DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-6 are presented for examination.
The specification is objected to minor informality.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergsrud; Corey Alexis Marvin (US 20180342910 A1) in the view of Perry; Jeffrey Robert (US 20110320175 A1).
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergsrud; Corey Alexis Marvin (US 20180342910 A1) in the view of Perry; Jeffrey Robert (US 20110320175 A1) further in the view of Hoque, Muttahid Ull, et al. "Design and analysis of a 35 GHz rectenna system for wireless power transfer to an unmanned air vehicle." Energies 15.1 (Jan 4, 2022).
This action is non-final rejection.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made for applicant claimed priority date for PRO 63/351955 filed on 06/14/2022.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On [0037], output module 614, should be output module 616.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“System-of- System (SOS) system” in claim 1
“Input variable interface” in claim 1
“Output user interface generator” in claim 1
“Design modules” in claim 1
“Multiphysics modeling module” in claim 2
“Diode component analysis module” in claim 3
“Circuit analysis module” in claim 4.
“Wireless power feasibility module” in claim 5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 1-6 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.
Specifically claim discloses System-of- System (SOS) system” ,“Input variable interface” , “Output user interface generator “ and “Design modules” in claim 1, “Multiphysics modeling module” in claim 2, “Diode component analysis module” in claim 3, “Circuit analysis module” in claim 4, and “Wireless power feasibility module” in claim 5 lack specific structure identified in the specification. The specification does not appear to disclose any structure for the modules for the system claims. Therefore, what structure is included in these modules is indefinite. These limitations are inherited in the claims 2-6. See specific mapping for each module reference as recited in the specification in the rejection under 35 USC 112(a).
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.
Claims 1-6 are 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. Claims 1-6 are directed to a system, however the modules disclosed therein do not have structural support in the specification. The specification therefore lacks written description in view of citation for each module below.
Module invoking 112/6th
Lacking structure support in the specification
System-of- System (SOS) system
[0005], [0006], [0024], [0025], [0029], [0031]- [0039], [0042], [0045], [0051]- [0054]
Input variable interface
[0006]
Output user interface generator
[0006]
Design modules
[0006]
Multiphysics modeling modules
[0022], [0024], [0038], [0050]
Diode component analysis module
[0037], [0040]
Circuit analysis module
[0024], [0037], [0040]
Wireless power feasibility module
[0037], [0041]
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergsrud; Corey Alexis Marvin (US 20180342910 A1) in the view of Perry; Jeffrey Robert (US 20110320175 A1).
As of claim 1, Bergsrud teaches A system for use in designing, optimizing, and manufacturing a wireless power system, the system comprising: (Abstract, Systems and related methods are provided for improving cognitive function of a wireless power system designer and simulate various aspects of a wireless power system as an aid in making design selections in a tradeoff environment).
an input variable interface adapted to enable graphical user interface selection of wireless system parameters or receive wireless system parameters; ([0055] In this example, a user can use the FIG. 4 user interface 30, 31 to select each desired data point, e.g., “Data Point 1”, “Data Point 2”, “Data Point 3”, etc (in this example, a user can select “Data Point 3” (within list 39)), then associate or select: an independent variable from a dropdown menu 41 (e.g. frequency 47, power density 49, transmitted power 51, separation distance 53, transmitter aperture area 55, receiver aperture area 59); select a dependent variable from a dropdown menu 43 (e.g. frequency 47, power density 49, transmitted power 51, separation distance 53)
an output user interface generator configured to generate a collection of efficiency graphical analysis data, atmospheric efficiency graph data, and rectenna RF to DC conversion efficiency graph data associated with said at least one design scenario of the wireless power system ( [0058] The output variables section 63 includes a plurality of graphs which display output data, including, for example, a Collection Efficiency graph 73, an Atmospheric Efficiency graph 81, a Rectenna RF-to-DC Conversion Efficiency graph 67, and a DC Power Output graph 89. The output variables section 63 also can include an Analysis Summary table 83 which stores and displays both the input variables (e.g. e.g. frequency 47, power density 49, transmitted power 51, separation distance 53, transmitter aperture area 55, receiver aperture area 59) and output variables (e.g. DC power output 93)), efficiency values comprising rectenna, atmospheric, and collection percentage values associated with the wireless power system being simulated, and output DC power data (Claim 1 and figure 4, efficiency values comprising rectenna, atmospheric, and collection percentage values associated with the wireless power system being simulated, and output DC power data
PNG
media_image1.png
818
1281
media_image1.png
Greyscale
) As shown on figure 4, on efficiency table rectenna, atmospheric, and collection percentage values associated with the wireless power system being simulated, and output DC power data are represented.
Bergsrud does not explicitly teach a System-of-Systems (SoS) system for design and analysis of the wireless power system, the SoS system includes a plurality of design modules configured for design and analysis of respective portions of the wireless power system.
While Perry teaches a System-of-Systems (SoS) system for design and analysis of the wireless power system, the SoS system including a plurality of design modules configured for design and analysis of respective portions of the wireless power system; ([0019], The design tool may further optimize the generated designs in accordance with additional design parameters indicating a tradeoff between various optimizations, such as power supply efficiency, component and printed circuit board footprint size, and overall component cost. The design tool may also provide a capability for graphical comparison and analysis of the resulting design solutions… [0050], FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary modularization of the power supply design tool application 160. As shown in the Figure, the power supply design tool application 160 may include a user interface module 402, requirements module 404, an architecture determination module 406, a component determination module 408, a circuit design module 410, a circuit optimization module 412, a schematic determination module 414, a board layout module 416, an electrical simulation module 418, a thermal simulation module 420 …). System-of-System is interpreted as a multi module architecture for designing and analyzing, so as it is cited above Perry teaches multiple modules inside a design tool to design and analyze power supply components.
Perry is considered as analogous to the claimed invention since it teaches integrating of different modules to design and analyze the whole system. Therefore, it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate Perry’s teaching of a design tool with different modules to analyze and design different portion of the power supply into Bergsrud ‘s teaching of a wireless power system.
The motivation would have been to quickly design and optimize a power supply configured to power a set of multiple loads and customized to the user's needs since design tool may provide a capability for graphical comparison and analysis of the resulting design solutions and designing one portion at a time is slow and tedious process (Perry, [0002], [0019]).
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergsrud; Corey Alexis Marvin (US 20180342910 A1) in the view of Perry; Jeffrey Robert (US 20110320175 A1) further in the view of Hoque, Muttahid Ull, et al. "Design and analysis of a 35 GHz rectenna system for wireless power transfer to an unmanned air vehicle." Energies 15.1 (Jan 4, 2022).
As of claim 2, the modified model of Bergsrud and Perry teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but it does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 2.
While Hoque teaches wherein the plurality of design modules includes a Multiphysics modeling module configured to characterize one or more of electrical/electromagnetic, thermal, humidity, and structural aspects of at least a rectenna used in the wireless power system (abstract, The numerically simulated gain, directivity, and efficiency of the proposed patch antenna array are 13.4 dBi, 14 dBi, and 85%, respectively. Finally, a rectifying system (rectenna) is optimized using the Agilent advanced design system (ADS) software as a microwave power receiving system … section 6.2 the rectifying nonlinear circuit simulation is performed in Advance Design System (ADS) Harmonics Balance (HB) simulator. A 10 dBm input RF power was considered for the simulation. The circuit parameters are first calculated, and then the software ADS Optim toolbox with optimization-type genetic and iteration 500 can be utilized to optimize those parameters). As it is cited a simulation of rectenna in wireless power system is performed using an ADS software and figure 16, shows Conversion efficiency of the designed rectenna as a function of the input power for different load resistance.
Hoque is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since it teaches design of rectenna system for wireless power transfer. Therefore, it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate Hoque’s teaching of designing and simulation of rectenna system for wireless power transfer using a software to the modified model to evaluate rectenna under realistic conditions.
The motivation would have been to design improved rectenna since based on the simulation and used software (ADS) rectenna has an efficiency of over 80% for an RF input power range of 9 to18 dBm and a DC output voltage of 3.5V for a 10 dBm input power at 35GHz, feeding a load of 1500Ω (Hoque, Conclusion).
As of claim 3, the modified model of Bergsrud- Perry- Hoque teaches all the limitations of claim 2, and Bergsrud also teaches wherein the plurality of design modules includes a diode component analysis module configured to model and simulate a diode element in the rectenna used in the wireless power system ([0100] Step 811 to perform design analysis steps and design performance analysis, followed by additional configuration/component selection including diode analysis and selection (e.g., See FIG. 7, FIGS. 25 and 26) and coplanar stripline configuration analysis (e.g., see FIG. 8, FIGS. 23 and 24) as well as component selection to produce a wireless power transfer system design which is used in subsequent manufacturing steps including component selection, system integration, and fabrication).
As of claim 4, the modified model of Bergsrud- Perry- Hoque teaches all the limitations of claim 2, and Perry also teaches wherein the plurality of design modules includes a circuit analysis module configured to model and simulate circuitry and associated printed circuit board configurations used in the wireless power system ([0072], circuit design module 410 may be utilized to determine the supporting components, or parameters and bounds for the supporting components. The circuit design module 410 may further be configured to determine a circuit topology indicating how those additional supporting components may be arranged to create the circuit with the power supply components 205… [0087], The board layout module 416 may be configured to create a printed circuit board (PCB) layout according to a determined schematic, such as an electrical schematic determined by the schematic determination module 414).
As of claim 5, the modified model of Bergsrud- Perry- Hoque teaches all the limitations of claim 2, and Bergsrud also teaches wherein the plurality of design modules includes a wireless power feasibility module configured to determine and display parameters for design of aspects of the wireless power system based on inputs received from the plurality of design modules (Figure 4,
PNG
media_image2.png
829
1224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
). As it shows on figure 4, label 35 input variables, and label 63 output variable based on the input received and it display on label 63 and it consists of three GUI (wireless power analysis, diode analysis, and coplanar stripline analysis) in one MSAV tool as it shown on label 31.
As of claim 6, the modified model of Bergsrud- Perry teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but it does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 6.
While Hoque teaches wherein the wireless power system is a system for providing wireless power to unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (Abstract: In this article, the concept of a 22-kW microwave-powered unmanned aerial vehicle is presented. Its system architecture is analyzed and modeled for wirelessly transferring microwave power to the flying UAVs).
Hoque is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since it teaches design of rectenna system for wireless power transfer. Therefore, it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate Hoque teaching of wirelessly transferring microwave power to the flying UAVs into the modified model.
The motivation would have been to design improved rectenna system for wireless power transfer to an unmanned air vehicle since based on the simulation and used software (ADS) rectenna has an efficiency of over 80% for an RF input power range of 9 to18 dBm and a DC output voltage of 3.5V for a 10 dBm input power at 35GHz, feeding a load of 1500Ω (Hoque, Conclusion).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kurs; Andre B. (US 20150073768 A1, Date Published 2015-03-12) is similar to the claimed invention since it teaches wireless energy transfer modeling tool including modeling the electromagnetic performance of the system to derive one or more modeled values and utilize the derived one or more modeled values to design an impedance matching network.
Chlebosz; Wojciech Adam (US 20170063159 A1, Date Published 2017-03-02) is similar to the claimed invention since it teaches method and system for computer aid designing, tuning and matching of wireless power transfer system
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABRHAM A. TAMIRU whose telephone number is (571)272-6987. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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 Pitaro can be reached at 571 272 4071. 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.
/ABRHAM ALEHEGN TAMIRU/Examiner, Art Unit 2188
/RYAN F PITARO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2188
Prosecution Insights