Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/351,943

WIRELESS POWER REGULATION AND CONTROL USING A RESONANT INTERMEDIATE COIL

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Examiner
LY, XUAN
Art Unit
2836
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Auckland UniServices Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
453 granted / 531 resolved
+17.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
552
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
66.0%
+26.0% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 531 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Applicant’s response filed on 06/26/2025 has been entered and considered. Upon entering claims 32-40 and 48-51 were pending; claims 32, 33, 35, 38, and 40 have been amended; and claims 41-47 and 52 have been cancelled. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed on 06/26/2025 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection as further noted. 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. (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 32-33, 35, 38-40, 48-49, and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being participated by Covic et al. (WO2018026288). Regarding claim 32, Covic teaches An IPT system (see figure 4) comprising: an intermediate circuit (fig. 4@ Vp2, Iin2, Cp2, Ip2, Lp2, Rp2) of a first source type (Vp2, Iin2) adapted to be coupled to a primary circuit (fig. 4@ Vp1, Iin1, Cp1, Ip1, Lp1, Rp1) of a second source type (Vp1, Iin1); and a secondary circuit (fig. 4@ Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL) of either source type coupled to the intermediate circuit (Vp2, Iin2, Cp2, Ip2, Lp2, Rp2) and adapted to be coupled to the primary circuit (Vp1, Iin1, Cp1, Ip1, Lp1, Rp1); wherein the first and second source types are respectively voltage-sourced and current- sourced (Vp2, Iin2; Vp1, Iin1). Regarding claim 33, Covic teaches wherein the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL) comprises: a secondary coupler providing a coupler voltage, and a secondary parallel tuning network connected to the secondary coupler and providing from the coupler voltage a voltage source (see figure 4). Regarding claim 35, Covic teaches wherein the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL) comprises: a secondary coupler providing a coupler voltage, and a secondary series tuning network connected to the secondary coupler and providing from the coupler voltage a current source, (see figure 4). Regarding claim 38, Covic teaches wherein the intermediate circuit (Vp2, Iin2, Cp2, Ip2, Lp2, Rp2) has a position controllable relative to the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL), (see figure 4). Regarding claim 39, Covic teaches wherein the intermediate circuit (Vp2, Iin2, Cp2, Ip2, Lp2, Rp2) is adapted to be arranged proximate to the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL) relative to the primary circuit (Vp1, Iin1, Cp1, Ip1, Lp1, Rp1), (see figure 4). Regarding claim 40, Covic teaches wherein the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL) comprises: a secondary coupler providing a coupler voltage, and a secondary tuning network connected to the secondary coupler and providing from the coupler voltage a voltage source, the secondary tuning network comprising at least three components including at least one inductor (Rs1) and at least one capacitor (Cs1), (see figure 4). Regarding claim 48, Covic teaches wherein the intermediate circuit (Vp2, Iin2, Cp2, Ip2, Lp2, Rp2) is adapted to be coupled directly to the primary circuit (Vp1, Iin1, Cp1, Ip1, Lp1, Rp1) and is coupled directly to the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL), (see figure 4). Regarding claim 49, Covic teaches further comprising: the primary circuit (Vp1, Iin1, Cp1, Ip1, Lp1, Rp1), (see figure 4). Regarding claim 51, Covic teaches wherein the intermediate circuit (Vp2, Iin2, Cp2, Ip2, Lp2, Rp2) has a position controllable relative to the secondary circuit (Vs1, Is1, Ls1, Rs1, Cs1, RL), (see figure 4). 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. Claims 34, 36 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Covic et al. (WO2018026288) in view of Lin et al. (US 2018/0159382). Regarding claim 34, Covic teaches the IPT system above, but Covic does not explicitly teach wherein the secondary circuit further comprises: a regulator connected directly to the parallel tuning network and producing an open circuit thereacross. Lin teaches the secondary circuit further comprises: a regulator (fig. 6@ 50, 52) connected directly to the parallel tuning network and producing an open circuit thereacross (see figure 6 and par. [0036-0037). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Covic with the teachings of Lin by having a regulator connected directly to the parallel tuning network and producing an open circuit thereacross in order to provide a output power is applied to a load. Regarding claim 36, Covic teaches the IPT system above, but does not explicitly teach wherein the secondary circuit further comprises: a regulator connected directly to the secondary series tuning network and producing a short circuit thereacross. Lin teaches the secondary circuit further comprises: a regulator (fig. 6@ 50, 52) connected directly to the secondary series tuning network and producing a short circuit thereacross (see figure 6 and par. [0036-0037). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Covic with the teachings of Lin by having a regulator connected directly to the secondary series tuning network and producing a short circuit thereacross in order to provide a output power is applied to a load. Regarding claim 37, the combination teaches the regulator includes at least one of: an active rectifier (50, 52), (see par. [0036] “The ac voltage from coil B is converted into dc voltage in converter 50, the dc from converter 50 is converted into a different dc voltage in converter 52, whose output is applied to the load”; Lin). Claim 50 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Covic et al. (WO2018026288) in view of Li et al. (Analysis and Design of Load-Independent Output Current or Output Voltage of a Three-Coil Wireless Power Transfer System, IDS). Regarding claim 50, Covic teaches the IPT system above, but does not explicitly teach wherein the primary circuit comprises an inverter, a compensation network and a primary coupler. Li teaches the primary circuit (primary circuit with primary coil LP) comprises an inverter (fig. 2@ S1-S4), a compensation network (CP, RP, LP) and a primary coupler (see figure 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Covic with the teachings of Li by having the primary circuit comprises an inverter, a compensation network and a primary coupler in order to transmit energy with high efficiency, safety, and operational flexibility. 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 XUAN LY whose telephone number is (571)272-9885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm. 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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. /XUAN LY/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 /REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 26, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597777
POWER SUPPLY UNIT FOR EXPLOSION-PROOF APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597849
DRIVING DEVICE, SWITCHING POWER SUPPLY APPARATUS, AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587020
A POWER SUPPLY CIRCUIT AND A METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A POWER SUPPLY CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580411
MULTIFUNCTIONAL PORTABLE EMERGENCY POWER SUPPLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580387
POWER CONVERTER AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING POWER CONVERTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+6.1%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 531 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month