DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10-14, 17, 20, 21, 25, 26, 29, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 20130200844 A1; hereinafter “LEE”) in view of Hiramatsu (US 20220181918 A1; hereinafter “HIRAMATSU”)
Regarding claim 1, LEE teaches a method performed by a Power Transmitter of a wireless power system (see LEE, fig. 1, 5), comprising:
receiving information from a Power Receiver related to an operation of the Power Receiver (see LEE, fig. 5, 511, rx config message, para. [0084]);
determining an energy requirement of the Power Receiver based, at least in part, on the information (see LEE, para. [0084-85]); and
during a power transfer phase (see LEE, fig. 5, 515, charging state, para. [0096]):
periodically receiving power control communications from the Power Receiver (see LEE, para. [0068], periodically reports);
transmitting wireless power to the Power Receiver (see LEE, fig. 5, 515, charging state, para. [0096]); and
ceasing transmission of wireless power by the Power Transmitter (see LEE, fig. 5, 529, stop power supply, para. [0104]) when an unexpected power control communication from the Power Receiver (see LEE, para. [0104], device remove, communication failures) after a total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds the energy requirement (see LEE, fig. 5, 519, fully charged, para. [0103]).
LEE is silent to teaching that wherein the unexpected power control communication is received and exceeding the energy requirement by a threshold amount.
In the same field of endeavor, HIRAMATSU teaches a method wherein the unexpected power control communication is received from the Power Receiver (see HIRAMATSU, fig. 6, S602, S603, increase power instruction, para. [0064-67]) and an amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds the energy requirement by a threshold amount (see HIRAMATSU, fig. 8, 805, para. [0075,105]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE with the teaching of AGRAWAL in order to provide high power wireless transfer and prevent damages to devices (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0003-4]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 1, wherein receiving the information from the Power Receiver includes receiving a message containing static configuration data indicating a rated power value and a rated time parameter associated with the energy requirement of the Power Receiver (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0051,60], timer).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of any one of claim 1, wherein the energy requirement represents a total amount of energy required by the Power Receiver to complete the operation (see LEE, para. [0084]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 1, comprising:
periodically determining the total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver during the power transfer phase (see LEE, para. [0068], periodical reports).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of any one of claims 1 9 claim 1, further comprising:
determining a maximum power transmission time based, at least in part, on the information and one or more operating parameters of the Power Transmitter (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0104]); and
ceasing transmission of wireless power by the Power Transmitter when the unexpected power control communication is received from the Power Receiver from the Power Receiver after a total power transmission time exceeds the maximum power transmission time (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0067,105]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 10, wherein determining the maximum power transmission time includes determining the maximum power transmission time based, at least in part, on a time parameter received from the Power Receiver (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0104-105]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the maximum power transmission time is further based on electronic thermal limits of the Power Transmitter or the Power Receiver (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0067]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: detecting a fault of the Power Receiver when the Power Transmitter continues to receive power control messages from the Power Receiver after the total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds the energy requirement by the threshold amount or the total power transmission time exceeds the maximum power transmission time (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0105]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of any one of claims 1 13 claim 1, further comprising communicating a fault detection message to the Power Receiver when the Power Transmitter continues to receive power control messages from the Power Receiver after the total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds the energy requirement by the threshold amount (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0105-105]).
Regarding claim 17, LEE teaches a Power Transmitter of a wireless power system (see LEE, fig. 1, 5), comprising:
a communication unit configured to receive information from a Power Receiver related to an operation of the Power Receiver (see LEE, fig. 5, 511, rx config message, para. [0084]);
a primary coil configured to transmit wireless power to the Power Receiver during a power transfer phase (see LEE, fig. 5, 515, charging state, para. [0096]);
the communication unit configured to periodically receive power control communications from the Power Receiver during the power transfer phase (see LEE, para. [0068], periodically reports); and
a transmission controller configured to:
determine an energy requirement of the Power Receiver based, at least in part, on the information (see LEE, para. [0084-85]); and
cease transmission of wireless power by the Power Transmitter (see LEE, fig. 5, 529, stop power supply, para. [0104]) when an unexpected power control communication from the Power Receiver (see LEE, para. [0104], device remove, communication failures) after a total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds the energy requirement (see LEE, fig. 5, 519, fully charged, para. [0103]).
LEE is silent to teaching that wherein the unexpected power control communication is received and exceeding the energy requirement by a threshold amount.
In the same field of endeavor, HIRAMATSU teaches a system wherein the unexpected power control communication is received from the Power Receiver (see HIRAMATSU, fig. 6, S602, S603, increase power instruction, para. [0064-67]) and an amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds the energy requirement by a threshold amount (see HIRAMATSU, fig. 8, 805, para. [0075,105]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE with the teaching of AGRAWAL in order to provide high power wireless transfer and prevent damages to devices (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0003-4]).
Regarding claims 20, 21, 25, and 26, the dependent claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claims 5, 6, 13 and 14, respectively.
Regarding claim 29, LEE teaches a method performed by a Power Transmitter of a wireless power system (see LEE, fig. 1, 5), comprising:
receiving information indicating an operation of a Power Receiver (see LEE, fig. 5, 511, rx config message, para. [0084]);
transmitting wireless power to the Power Receiver based on the information (see LEE, fig. 5, 515, charging state, para. [0096]);
periodically receiving power control communications from the Power Receiver during a power transfer phase (see LEE, para. [0084-85]); and
ceasing transmission of wireless power to the Power Receiver (see LEE, fig. 5, 529, stop power supply, para. [0104]) after a total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver based on the operation (see LEE, fig. 5, 519, fully charged, para. [0103]).
LEE is silent to teaching that when one of the power control communications includes a request for additional power after a total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds a threshold amount based on the operation.
In the same field of endeavor, HIRAMATSU teaches a method when one of the power control communications includes a request for additional power (see HIRAMATSU, fig. 6, S602, S603, increase power instruction, para. [0064-67]) after a total amount of energy transferred to the Power Receiver exceeds a threshold amount based on the operation (see HIRAMATSU, fig. 8, 805, para. [0075,105]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE with the teaching of AGRAWAL in order to provide high power wireless transfer and prevent damages to devices (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0003-4]).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 29, further comprising:
determining an energy requirement of the Power Receiver based, at least in part, on the information (see LEE, para. [0084-85]); and
determining the threshold amount based on the energy requirement (see HIRAMATSU, para. [0095]).
Claim(s) 2, 3, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE and HIRAMATSU as applied to claims 1 and 17 above, and further in view of Patel et al. (US 20170318537 A1; hereinafter “PATEL”).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU is silent to teaching that wherein receiving information from the Power Receiver includes receiving a rated power value and a time parameter indicating an expected time for the Power Receiver to complete the operation based on the rated power value.
In the same field of endeavor, PATEL teaches a method wherein receiving information from the Power Receiver includes receiving a rated power value and a time parameter indicating an expected time for the Power Receiver to complete the operation based on the rated power value (see PATEL, para. [0024,63]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE and HIRAMATSU with the teaching of PATEL in order to improve power management efficiency (see PATEL, para. [0005-6]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of LEE, HIRAMATSU and PATEL teaches the method of claim 2, wherein determining the energy requirement includes multiplying the rated power value and the time parameter to determine the energy requirement (see PATEL, para. [0092]).
Regarding claims 18 and 19, the dependent claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claims 2 and 3, respectively.
Claim(s) 7, 15, 22 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE and HIRAMATSU as applied to claims 1, 6, 17 and 21 above, and further in view of Krenz et al. (US 20210185621 A1; hereinafter “KRENZ”)
Regarding claim 7, the com method of claim 6, wherein determining the total amount of energy transferred includes:
determining a plurality of power transfer amounts corresponding to a plurality of power transfer periods based on measurements at the Power Transmitter; and
calculating the total amount of energy transferred based on a sum of each of the plurality of power transfer amounts multiplied by a corresponding one of the plurality of power transfer periods.
In the same field of endeavor, KRENZ teaches a method wherein determining the total amount of energy transferred includes:
determining a plurality of power transfer amounts corresponding to a plurality of power transfer periods based on measurements at the Power Transmitter (see KRENZ, para. [0044]); and
calculating the total amount of energy transferred based on a sum of each of the plurality of power transfer amounts multiplied by a corresponding one of the plurality of power transfer periods (see KRENZ, para. [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE and HIRAMATSU with the teaching of KRENZ in order to determine and monitor energy accumulation and transfer (see KRENZ, para. [0005]).
Regarding claim 22, the dependent claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claim 7.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU is silent to teaching that further comprising determining the threshold amount based, at least in part, on the energy requirement multiplied by a factor variable.
In the same field of endeavor, KRENZ teaches a method comprising determining the threshold amount based, at least in part, on the energy requirement multiplied by a factor variable (see KRENZ, para. [012-125]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE and HIRAMATSU with the teaching of KRENZ in order to determine and monitor energy accumulation and transfer (see KRENZ, para. [0005]).
Regarding claim 27, the dependent claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claim 15.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 23 and 24 bis/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE, HIRAMATSU and KRENZ as applied to claims 6 and 21 above, and further in view of Van Wageningen (US 20150263532 A1; hereinafter “VAN WAGENINGEN”)
Regarding claim 8, the combination LEE, HIRAMATSU and KRENZ teaches the method of claim 7.
The combinate of LEE, HIRAMATSU and KRENZ is silent to teaching that wherein determining the plurality of power transfer amounts includes, for each power transfer amount of the plurality of power transfer amounts:
measuring a voltage and a current associated with an inverter coupled to a primary coil of the Power Transmitter during a corresponding power transfer period;
calculating an input power based on the voltage and the current during the corresponding power transfer period; and
determining the power transfer amount based on a difference between the input power and an expected power transmission loss associated with the Power Transmitter.
In the same field of endeavor, VAN WAGENINGEN teaches a method wherein determining the plurality of power transfer amounts includes, for each power transfer amount of the plurality of power transfer amounts (see VAN WAGENINGEN, para. [0237):
measuring a voltage and a current associated with an inverter coupled to a primary coil of the Power Transmitter during a corresponding power transfer period (see VAN WAGENINGEN, para. [0034]);
calculating an input power based on the voltage and the current during the corresponding power transfer period (see VAN WAGENINGEN, para. [0121]); and
determining the power transfer amount based on a difference between the input power and an expected power transmission loss associated with the Power Transmitter (see VAN WAGENINGEN, para. [0034,240-242]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE, HIRAMATSU and KRENZ with the teaching of VAN WAGENINGEN in order to increase power and efficiency while ensuring meeting of standard requirements (see VAN WAGENINGEN, para. [0011-12]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of LEE, HIRAMATSU, KRENZ and VAN WAGENINGEN teaches the method of claim 8, wherein one or more power transfer periods are consecutive time periods and each of the one or more power transfer periods includes one or more half cycles of an alternating current (AC) power supply coupled to the inverter (see VAN WAGENINGEN, para. [0114]).
Regarding claims 23 and 24, the dependent claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claims 6-9, respectively.
Claim(s) 16 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE and HIRAMATSU as applied to claims 1 and 17 above, and further in view of Kwon et al. (US 20210296938 A1; hereinafter “KWON”).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of LEE and HIRAMATSU is silent to teaching that further comprising determining the threshold amount based, at least in part, on a configurable offset value.
In the same field of endeavor, KWON teaches a method comprising determining the threshold amount based, at least in part, on a configurable offset value (see KWON, para. [0170,178,203]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of LEE and HIRAMATSU with the teaching of KWON in order to improve charging object detection and improve wireless power transfer efficiency (see KWON, para. [0013-14]).
Regarding claim 28, the dependent claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claim 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Agrawal et al. (US 20210143688 A1) and Bhandarkar (US 20230024604 A1) teach wireless power transfer systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEN WU HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7852. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/WEN W HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights