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 statements (IDS) were submitted on 03/24/2023 and 07/14/2025. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 31-32 and 37-39 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 31, line 3 recites “the first housing”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term. For examination purposes, it is interpreted the “housing” introduced in claim 31, line 2, is the “first housing”.
Claim 32, line 3 recites “the second housing”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term. For examination purposes, it is interpreted the “housing” introduced in claim 32, line 2, is the “second housing”.
Claim 37, line 5 recites “the first body”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term. For examination purposes, it is interpreted the “body” introduced in claim 37, line 2, is the “first body”.
Claim 38, line 3 recites “the second body”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term. For examination purposes, it is interpreted the “body” introduced in claim 38, line 2, is the “second body”.
Claim 39 is further rejected for their dependency on other rejected claims.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-22 and 31-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8, and 10 of copending application number 18/030,466 (amended claims filed 02/19/2026) in view of Gomi et al. (US 2011/0068738 A1).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. Though the copending application has been allowed, the patent is not currently issued.
The following table compares the instant application and the copending application’s claims. The patentably indistinct claim language is identified with bold text.
Instant Application 18/015,164
Copending 18/030,466
Claim 21
A charging device for a personal mobility vehicle, the charging device comprising:
a first charger configured to create a magnetic field for wireless charging;
a second charger mounted on the personal mobility vehicle, and configured to convert the magnetic field that is created by the first charger into a power source, and charge a battery provided in the personal mobility vehicle;
a stand configured to store the personal mobility vehicle in an upright position;
and a variable support fixed to the stand, and configured to support the first charger, and move the first charger, based on a position of the second charger.
Claim 1
A charging device for a personal mobility device, the charging device comprising:
a first charging unit … configured to generate a magnetic field …, the magnetic field for wireless charging the personal mobility device,
wherein a second charging unit is mounted to the personal mobility device and configured to charge a battery provided in the personal mobility device by converting the magnetic field into electricity,
a frame part connected to the support part;
wherein the charging device further comprises a variable support part secured to the frame part and configured to support and move the first charging unit relative to a position of the second charging unit,
Claim 22
The charging device of claim 21,
wherein the variable support comprises:
a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable.
Claim 1
wherein the variable support part comprises:
a first variable support rotatably arranged to support the first charging unit;
Claim 31
The charging device of claim 21,
wherein the first charger comprises: a housing fixed to the stand;
a transmission controller installed inside the first housing; and
a transmission coil disposed inside the first housing, and configured to connect to the transmission controller.
Claim 8
wherein the first charging unit comprises: a first housing secured to the frame part;
a transmission controller disposed inside the first housing; and
a transmission coil disposed inside the first housing and connected with the transmission controller.
Claim 32
The charging device of claim 21,
wherein the second charger comprises:
a housing fixed to the personal mobility vehicle;
a reception controller installed inside of the second housing;
and a reception coil disposed inside the second housing, and configured to connect to the reception controller.
Claim 10
wherein the second charging unit comprises:
a second housing secured to a lower area of the personal mobility device;
a reception controller disposed inside the second housing;
and a reception coil disposed inside the second housing and connected with the reception
controller.
Regarding independent Claim 21, though the copending application claims a stand (“frame part”), the copending application does not claim that the stand is “configured to store the personal mobility vehicle in an upright position”.
Gomi teaches a stand (“stand 86”; Figs. 12, 14) configured to store the personal mobility vehicle (“vehicle 1”; Figs. 1-4, 12, 14-15) in an upright position (¶ [8]: “a stand for holding the vehicle in a substantially upright posture”).
Gomi further teaches the stand’s arrangement to minimize effort for the user by allowing the vehicle to be easily placed in the charging position (¶ [9]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the stand claimed in the copending application to be configured to store the personal mobility vehicle in an upright position, as taught by Gomi, to minimize effort for the user by allowing the vehicle to be easily placed in the charging position.
Regarding dependent Claim 22, the claimed dependent subject matter is included in the copending application’s claim 1.
Regarding dependent Claim 31, the claimed dependent subject matter is included in the copending application’s claim 8.
Regarding dependent Claim 32, the claimed dependent subject matter is included in the copending application’s claim 10.
Claim 33 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending application number 18/030,466 (amended claims filed 02/19/2026) in view of Terao et al. (US 2010/0315038 A1).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
The following table compares the instant application and the copending application’s claims. The patentably indistinct claim language is identified with bold text.
Instant Application 18/015,164
Copending 18/030,466
Claim 33
A charging device for a personal mobility vehicle, the charging device comprising:
a first charger configured to create a magnetic field for wireless charging;
a second charger configured to convert the magnetic field that is created by the first charger into a power source, and charge a battery provided in a personal mobility vehicle;
and a variable support configured to support the first charger, and move the first charger, based on a position of the second charger,
wherein in a state where the first charger and the second charger do not contact each other, a position of the first charger varies depending on the position of the second charger.
Claim 1
A charging device for a personal mobility device, the charging device comprising:
a first charging unit … configured to generate a magnetic field …, the magnetic field for wireless charging the personal mobility device,
wherein a second charging unit is mounted to the personal mobility device and configured to charge a battery provided in the personal mobility device by converting the magnetic field into electricity,
wherein the charging device further comprises a variable support part secured to the frame part and configured to support and move the first charging unit relative to a position of the second charging unit,
(no equivalent claim language)
Regarding independent Claim 33, the copending application does not claim “in a state where the first charger and the second charger do not contact each other, a position of the first charger varies depending on the position of the second charger.”
Terao teaches (detailed claim item mapping is included infra in the prior art rejection) that in a state where the first charger and the second charger do not contact each other, a position of the first charger varies depending on the position of the second charger.
Terao further teaches for the first charger to vary its position based on the second charger’s position to improve power transmission efficiency (¶ [21]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the first charger claimed by the copending application to vary its position based on the second charger’s position, as taught by Terao, to improve power transmission efficiency.
Claims 34-35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8, and 10 of copending application number 18/030,466 (amended claims filed 02/19/2026) in view of Terao et al. (US 2010/0315038 A1) and Bae et al. (US 2018/0248406 A1).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
The following table compares the instant application and the copending application’s claims. The patentably indistinct claim language is identified with bold text.
Instant Application 18/015,164
Copending 18/030,466
Claim 34
The charging device of claim 33,
wherein the first charger comprises:
a first housing fixed to a stand that supports the personal mobility vehicle;
a transmission controller installed inside the first housing;
a transmission coil disposed inside the first housing, and configured to connect to the transmission controller;
and a first magnet fixed to the first housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force.
Claim 8
wherein the first charging unit comprises:
a first housing secured to the frame part;
a transmission controller disposed inside the first housing; and
a transmission coil disposed inside the first housing and connected with the transmission controller.
(no equivalent claim language)
Claim 35
The charging device of claim 34,
wherein the second charger comprises:
a second housing fixed to the personal mobility vehicle;
a reception controller installed inside of the second housing;
a reception coil disposed inside the second housing, and configured to connect to the reception controller;
and a second magnet fixed to the second housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force of a polarity different from a polarity of the magnetic force produced by the first magnet.
Claim 10
wherein the second charging unit comprises:
a second housing secured to a lower area of the personal mobility device;
a reception controller disposed inside the second housing;
and a reception coil disposed inside the second housing and connected with the reception
controller.
(no equivalent claim language)
Regarding dependent Claims 33-34, the copending application does not claim “a first magnet fixed to the first housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force” and “a second magnet fixed to the second housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force of a polarity different from a polarity of the magnetic force produced by the first magnet”.
Bae teaches (detailed claim item mapping is included infra in the prior art rejection) a first magnet fixed to the first housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force and a second magnet fixed to the second housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force of a polarity different from a polarity of the magnetic force produced by the first magnet.
Bae further teaches the magnets on each charger’s housing to make it easier for the user to align the two chargers (¶ [13]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the two chargers’ housings claimed by the copending application to incorporate magnets, as taught by Bae, to make it easier to align the two chargers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Creanga (EP 3386070 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, Creanga discloses a charging device (“bicycle rack 32” with “charging system 10”; Figs. 3, 5) for a personal mobility vehicle (“electric bicycle”; Fig. 4).
Creanga further discloses the charging device (32, 10) comprising a first charger (“primary device 16” with “transmitter 28”; Figs. 1, 3, 5) configured to create a magnetic field (¶ [10]: “energy transfer … by inductive coupling”) for wireless charging (¶ [9]: “transfer energy wirelessly from the primary device to the secondary device”).
Creanga further discloses a second charger (“secondary device 18” with “receiver 30”; Figs. 1, 4) mounted on the personal mobility vehicle (14; ¶ [29]: “18 is configured to be fixed to the electric bicycle … and for this purpose may also comprise a mount 36”).
Creanga further discloses the second charger (18, 30) is configured to convert the magnetic field (¶ [11]: “inductive coupling of the transmitter and the receiver”) that is created by the first charger (18, 30) into a power source (output from “first connector 20”; Fig. 4), and charge a battery (“accumulator 12”; Fig. 4; ¶ [35]: “by means of the inductive … coupling of the transmitter 28 and the receiver 30 the electric charging of the accumulator can easily be performed”) provided in the personal mobility vehicle (14).
PNG
media_image1.png
742
1173
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Creanga further discloses a stand (“bicycle rack 32”, including “carriers 50”) configured to store the personal mobility vehicle (14) in an upright position (combo of Figs. 2 & 3 are interpreted such that wheels of “14” are supported on “32” so the alignment of the chargers can occur; thus, “14” is mounted upright on “32” during charging, storage, and/or transport).
PNG
media_image2.png
837
1120
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Creanga further discloses a variable support (“mount 34” and its adjustable interface to “28”; Fig. 1; ¶ [29]: “34, by means of which the primary device 16 can be attached to the bicycle rack 32”) fixed to the stand (32).
Creanga further discloses the variable support (“34” + interface to “28”) is configured to support the first charger (16, 28), and move the first charger (¶ [29]: “28 can be adjustable in its position with respect to the mount 34”), based on a position of the second charger (18, 30) (¶ [29]: “always perfect alignment of the transmitter 28 with regard to the receiver 30 can be ensured”).
PNG
media_image3.png
908
1120
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 22, Creanga discloses the charging device of claim 21.
Creanga further discloses the variable support (“34” + interface to “28”) comprises: a first supporter (“34” + interface to “28”) configured to support the first charger (16, 28) to be rotatable (¶ [29]: “30 may also be rotatable, illustrated by the double arrow 42”; ¶ [29]: “alternatively or additionally, also the transmitter 28 can be adjustable in its position with regard to the mount 34”; Fig. 1).
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 25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creanga (EP 3386070 A1) in view of Kang (US 2018/0339600 A1).
Regarding Claims 25 and 27, Creanga discloses the charging device of claim 22.
Regarding claim 25, Creanga does not disclose the variable support comprises “a second supporter disposed outside the first supporter, and configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter”.
Regarding claim 27, Creanga further does not disclose the variable support comprises “a third supporter disposed outside the second supporter, mounted on the stand, and configured to guide a front-rear movement of the second supporter”.
Kang teaches the variable support (“transfer part 162” of the “robot arm 160”; see annotated Fig. 2, included infra).
PNG
media_image4.png
945
1232
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kang teaches the variable support (162) further comprises a second supporter (“vertical transfer member 164”; Fig. 2) disposed outside the first supporter (“rotation part 165”; Fig. 2; ¶ [55]: “165 rotates the feeder module 130 so as to align the feeder module 130 and the collector module 210 at correct positions”), and configured to guide an up-down movement (¶ [43]: “164 transferring the feeder module 130 up and down in a vertical direction”) of the first supporter (165).
Kang further teaches a third supporter (“horizontal transfer member 163”; Fig. 2) disposed outside the second supporter (164), mounted on the stand (“support part 161”; Fig. 2) and configured to guide a front-rear movement (¶ [44]: “163 is disposed to enable a horizontal movement on x- and y-axes in a horizontal direction from the top end portion of the support part 161”) of the second supporter (164).
Kang further teaches the variable support’s structure including three supporters to enable greater maneuverability of the first charger to achieve alignment with the second charger location of vehicles of different heights (¶ [54]), which makes charging easier (¶ [62]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the variable support disclosed by the combination of Creanga and Terao to incorporate the structure of three supporters, as taught by Kang, to make charging easier for personal mobility vehicles with second chargers located in different locations.
Claims 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creanga (EP 3386070 A1) in view of Gomi et al. (US 2011/0068738 A1).
Regarding Claims 31-32, Creanga discloses the charging device of claim 21.
Creanga further discloses the first charger (16, 28) is fixed to the stand (32, 50).
Creanga further discloses the second charger (18, 30) is fixed to the personal mobility vehicle (14).
Regarding claim 31, Creanga does not disclose “the first charger comprises: a housing fixed to the stand; a transmission controller installed inside the first housing; and a transmission coil disposed inside the first housing, and configured to connect to the transmission controller.”
Regarding claim 32, Creanga does not disclose “the second charger comprises: a housing fixed to the personal mobility vehicle; a reception controller installed inside of the second housing; and a reception coil disposed inside the second housing, and configured to connect to the reception controller.”
Gomi teaches the first charger (circuitry within “86”, including “feed control circuit 134”, “first switch 135”, and “feed coil 95”; Fig. 15; ¶ [124]: “recharging system 87 which includes a first part provided in the stand 86”) comprises a housing (“casing 93” and/or the “stand 86” itself; Figs. 12, 14) fixed to the stand (“stand 86”; Fig. 14).
Gomi further teaches a transmission controller (“feed control circuit 134”; Fig. 15) installed inside the first housing (“93”, as part of “86”).
Gomi further teaches a transmission coil (“feed coil 95”; Figs. 14-15) disposed inside the first housing (“93”, including “front wall 103”; ¶ [117]: “95 is placed on the inner surface of the front wall 103”), and configured to connect (via circuit components “135”, “131”, and “132”; Fig. 15) to the transmission controller (134).
Gomi further teaches the second charger (combo of “receiving coil 88” and “charging control unit 120”; Fig. 15; ¶ [124]: “recharging system 87 which includes … a second part provided in the vehicle 1”; “88” is part of the “power take device” and “120” is part of the “electric unit” described per ¶ [14] as being within the “hollow interior” of the “frame”) comprises a housing (“frame 2”, including “upper frame 21” and “lower frame 22”; Figs. 1-4, 12) fixed to the personal mobility vehicle (“vehicle 1”; Figs. 1-4, 12, 14-15).
Gomi further teaches a reception controller (“receiving control circuit 138”; Fig. 15) installed inside of the second housing (2).
Gomi further teaches a reception coil (“receiving coil 88”; Fig. 15) disposed inside the second housing (2), and configured to connect (via “second switch 139”; Fig. 15) to the reception controller (138).
Gomi further teaches the housings, controllers, and coils of each charger form a structure that supports reliable electric coupling without requiring physical contact (¶ [10, 12]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify each of the two chargers disclosed by Creanga to incorporate a housing, a controller, and a coil, as taught by Gomi, to support reliable electric coupling between the chargers.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creanga (EP 3386070 A1) in view of Terao et al. (US 2010/0315038 A1).
Regarding Claim 33, Creanga discloses a charging device (“bicycle rack 32” with “charging system 10”; Figs. 3, 5) for a personal mobility vehicle (“electric bicycle”; Fig. 4).
NOTE: See the examiner-annotated Creanga Figs. 1, 3, and 4, included supra in the 103 rejection of claim 22.
Creanga further discloses the charging device (32, 10) comprising a first charger (“primary device 16” with “transmitter 28”; Figs. 1, 3, 5) configured to create a magnetic field (¶ [10]: “energy transfer … by inductive coupling”) for wireless charging (¶ [9]: “transfer energy wirelessly from the primary device to the secondary device”).
Creanga further discloses a second charger (“secondary device 18” with “receiver 30”; Figs. 1, 4) configured to convert the magnetic field (¶ [11]: “inductive coupling of the transmitter and the receiver”) that is created by the first charger (18, 30) into a power source (output from “first connector 20”; Fig. 4), and charge a battery (“accumulator 12”; Fig. 4; ¶ [35]: “by means of the inductive … coupling of the transmitter 28 and the receiver 30 the electric charging of the accumulator can easily be performed”) provided in the personal mobility vehicle (14).
Creanga further discloses a variable support (“mount 34” and its adjustable interface to “28”; Fig. 1; ¶ [29]: “34, by means of which the primary device 16 can be attached to the bicycle rack 32”) configured to support the first charger (16, 28), and move the first charger (¶ [29]: “28 can be adjustable in its position with respect to the mount 34”), based on a position of the second charger (18, 30) (¶ [29]: “always perfect alignment of the transmitter 28 with regard to the receiver 30 can be ensured”).
Creanga does not disclose that “in a state where the first charger and the second charger do not contact each other, a position of the first charger varies depending on the position of the second charger.” Though, Creanga does disclose the position of the first charger is adjustable.
Terao teaches that in a state where the first charger (“transmitting coil 11”; Figs. 1-6) and the second charger (“receiving coil 51” and supporting circuitry in “device 50”; Figs. 1, 5-6) do not contact each other (Fig. 1 shows “11” and “50” not touching each other), a position of the first charger (11) varies (¶ [11]: “to move the transmitting coil 11 in close proximity to the receiving coil 51 in the device housing a battery 50”) depending on the position of the second charger (50).
Terao further teaches for the first charger to vary its position based on the second charger’s position to improve power transmission efficiency (¶ [21]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the first charger disclosed by Creanga to vary its position based on the second charger’s position, as taught by Terao, to improve power transmission efficiency.
Claims 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creanga (EP 3386070 A1) in view of Terao et al. (US 2010/0315038 A1), Gomi et al. (US 2011/0068738 A1), and Bae et al. (US 2018/0248406 A1).
Regarding Claims 34-35, the combination of Creanga and Terao teaches the charging device of claim 33.
Creanga further discloses the first charger (16, 28) is fixed to a stand (32, 50) that supports the personal mobility vehicle (14).
Creanga further discloses the second charger (18, 30) is fixed to the personal mobility vehicle (14).
Regarding claim 34, Creanga does not disclose “the first charger comprises: a first housing fixed to a stand that supports the personal mobility vehicle; a transmission controller installed inside the first housing; a transmission coil disposed inside the first housing, and configured to connect to the transmission controller; and a first magnet fixed to the first housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force.”
Regarding claim 35, Creanga does not disclose “the second charger comprises: a second housing fixed to the personal mobility vehicle; a reception controller installed inside of the second housing; a reception coil disposed inside the second housing, and configured to connect to the reception controller; and a second magnet fixed to the second housing, and configured to produce a magnetic force of a polarity different from a polarity of the magnetic force produced by the first magnet.”
Gomi teaches the first charger (circuitry within “86”, including “feed control circuit 134”, “first switch 135”, and “feed coil 95”; Fig. 15; ¶ [124]: “recharging system 87 which includes a first part provided in the stand 86”) comprises a first housing (“casing 93” and/or the “stand 86” itself; Figs. 12, 14) fixed to a stand (“stand 86”; Fig. 14) that supports the personal mobility vehicle (“vehicle 1”; Figs. 1-4, 12, 14-15).
Gomi further teaches a transmission controller (“feed control circuit 134”; Fig. 15) installed inside the first housing (“93”, as part of “86”).
Gomi further teaches a transmission coil (“feed coil 95”; Figs. 14-15) disposed inside the first housing (“93”, including “front wall 103”; ¶ [117]: “95 is placed on the inner surface of the front wall 103”), and configured to connect (via circuit components “135”, “131”, and “132”; Fig. 15) to the transmission controller (134).
Gomi further teaches the second charger (combo of “receiving coil 88” and “charging control unit 120”; Fig. 15; ¶ [124]: “recharging system 87 which includes … a second part provided in the vehicle 1”; “88” is part of the “power take device” and “120” is part of the “electric unit” described per ¶ [14] as being within the “hollow interior” of the “frame”) comprises a second housing (“frame 2”, including “upper frame 21” and “lower frame 22”; Figs. 1-4, 12) fixed to the personal mobility vehicle (“vehicle 1”; Figs. 1-4, 12, 14-15).
Gomi further teaches a reception controller (“receiving control circuit 138”; Fig. 15) installed inside of the second housing (2).
Gomi further teaches a reception coil (“receiving coil 88”; Fig. 15) disposed inside the second housing (2), and configured to connect (via “second switch 139”; Fig. 15) to the reception controller (138).
Gomi further teaches the housings, controllers, and coils of each charger form a structure that supports reliable electric coupling without requiring physical contact (¶ [10, 12]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify each of the two chargers disclosed by the combination of Creanga and Terao to incorporate a housing, a controller, and a coil, as taught by Gomi, to support reliable electric coupling between the chargers.
Bae teaches a first magnet (any of “magnets 4261-4266” of Fig. 4A; equivalent to “magnets 5251-5265” of Figs. 5A-5B) fixed to the first housing (“outer housing 421” of the “wireless charging cradle 420”; Fig. 4A), and configured to produce a magnetic force (polarity of first charger’s magnets depicted in Fig. 5B).
Bae further teaches a second magnet (any of “magnets 4161-4163” of Fig. 4B; equivalent to “magnets 6131-6133” of Figs. 6A-6B) fixed to the second housing (combo of “bezel 411” and “rear housing 415” of “electronic device 410”; Fig. 4B), and configured to produce a magnetic force (polarity of second charger’s magnets depicted in Fig. 6B) of a polarity different (¶ [12]: “attracted to each other by a magnetic force”; because the magnets attract each other, their forces have different polarities) from a polarity of the magnetic force (polarity of first charger’s magnets depicted in Fig. 5B) produced by the first magnet (any of “4261-4266”).
Bae further teaches the magnets on each charger’s housing to make it easier for the user to align the two chargers (¶ [13]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the two chargers’ housings disclosed by the combination of Creanga, Terao, and Gomi to incorporate magnets, as taught by Bae, to make it easier to align the two chargers.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creanga (EP 3386070 A1) in view of Terao et al. (US 2010/0315038 A1) and Kang (US 2018/0339600 A1).
Regarding Claim 36, the combination of Creanga and Terao teaches the charging device of claim 33.
Creanga further discloses the variable support (“34” + interface to “28”) comprises: a first supporter (“34” + interface to “28”) configured to support the first charger (16, 28) to be rotatable (¶ [29]: “30 may also be rotatable, illustrated by the double arrow 42”; ¶ [29]: “alternatively or additionally, also the transmitter 28 can be adjustable in its position with regard to the mount 34”; Fig. 1).
Creanga further discloses the variable support (“34” + interface to “28”) is mounted on a stand (“bicycle rack 32”, including “carriers 50”) that supports the personal mobility vehicle (14).
Creanga does not disclose the variable support comprises “a second supporter disposed outside the first supporter, and configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter; and a third supporter disposed outside the second supporter, mounted on a stand” and “configured to guide a front-rear movement of the second supporter.”
Kang teaches (see annotated Fig. 2, included supra) the variable support (“transfer part 162” of the “robot arm 160”; Fig. 2) comprises a first supporter (“rotation part 165”; Fig. 2) configured to support the first charger (“feeder module 130”; Figs. 1-2; ¶ [34]: “130 supplying a wireless power”) to be rotatable (¶ [55]: “165 rotates the feeder module 130 so as to align the feeder module 130 and the collector module 210 at correct positions”).
Kang further teaches a second supporter (“vertical transfer member 164”; Fig. 2) disposed outside the first supporter (165), and configured to guide an up-down movement (¶ [43]: “164 transferring the feeder module 130 up and down in a vertical direction”) of the first supporter (165).
Kang further teaches a third supporter (“horizontal transfer member 163”; Fig. 2) disposed outside the second supporter (164), mounted on a stand (“support part 161”; Fig. 2).
NOTE: It was established supra that Creanga discloses the stand supports the personal mobility vehicle. Thus, Kang is not relied upon to teach that the stand upon which the third supporter is mounted is also configured to support the personal mobility vehicle.
Kang further teaches the third supporter (163) is configured to guide a front-rear movement (¶ [44]: “163 is disposed to enable a horizontal movement on x- and y-axes in a horizontal direction from the top end portion of the support part 161”) of the second supporter (164).
Kang further teaches the variable support’s structure including three supporters to enable greater maneuverability of the first charger to achieve alignment with the second charger location of vehicles of different heights (¶ [54]), which makes charging easier (¶ [62]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the variable support disclosed by the combination of Creanga and Terao to incorporate the structure of three supporters, as taught by Kang, to make charging easier for personal mobility vehicles with second chargers located in different locations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-24, 26, 28-30, and 40 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 37-39 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 23, though the prior art teaches the charging device of Claims 21-22 including a first charger, a second charger mounted on a personal mobility vehicle, a stand to store the personal mobility vehicle in an upright position, a variable support fixed to the stand to move the first charger based on the second charger, and a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable, it fails to teach the inclusion of and the combination with “the first supporter comprises: a body spaced apart from the first charger and elongated in an up-down direction; a side member elongated from both sides of the body toward a front of the body at which the first charger is disposed, and configured to support the first charger to be rotatable; and a stopper protruding toward the front of the body to contact the first charger that rotates at an angle greater than or equal to a predetermined angle, and configured to limit a rotation of the first charger.”
Claim 24 would be allowable due to its dependency on Claim 23.
Regarding Claim 26, though the prior art teaches the charging device of Claims 21-22 and 25 including a first charger, a second charger mounted on a personal mobility vehicle, a stand to store the personal mobility vehicle in an upright position, a variable support fixed to the stand to move the first charger based on the second charger, a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable, and a second supporter disposed outside the first supporter and configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter, it fails to teach the inclusion of and the combination with “the second supporter comprises: a body disposed to surround a lateral surface and a rear of the first supporter; a guide bar fixed to the body and passing through the first supporter in an up-down direction; a first elastic supporter disposed between an upper side of the first supporter and the body, and configured to pressurize the first supporter downward; and a second elastic supporter disposed between a lower side of the first supporter and the body, and configured to pressurize the first supporter upward.”
Regarding Claim 28, though the prior art teaches the charging device of Claims 21-22 and 25 including a first charger, a second charger mounted on a personal mobility vehicle, a stand to store the personal mobility vehicle in an upright position, a variable support fixed to the stand to move the first charger based on the second charger, a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable, a second supporter configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter, and a third supporter disposed outside the second supporter, mounted on the stand, and configured to guide a front-rear movement of the second supporter, it fails to teach the inclusion of and the combination with “the third supporter comprises: a body disposed outside the second supporter and fixed to the stand; a link which connects the body and the second supporter, and has a link shape which changes based on the front-rear movement of the second supporter; and a shaft connecting the link that is disposed on a lateral surface of the second supporter.”
Claims 29-30 would be allowable due to their dependency on Claim 28.
Regarding Claim 37, though the prior art teaches the charging device of Claims 33 and 36 including a first charger, a second charger mounted on a personal mobility vehicle, a variable support configured to move the first charger based on the second charger, a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable, a second supporter configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter, and a third supporter mounted on a stand that supports the personal mobility vehicle and configured to guide a front-rear movement of the second supporter, it fails to teach the inclusion of and the combination with “the first supporter comprises: a body spaced apart from the first charger and elongated in an up-down direction; a side member elongated from both sides of the body toward a front of the body at which the first charger is disposed, and configured to support the first charger to be rotatable; a stopper protruding toward the front of the first body to contact the first charger that rotates at an angle greater than or equal to a predetermined angle, and configured to limit a rotation of the first charger; and a buffer member disposed between the stopper and the first charger, and configured to reduce an impact at a time at which the first charger rotates toward the stopper.”
Regarding Claim 38, though the prior art teaches the charging device of Claims 33 and 36 including a first charger, a second charger mounted on a personal mobility vehicle, a variable support configured to move the first charger based on the second charger, a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable, a second supporter configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter, and a third supporter mounted on a stand that supports the personal mobility vehicle and configured to guide a front-rear movement of the second supporter, it fails to teach the inclusion of and the combination with “the second supporter comprises: a body disposed to surround a lateral surface and a rear of the first supporter; a guide bar fixed to the second body and passing through the first supporter in an up-down direction; a first elastic supporter disposed between an upper side of the first supporter and the body, and configured to pressurize the first supporter downward; and a second elastic supporter disposed between a lower side of the first supporter and the body, and configured to pressurize the first supporter upward.”
Claim 39 would be allowable due to its dependency on Claim 38.
Regarding Claim 40, though the prior art teaches the charging device of Claims 33 and 36 including a first charger, a second charger mounted on a personal mobility vehicle, a variable support configured to move the first charger based on the second charger, a first supporter configured to support the first charger to be rotatable, a second supporter configured to guide an up-down movement of the first supporter, and a third supporter mounted on a stand that supports the personal mobility vehicle and configured to guide a front-rear movement of the second supporter, it fails to teach the inclusion of and the combination with “the third supporter comprises: a body disposed outside the second supporter and fixed to the stand; a link which connects the body and the second supporter, and has a link shape which changes based on the front-rear movement of the second supporter; and a shaft connecting the link that is disposed on a lateral surface of the second supporter.”
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