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 § 102
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.
Claim(s) 14, 19, 23, 26, 37, 39-42, and 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun et al (US 2019/0027792 A1).
Regarding claims 14 and 37, Sun et al teaches: A battery charging system and corresponding method (see Figs. 2, 8, 14a, 21 and 22), comprising: a first current source (conventional charging device 100) for charging a battery (300) that provides a direct current for charging the battery (see para. 0065, 0332 and 0333); and a second current source (variable frequency triggering oscillation charging device 200) for charging the battery (300) that provides an alternating current at a frequency of at least 5 KHz for charging the battery (see paras. 0018 and 0130-0132).
Regarding claim 19, Sun et al teaches: wherein the battery (300) comprises a lithium-ion cell (see para. 0123).
Regarding claim 39, Sun et al teaches: wherein within a charging period of the battery, a waveform of the alternating current has a first waveform shape at a first time (see, for example, T2 in Fig. 20) within the charging period and a second waveform shape at a second time (see, for example, T3 in Fig. 20) within the charging period (the change high frequency oscillation provides a different waveform shape than the middle frequency oscillation current).
Regarding claim 40, Sun et al teaches: wherein one of the first waveform shape and the second waveform shape is one of the following: a rectangular wave, a triangular wave, and a sinusoidal wave (a sinusoidal waveform shape is shown in Fig. 20).
Regarding claim 41, Sun et al teaches: wherein at least one of the first waveform shape (T2) and the second waveform shape has zero direct current (the waveform shape during at least T2 has zero direct current).
Regarding claims 23 and 42, Sun et al teaches: wherein the alternating current has a frequency of between 5 KHz and 100 KHz (see paras. 0018 and 0130-0132).
Regarding claims 26 and 45, Sun et al teaches: wherein a frequency of the alternating current is modulated in order to regulate a temperature associated with the battery (the system uses either the high frequency or middle frequency depending upon battery temperature, see para. 0123).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 24 and 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al (US 2019/0027792 A1).
Regarding claims 24 and 43, the teachings of Sun et al have been discussed above.
Sun et al does not specifically state that the alternating current has a frequency of at least 10 KHz.
However, Sun et al teaches that the particular operating frequency can be determined from the temperature and state of charge of the battery, the high frequency is a frequency that is higher than the middle frequency, and that the frequency ranges are not limited by the specific values mentioned in the examples (see paras. 0018 and 0130-0132).
Therefore, in view of the teachings of Sun et al, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the alternating current to have a frequency of at least 10 KHz, since Sun et al teaches that the particular frequency used is dependent upon at least the temperature and state of charge of the battery.
Claim(s) 15-18, 20-22, 27, 38 and 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al (US 2019/0027792 A1) in view of Liu et al (US 11,125,826 B2).
Regarding claims 15-18 and 38, the teachings of Sun et al have been discussed above.
Sun et al does not specifically teach: (claim 15) wherein the second current source comprises a switch-mode converter; (claims 16, 38) further comprising an energy storage device, and wherein: the switch-mode converter is coupled between the battery and the energy storage device, and is configured to transfer electrical energy from the battery to the energy storage device and vice versa; (claim 17) wherein the energy storage device is a capacitor; (claim 18) wherein the first current source comprises a switch-mode converter.
Liu et al teaches (see Fig. 1) a battery (103) charging system and method including a first current source (charger 105) than may be integrated with one or more second current sources (power converters 111) (see col. 3, line 35 – col. 4, line 28), where the first and second current sources may be any of a variety of types of switching power supplies, which typically include one or more switching devices and one or more energy storage elements, such as inductors or capacitors (see col. 3, lines 52-60 and col. 4, lines 9-16); (claim 15) wherein the second current source (one of power converters 111) comprises a switch-mode converter (a switching power supply, see col. 3, lines 53-57); (claims 16, 38) further comprising an energy storage device (for example, a capacitor), and wherein: the switch-mode converter is coupled between the battery (103) and the energy storage device, and is configured to transfer electrical energy from the battery to the energy storage device and vice versa; (claim 17) wherein the energy storage device is a capacitor (see col. 3, lines 55-57); (claim 18) wherein the first current source (105) comprises a switch-mode converter (a switching power supply, see col. 4, lines 11-14).
In view of the teachings of Liu et al, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to include with the system and method of Sun et al: (claim 15) wherein the second current source comprises a switch-mode converter; (claim 16, 38) further comprising an energy storage device, and wherein: the switch-mode converter is coupled between the battery and the energy storage device, and is configured to transfer electrical energy from the battery to the energy storage device and vice versa; (claim 17) wherein the energy storage device is a capacitor; (claim 18) wherein the first current source comprises a switch-mode converter; since this would provide greater control over the particular voltages used and switching power converters are known to be efficient.
Regarding claim 20, Sun et al as modified by Liu et al teaches: wherein within a charging period of the battery, a waveform of the alternating current has a first waveform shape at a first time (see, for example, T2 in Fig. 20) within the charging period and a second waveform shape at a second time (see, for example, T3 in Fig. 20) within the charging period (the change high frequency oscillation provides a different waveform shape than the middle frequency oscillation current).
Regarding claim 21, the teachings of Sun et al as modified by Liu et al have been discussed above. Sun et al as modified by Liu et al shows that the second waveform shape is a sinusoidal wave (a sinusoidal waveform shape is shown in Fig. 20 of Sun et al and Fig. 5A of Liu et al).
Sun et al as modified by Liu et al does not specifically teach wherein one of the first waveform shape and the second waveform shape is a rectangular wave.
However, rectangular waveforms were old and well known to those of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date. Furthermore, the selection of a particular waveform shape represents selecting from a limited number of known choices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the system and method as taught by Sun et al as modified by Liu et al, to include wherein one of the first waveform shape and the second waveform shape is a rectangular wave, since Liu et al teaches that the second current source may be any of a variety of types of switching power supplies and the selection of a power supply with a waveform shape of a rectangular wave would utilize simpler switching control as compared to a sinusoidal waveform. Furthermore, the selection of a particular waveform shape represents selecting from a limited number of known choices.
Regarding claim 22, Sun et al as modified by Liu et al teaches: wherein one of the first waveform shape and the second waveform shape is one of the following: a rectangular wave, a triangular wave, and a sinusoidal wave (a sinusoidal waveform shape is shown in Fig. 20).
Regarding claims 27 and 46, the teachings of Sun et al as modified by Liu et al have been discussed above. Sun et al as modified by Liu et al also teaches wherein at least one of the first current source and the second current source is configured to provide electrical energy to a system load (since the charging device 200 is connected in parallel with the load 500, the charging device 200 is configured to provide electrical energy to the load 500, see Figs. 8 and 14a of Sun et al).
Sun et al as modified by Liu et al, as applied above, does not show a device housing the battery.
However, Liu et al also teaches that charging systems and methods are used with devices that include a housing for the battery (see the portable electronic and computing devices discussed in col. 1, lines 5-10).
In view of the teachings of Liu et al, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to include with the system and method as taught by Sun et al as modified by Liu et al, a device housing the battery, since this is a common application of battery powered devices and the housing would provide protection for the battery and charging circuitry.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10 of the remarks, filed on June 11, 2026, with respect to the amendments made to claims 23, 24, 42 and 43 overcoming the 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) of claims 23, 24, 42 and 43 has been withdrawn.
It is also noted that, due to the amendments made to claims 25 and 44, the previous objection to these claims has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11-13 of the remarks, filed June 11, 2026, with respect to Sun et al failing to teach that the second current source provides an alternating current for charging the battery and for operation of a system load of the battery during discharging of the battery, as recited in claims 1 and 28, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejections of claims 1-13 and 28-36 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 14 of the remarks, filed June 11, 2026, with respect to Sun et al failing to teach that the direct current is dependent upon a power loss of the second current source, as recited in claims 25 and 44, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejection of claims 25 and 44 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed June 11, 2026, with respect to claims 14-24, 26, 27, 37-43, 45 and 46 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, with respect to claims 14 and 37, that Sun et al fails to teach a second current source for charging the battery that provides an alternating current at a frequency of at least 5 KHz for charging the battery, in combination with the other recitations of claims 14 and 37, particularly, the requirement that the same second current source supply the alternating current used both for charging and for operation of a system load (see page 11 of the remarks filed on June 11, 2026).
First, it is noted that claims 14 and 37 do not recite any system load or that the second current source is used both for charging and for operation of a system load.
Second, as discussed in the rejection above, Sun et al teaches a second current source (variable frequency triggering oscillation charging device 200) for charging the battery (300) that provides an alternating current at a frequency of at least 5 KHz for charging the battery (see paras. 0018 and 0130-0132). Thus, the teachings of Sun et al meet the claimed limitations.
Applicant argues that the variable frequency triggering oscillation charging device 200 is not analogous to the claimed second current source because it is a passive oscillation network that shapes current sourced from elsewhere and that the energy delivered to the battery 300 in Sun et al is supplied by the conventional charging device 100 (see pages 12-13 of the remarks filed on June 11, 2026).
It is noted that claims 14 and 37 do not recite any particular structure of the second current source. It is also noted that Applicant’s Fig. 1 shows a single DC INPUT and that the AC charging path 108 is powered internally to the device. In this way, it could also be said that Applicant’s AC charging path (the claimed second current source) shapes current sourced from the DC charging path (the claimed first current source). The claims do not require that the second current source is powered by a supply that is external to the system. Thus, the variable frequency triggering oscillation charging device 200 of Sun et al meets the claimed limitations.
Applicant argues, with respect to claims 26 and 45, that Sun et al switching between the high frequency or middle frequency depending upon battery temperature and switching between two discrete oscillation regimes is not the same as modulating a frequency of the alternating current to regulate battery temperature (see pages 14-15 of the remarks filed on June 11, 2026).
It is noted that claims 26 and 45 do not recite any particular manner of performing the frequency modulation or that there are more than two frequency regimes. Thus, the teaching in Sun et al of using a high or middle frequency depending upon the battery temperature meets the claimed limitations. A change in the frequency from high to middle or middle to high can be considered a modulation or control of the frequency in order to regulate a temperature associated with the battery.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references (see pages 15-16 of the remarks filed on June 11, 2026), the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Liu et al teaches that it is known to provide an electronic device 101 (Fig. 1) with a battery charger 105 (serving as a first current source) and a power converter 111 (serving as a second current source), and that the power converter may be any type of switching power supply, which typically include one or more energy storage elements and convert power to voltage and current levels that are suitable for various subsystems (see col. 3, line 35 – col. 4, line 28). Thus, Liu et al shows that the particular type of current source or power converter can be selected from known options, which are suitable to provide the desired voltage and/or current levels for the particular application. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would recognize that the type of power converter selected would allow greater control over the output current & voltage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 and 28-36 are allowed over the prior art of record.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record does not teach a battery charging system including a second current source for charging the battery that provides an alternating current for charging the battery and that provides electrical energy for operation of a system load of the battery during discharging of the battery, in combination with the other limitations recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 28, the prior art of record does not teach a method including charging the battery with a second current source that provides an alternating current for charging the battery and that provides electrical energy for operation of a system load of the battery during discharging of the battery, in combination with the other limitations recited in claim 28.
Claims 2-13 and 29-36 depend from claims 1 and 28, respectively, and are allowed for at least the same reasons.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 25 and 44 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 25 and 44, the prior art of record does not teach a system and method, respectively, wherein the direct current is dependent upon an amount of power loss of the second current source.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jared Fureman whose telephone number is (571)272-2391. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/JARED FUREMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights