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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the element 232 is not clearly shown in Fig. 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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 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 1-6, 12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Partovi (USPGPN 20130093388).
Independent Claim 1, Partovi discloses a wireless power receiver (Figs. [1-6, 20, 29, 30, 36, 37], abstract, ¶’s [28, 59, 60, 71, 85, 167, 177, 186, 208]) comprising:
a wireless charging circuit coupled to a power switch, wherein the wireless charging circuit is configured to receive power from a wireless power transmitter (receiver portion shown in at least Figs. [1-6], switch described in ¶’s [85, 208] likely referring to charge management IC, along with sense and switch, see esp. Fig. 6); and,
a wired charging circuit coupled to the power switch, wherein the wired charging circuit is configured to receive power from a power connector coupled to the wired charging circuit (AC/DC power supply, switch[es] described in ¶’s [85, 208] likely referring to charge management IC, along with sense and switch);
wherein the power switch is configured to selectively couple power from the wired charging circuit to a mobile device or from the wireless charging circuit to the mobile device (¶’s [85, 208] describes switching between them, sense and switch).
Independent Claim 15, Partovi discloses a method implemented on a wireless power receiver for supplying power to a mobile device (Figs. [1-6, 20, 29, 30, 36, 37], abstract, ¶’s [28, 59, 60, 71, 85, 167, 177, 186, 208]), the method comprising:
selectively coupling a first charging current from a power connector to the mobile device when a charging cable is connected to the power connector (AC/DC power supply, switch[es] described in ¶’s [85, 208] likely referring to charge management IC, along with sense and switch, see esp. Fig. 6); and,
selectively coupling a second charging current from a wireless charging circuit to the mobile device when the charging cable is not connected to the power connector (receiver portion shown in at least Figs. [1-6], switch[es] described in ¶’s [85, 208] likely referring to charge management IC, along with sense and switch),
wherein the wireless charging circuit is configured to receive a power signal from a wireless power transmitter and generate the second charging current from the received power signal (¶’s [85, 208] describes switching between them, sense and switch).
Dependent Claim 2, Partovi discloses selectively coupling power from the wired charging circuit to the mobile device is in response to detecting, by the power switch, that a charging cable is coupled to the power connector (¶’s [85, 177, 208, esp. 208])
Dependent Claim 3, Partovi discloses selectively coupling power from the wired charging circuit to the mobile device is in response to detecting, by the power switch, that a charging cable is coupled to the power connector and a voltage or current is supplied by the charging cable (¶’s [85, 177, 208, esp. 208: “priority can be given to either wireless or wired method after determining which one can provide higher current and therefore faster charging times or some other criteria”]).
Dependent Claim 4, Partovi discloses selectively coupling power from the wireless charging circuit to the mobile device is in response to detecting, by the power switch, that a charging cable is not coupled to the power connector (¶’s [71: “…the circuit can contain a sense circuit that is used to sense the proximity of the receiver and/or as a component for data or signal transfer between the charger and/or power supply and the receiver… we mean that 2 devices are within a distance such that they can interact through a wireless, wired, optical, or other method or protocol within a Personal Area Network (PAN) or Local Area Network (LAN)…”,
177: “the user can disconnect the device from the power from the device by for example disconnecting it from the USB connector of the laptop and use the wireless charger away from any power source by operating it from its own internal battery power”], where the lack of communication via wired [e.g. USB] communication would result in the sensing that the charging USB cable is not connected, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand).
Dependent Claim 5, Partovi discloses selectively coupling power from the wireless charging circuit to the mobile device further comprises determining, by the wireless charging circuit, that the wireless power receiver is proximate to the wireless power transmitter (¶[71:” the circuit can contain a sense circuit that is used to sense the proximity of the receiver”];
¶[60: “A coil or wire in a receiver embedded into a device that is in the vicinity of the surface can sense the magnetic field”], sense and communication circuit in Figs. [1-6]).
Dependent Claim 6, Partovi discloses the wireless charging circuit and the wired charging circuit are embedded in a case comprising a first cover section and a second cover section, wherein the case is adapted to physically protect the mobile device (Figs. [29, 30, 36, 37, esp. 29, 30, 36] ¶’s [167, 186], where Fig. [37] shows input for external wired power is different from wireless power receive coil area).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
686
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Dependent Claim 12, Partovi discloses a controller configured to disable the wireless charging circuit when a charging cable is coupled to the power connector (¶’s [85, 208])
Dependent Claim 16, Partovi discloses selectively coupling the first charging current from the power connector to the mobile device when the charging cable is connected to the power connector further comprises determining that a current or a voltage is supplied to the power connector (¶’s [85, 177, 208, esp. 208: “priority can be given to either wireless or wired method after determining which one can provide higher current and therefore faster charging times or some other criteria”]).
Dependent Claim 17, Partovi discloses selectively coupling the second charging current from the wireless charging circuit to the mobile device when the charging cable is not connected to the power connector further comprises determining that the wireless power receiver is proximate to the wireless power transmitter (¶[71:” the circuit can contain a sense circuit that is used to sense the proximity of the receiver”];
¶[60: “A coil or wire in a receiver embedded into a device that is in the vicinity of the surface can sense the magnetic field”], sense and communication circuit in Figs. [1-6]).
Dependent Claim 18, Partovi discloses the wireless power receiver is embedded in a case comprising a first cover section and a second cover section, wherein the case is adapted to physically protect the mobile device (Figs. [29, 30, 36, 37, esp. 29, 30, 36], ¶’s [167, 186], where Fig. [37] shows input for external wired power is different from wireless power receive coil area)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Partovi (USPGPN 20130093388)
Dependent Claim 10, Partovi discloses an alternating current to direct current (AC/DC) converter configured to convert an alternating current (AC) voltage received by a receiving coil to a direct current (DC) voltage (rectifier-&-filter);
a voltage regulator coupled to the AC/DC converter (regulator), wherein the voltage regulator is configured to generate a regulated voltage from the DC voltage, and wherein the regulated voltage is at a pre-determined voltage level (inherent to voltage regulators, and/or obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide improved reliability [official notice taken]);
and, a current limiter coupled to the voltage regulator (charge management IC,
a current limiter is known to those in the art to include a resistance which reduces current [e.g. a wire’s resistance, a resistor, an active current limiter], thus as Partovi shows wiring, Partovi has a current limiter),
wherein the current limiter is configured to limit a current of the regulated voltage to a current level selected from a plurality of current levels (¶’s [210: “The information from the sensor can be used to shut down the wireless or wired charger, reduce the current output, and/or provide a warning or alarm to user or take other actions”
217: “In case of an over-temperature condition at the battery, the receiver can take action such as shut down wired or wireless charger, disconnect input power to the battery, reduce output current for charging the battery,”
218: “priority can be given to wireless charger/power supply over the wired charger/power supply or priority can be given to either method after determining which one can provide higher current”, and
wherein the selected current level is determined by a microcontroller (¶’s [203, 204, 227]) based at least in part on a voltage level of the DC voltage (due to the fact that any decision to provide power is based on the power source voltage, this feature is taught).
Dependent Claim 11, Partovi teaches the selected current level is further based on a distance between the wireless power receiver and the wireless power transmitter (noted that the applicant did not clarify that the microcontroller selects a distinct current level using a first distance and another for a second distance with active control, thus Partovi meets it due to the inherent and known feature that when beyond an optimal distance, the power is reduced, and thus the available power is reduced).
Claims 7-9, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Partovi (USPGPN 20130093388) in view of Lu et al (USPGPN 20190190298)
Dependent Claims 7 and 19, Partovi teaches the wireless charging circuit comprises a current limiter (a current limiter is known to those in the art to include a resistance which reduces current [e.g. a wire’s resistance, a resistor, an active current limiter], thus as Partovi shows wiring, Partovi has a current limiter).
However, it is well known to the art that generally with wireless power once a receiver has gone beyond the optimal distance, the power received/current outputted by the receiver is reduced, which meets the claim limitations. While Partovi is silent to this explicit feature, Lu teaches and/or provides evidence that the power received is reduced/limited based on being further than a predetermined distance. Lu teaches it serves to improve the efficiency of the system by modifying the system (“a wireless charging device that dynamically adjusts the charging mode of the charging plate 2 so as to reduce the amount of power consumption of the charging plate 2”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Partovi with Lu to provide improved efficiency.
Dependent Claims 8 & 20,and 9, Partovi and/or the [combination of Partovi and Lu] teaches the first current level is lower than the second current level when the first distance is larger than the second distance (as noted above, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that the power received is lower when greater than the predetermined distance rather than less than the predetermined distance, with Lu teaches this feature as well; with respect to [wrt] Claims 8 & 20);
the first distance corresponds to a first output voltage of an alternating current to direct current (AC/DC) converter coupled to a receiving coil and the second distance corresponds to a second output voltage of the AC/DC converter, and the first voltage is lower than the second voltage ([a] the applicant did not claim the values were different, and [b] as noted above, the power received is less the further from the optimal distance than within/at the optimal distance, thus as the power is reduced, the voltage would also be reduced, with 135 of Lu and the rectifier of Partovi being the AC/DC converter; wrt Claim 9)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Most relevant prior art for Claim 1:
US-20050156569-A1 OR US-20060145659-A1 OR US-20130207602-A1 OR US-20200006952-A1 OR US-20210376643-A1 OR US-20250125644-A1 OR US-20160094080-A1 OR US-20260005550-A1 OR US-20110050164-A1 OR US-20130093388-A1 OR US-20130260677-A1 OR US-20220123786-A1 OR US-20230216544-A1 OR US-20250088217-A1
US-7705565-B2 OR US-9425645-B2 OR US-11190038-B2 OR US-12249859-B2 OR US-11211975-B2 OR US-11606119-B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights