplied in the second mode (Jung: power supplied from “102” with no “CP” signal supplied), at least one second power pin (Jung: “L” input pin “1002” of “200” from “102”) corresponding to the second mode of the plurality of connection pins (Jung: “1002”) of the first connector (Jung: “1001”, “1002”) is connected to the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv).
The combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) further includes a second switch (Jung: “402”) connected to the at least one second power pin (Jung: “L” input pin “1002” to “200”) and the output terminal (Jung: output interface of “200” with signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”) at both ends, respectively.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2021/0184478 A1) in view of the AdvancedPCB article (AdvancedPCB, Benefits of Printed Circuit Boards, 03/13/2020, advancedpcb.com) (hereinafter “Adv”) and Press et al. (US 2020/0338999 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 1.
Jung does not disclose the combination of “the first switch includes: a first terminal connected to the first connector; a second terminal connected to the control board; and a third terminal connected to the output terminal”.
Press teaches the first switch (“switch 504”; Fig. 5) includes a first terminal (“Pilot” signal input from “EVSE 302”; Fig. 5) connected to the first connector (input to “smart adapter 502”; Fig. 5); a second terminal (connected to “resistor 506”; Fig. 5) connected to the control unit (mounting locations of “504”, “506”, and “508” within “smart adapter 502” are analogous to being on the control board; Fig. 5; further, ¶ [53] indicates the components of a different embodiment of “adapter 402” may be mounted on a PCB; see note 4-1, included infra, for further discussion); and a third terminal (“Pilot” signal output to “EV 304”; Fig. 5) connected to the output terminal (output from “smart adapter502” to “EV 304”; Fig. 5).
NOTE 4-1: The instant application’s Figs. 2-3 depict the “first switch 221” and its three terminals’ connections. The first terminal connects to the “fourth connector” (item 227), which then connects to the “first connector” (item 210). Thus, the examiner interprets that the term “connects” allows for there to be other components through which the two features connect. The second terminal connects to the “control board 220” and carries the signal “CP-second mode”. The examiner interprets Fig. 3’s depiction of the “CP-second mode” to be a signal that is either an output logic signal from a control circuit (microcontroller or digital logic hardware circuit), or simply tied to a ground (i.e., via a pull-down resistor), or simply tied to a positive DC voltage rail (i.e., via a pull-up resistor). Each of these three options are envisioned by the examiner to be potential manners for outputting a communication signal (“CP-second mode”) from the “control board” to the “output terminal” via the “first switch” when in the second mode. In the case of Press’s first switch, the second terminal of the first switch connects to a pull-down resistor to ground the output signal to the output terminal, thus communicating the mode. As described in Press’s ¶ [53], the components within the adapter may be mounted on a printed circuit board (PCB). Thus, Press’s second terminal connects to a grounded termination, likely located on a printed circuit board, so as to communicate a mode to the output terminal.
Press further teaches the three-prong configuration of the control pilot switch to enable interruptions of the control pilot signal from the external power source (EVSE) based on control from the processor, such as based on a charging schedule, resulting in smoothing an electricity demand and reducing energy costs (¶ [5, 58-60]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the first switch disclosed by the combo of Jung & Adv to be a three-prong configuration with processor-based controls for the communication paths, as taught by Press, to enable interruptions of the control pilot signal from the external power source based on control from the processor, such as based on a charging schedule, resulting in smoothing an electricity demand and reducing energy costs. The three-prong configuration of the Press’s first switch enables a communication signal to be output from the first switch’s third terminal to the control box’s output terminal, regardless of whether a “CP” signal is provided by the external power source. Thus, this configuration would enable the control box by Jung to achieve its objective of communicating the power mode to the EV, regardless of whether a “CP” signal is provided by the external power source. It may be even be true that Jung’s first switch is already a three-prong configuration to achieve the described functionality of Jung’s ¶ [58-59].
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2021/0184478 A1) in view of the AdvancedPCB article (AdvancedPCB, Benefits of Printed Circuit Boards, 03/13/2020, advancedpcb.com) (hereinafter “Adv”) and Noh et al. (US 2020/0122593 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 7.
The combo of Jung & Adv teaches when power is supplied in the second mode (Jung: power supplied from “102” with no “CP” signal supplied), the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) is configured to control the following operations.
The combo of Jung & Adv teaches to control the second switch (402) in an open state (in second mode with power from “102”, “402” is configured to be controlled to the open or close state to control the current level in accordance with the command from “controller 200” per ¶ [91, 93, 102]) by controlling the first switch (401) in the second state (“401” is closed/connected while in second mode with “102” connected per ¶ [59]), thus blocking current flow to the vehicle.
The combo of Jung & Adv teaches to control the second switch (402) in a close state (in second mode with power from “102”, “402” is configured to be controlled to the open or close state to control the current level in accordance with the command from “controller 200” per ¶ [91, 93, 102]), thus allowing current flow to the vehicle
Jung does not disclose to “control the second switch in an open state until a signal is input from the vehicle by controlling the first switch in the second state, and control the second switch in a close state when a signal is input from the vehicle” while in the second mode.
Noh teaches when power is supplied in the second mode (power available for supply from “second charger 10-2”, as indicated by “connection (S802)”; Figs. 4-5, 8), to control the following operations.
Noh further teaches to block the current flow to the vehicle (“vehicle 1”; Fig. 1) until a signal is input from the vehicle (charge current from “10-2” is blocked from flowing to the vehicle “1” until after the vehicle inputs the “pairing request signal (S807)”; Fig. 8).
Noh further teaches to allow the current flow to the vehicle (1) when a signal is input from the vehicle (charging current from “10-2” is allowed to flow to the vehicle “1” after the vehicle inputs the “pairing request signal (S807)”; Fig. 8).
NOTE 8-1: Though Noh does not explicitly detail the switching functions, Noh is analogous by its operations of enabling the blocking/allowance of current flow to the vehicle. It was already established supra that Jung teaches the opening/closing of the second switch while in the second mode to block/allow current flow to the vehicle.
Noh further teaches to block/allow current flow to the vehicle based on a signal input from the vehicle as a simple technique to confirm pairing between the vehicle and the power source that avoids unexpected errors caused by signal interference associated with other techniques (¶ [6]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the control box’s second mode disclosed by the combo of Jung & Adv to control the second switch’s position to block/allow current flow to the vehicle based on a signal input from the vehicle, in view of the teachings of Noh, as a simple technique to confirm pairing between the vehicle and the power source that avoids unexpected errors caused by signal interference associated with other techniques.
Regarding Claim 9, the combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh teaches the control box of claim 8.
Jung further discloses the first connector (1001, 1002) includes at least one recognition pin (pin “1001” which interfaces to each of “intrinsic resistance A” and “intrinsic resistance B”; Fig. 3) connected to the supply cable (“cable 201” with plug “100”).
Jung further discloses the control box (200) is configured to recognize resistance (may be either “intrinsic resistance A” or “intrinsic resistance B”; Fig. 3; ¶ [62-67]) of the plug (100) of the plurality of connection pins (1002).
The combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh teaches that when the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) is connected to at least one connection pin among the plurality of connection pins (Jung: “1002”) and is supplied with power in the second mode (Jung: Fig. 4, step 2105: “charging supply current as second mode”; occurs when power is supplied from “second power source connector 102”; ¶ [59, 92-93]), the control board (Jung’s “200”, modified per Adv) is configured to control the second switch (Jung: “402”; mode is selected based on recognized resistance; thus, operation of “402” is based on recognized resistance) based on the recognized resistance (Jung: “intrinsic resistance B” of “102”) of the plug (Jung: “100”).
Regarding Claim 10, the combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh teaches the control box of claim 9.
The combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh teaches that when power is supplied in the second mode (Jung: power supplied from “102”), the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) is configured to do the following.
Jung further discloses to determine an allowable current (¶ [54]: “current that may be accepted by the second power source connector 102 may be up to 12A”)of the plug (100) based on a determined voltage (¶ [65]: “when the second power source connector 102 having the intrinsic resistance value of 1 kΩ is connected to the power source 2, a voltage of 2.5 V may be distributed to the second power source connector 102”; ¶ [68]: “voltage values … may vary depending on the voltage applied to the power source 2”) according to the recognized resistance (“intrinsic resistance B” of “102” is measured) of the plug (100) and a pre-stored resistance (¶ [65]: “reference resistance”) of the plug (100).
Jung further discloses to control the second switch (402) in the open state (¶ [81]: “when the second power source connector is connected to the power source 2, the charge breaker 400 may adjust the supply current through duty ratio control”; ¶ [72-73, 93-96]; thus, the second switch “402” is controlled to be open during the off-states of the duty ratio period) when a supply current (current output via output cable “300” to vehicle “1”) corresponding to power that is supplied exceeds the allowable current (¶ [54]: “current that may be accepted by the second power source connector 102 may be up to 12A”) of the plug (100).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2021/0184478 A1) in view of the AdvancedPCB article (AdvancedPCB, Benefits of Printed Circuit Boards, 03/13/2020, advancedpcb.com) (hereinafter “Adv”), Noh et al. (US 2020/0122593 A1), and the IEEE article by Soponoudomsit (P. Soponoudomsit et al., Safety Function Designs in Mode 3 EVSE, 06/16/2022, IEEE, 19th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology (ECTI-CON)) (hereinafter “Sopo”).
NOTE: The Sopo reference is currently accessible at the following link:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9795477
Regarding Claim 11, the combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh teaches the control box of claim 10.
The combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh teaches the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) is configured to measure a supply current (¶ [100]: “200 may monitor … the intensity of the charging supply current”) corresponding to power that is supplied (power supplied from “200” through output cable “300” to vehicle “1”).
Jung does not disclose “the control board includes at least one of a current transformer and a zero-phase current transformer that are configured to measure a supply current corresponding to power that is supplied”.
Sopo teaches the control board (“control board of EVSE”; Fig. 10) includes a current transformer (pp 3, 2nd para.: “current waveform is acquired through current transformer (CT)”; drawn in Figs. 7-8) that is configured to measure a supply current (current on “L” and “N” lines; Fig. 8) corresponding to power that is supplied (power delivered to one of the electric vehicles of Fig. 1).
Sopo further teaches a current transformer enables a very fast response to changes in current, which improves safety in leakage currents (section II.D. Leakage Current Protection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the control board disclosed by the combo of Jung, Adv, & Noh to incorporate a current transformer, as taught by Sopo, to improve safety by enabling a fast response to changes in current.
NOTE 11-1: Though not relied upon for the rejection supra, Toth (US 2025/0341547 A1) also includes teachings relevant to the subject matter of claim 11.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2021/0184478 A1) in view of the AdvancedPCB article (AdvancedPCB, Benefits of Printed Circuit Boards, 03/13/2020, advancedpcb.com) (hereinafter “Adv”) and the article by Bao (Nick Bao, PCB Connectors Crash Course: All the Connectors You Should Know About, 07/08/2021, NexPCB).
NOTE: The Bao article is currently available at the following link:
https://www.nexpcb.com/blog/pcb-connectors-crash-course-almost-all-the-connectors-you-need-to-know
Regarding Claim 12, the combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control box of claim 7.
The combo of Jung & Adv teaches the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) includes the second switch (Jung: “402”) mounted thereon, which is connected between the second power pin (Jung: “L” input pin “1002” to “200”) and the output terminal (Jung: output interface of “200” with signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”) of the control box (Jung: “200”).
Jung does not disclose “the control board includes: a second connector disposed of between the second power pin and the second switch; and a third connector disposed of between the second switch and the output terminal”. Jung is silent as to the mechanical structure of the connections between these features, though one may argue the second and third connectors are inherent. The prior art shows it is widely known to use wire-to-board connectors to connect between PCB-mounted components and external connectors.
Bao teaches a second/third connector (pp 2: “Wire-to-Board (WTB) connector”; more specifically shown as example “power connector” on pages 10-11), which is mounted on a board and connects between wires (such as that from the second power pin or the output terminal) and board-mounted components (such as that of the second switch).
Bao further teaches the wire-to-board connector would be selected by electronics engineers to connect from a wired component to a circuit board, while being properly designed for the desired mechanical, electrical, and environmental properties of the application environment (pp 1, 2nd para.). Bao further teaches the use of connectors are indispensable components to realize the functions of the circuit (pp 1, 1st para.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the control box disclosed by the combo of Jung & Adv to incorporate a second connector and a third connector to connect the second switch to the second power pin and output terminal, respectively, as taught by Bao, to enable robust circuit connections between the external components and the control board, designed for the desired mechanical, electrical, and environmental properties of the application environment, thus improving reliability.
Thus, the combo of Jung, Adv, & Bao teaches the control board (Jung: “200”, modified for internal electrical components to be mounted on a PCB per Adv) includes: a second connector (“WTB connector” incorporated per Bao on the control board) disposed of between the second power pin (Jung: Jung: “L” input pin “1002” to “200”) and the second switch (Jung: “402”).
The combo of Jung, Adv, & Bao teaches further teaches a third connector (“WTB connector” incorporated per Bao on the control board) disposed of between the second switch (Jung: “402”) and the output terminal (Jung: output interface of “200” with signals “CP”, “L”, “N”, & “GND”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 5, though the prior art teaches a control box for charging comprising a connector, a control board, and a switch controlled in multiple states and multiple terminals for said switch to connect to the connector, control board, and output terminal, it fails to teach or suggest “the control board is configured to: control the first switch in the first state in which the first terminal and the third terminal are connected to each other when power is supplied in the first mode in which the signal is input from the first connector; and control the first switch in the second state in which the second terminal and the third terminal are connected to each other when power is supplied in the second mode in which the signal is not input from the first connector”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel P McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-5952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM Eastern.
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.
/DANIEL P MCFARLAND/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights