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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/03/2023 is compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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) 1-4, 6, 8, 10, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Labell et al. [US 2022/0055491].
With respect to claims 1 and 20, Labell discloses a charging apparatus [see Fig. 1], comprising: a support structure disposed at a height above a floor surface [rails 116 and 112]; a cable holder disposed on the support structure [130], wherein the cable holder comprises an electric cable [142]; an actuation mechanism coupled to the cable holder, wherein the actuation mechanism is configured to control a movement of the electric cable from the cable holder [132]; and a power supply equipment coupled to the actuation mechanism [170], wherein, the power supply equipment, the actuation mechanism and the cable holder are coupled to each other, to form a unitary structure that is configured to move on the support structure [120].
With respect to claim 2, Labell further discloses wherein the support structure is a guide rail, and the power supply equipment is an electric vehicle supply equipment, which is configured to move on the guide rail [112/116 are guides rails, 170 is charging circuitry for a vehicle].
With respect to claim 3, Labell further discloses wherein the cable holder is a pulley drive that is configured to reel the electric cable, wherein the actuation mechanism is configured to control the pulley drive to releasably reel the electric cable [130/132].
With respect to claim 4, Labell further discloses wherein, in a charging event, the actuation mechanism is configured to control the movement of the electric cable from the cable holder towards the floor surface [i.e. the vehicle is positioned below the charger so it has to descend to reach the vehicle].
With respect to claim 6, Labell further discloses wherein, based on a completion of a charging event, the actuation mechanism is configured to control the movement of the electric cable from the floor surface towards the cable holder [Fig 2 shows starting position where the cable is retracted].
With respect to claim 8, Labell further discloses wherein the cable holder further includes a handle, which is coupled to an end of the electric cable, the handle has an electric contact, which is configured to connect with a socket associated with a battery of a component, to further charge the component [see Fig. 4].
With respect to claim 10, Labell further discloses wherein, the power supply equipment is configured to activate the actuation mechanism, wherein, when activated, the unitary structure is moved from a first location of the floor surface to a second location of the floor surface, via the support structure [i.e. via rails 112 and 116].
With respect to claim 16, Labell further discloses a plurality of unitary structures disposed on the support structure, wherein, each unitary structure of the plurality of unitary structures is configured to charge each electric vehicle of a plurality of electric vehicles [Fig. 7].
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.
Claim(s) 5 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Labell et al. [US 2022/0055491] as applied above, and further in view of Penilla et al. [US 11,602,994].
With respect to claims 5 and 17, Labell further discloses wherein, in a charging event, the vehicle is configured to control a charging door of an electric vehicle to charge the vehicle [810] but fails to explicitly disclose it is the actuation mechanism (i.e. the plug side) that performs the control.
Penilla relates to automated charging of electric vehicles and teaches the actuation mechanism/plug side is configured to control a charging door of an electric vehicle, to charge the electric vehicle [claims 9, 15, and 17].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Labell such that the plug side is configured to open the door for the benefit of allowing the door to stay closed and therefore safe and protected for the longest amount of time until the plug is ready/close for insertion.
With respect to claim 18, Labell further discloses releasing the electric cable from the socket based on a completion of a charging event; and controlling the actuation mechanism to retract the electric cable towards the cable holder [Fig. 1 depicts the cord in the retracted position after/between charging vehicles].
With respect to claim 19, Labell further discloses wherein the charging door is one of: a lid of the socket of the electric vehicle or a garage door of the electric vehicle [Fig. 14].
Claim(s) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Labell et al. [US 2022/0055491] as applied above, and further in view of Bianco et al. [US 9,457,674].
With respect to claims 7 and 9, Label further disclose wherein the cable holder further includes a handle which is coupled to an end of the electric cable [i.e. the grasping portion of the connector], but fails to explicitly disclose the handle has a selection button, which is configured to control a movement of the electric cable, from the cable holder and/or a charging door.
Bianco relates to an overhead power cable for recharging of electric vehicles and teaches the connector end having a handle with selection buttons [100] to control the charging operation between the cord and the vehicle. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to include button to actuate the cord and for opening the charging door for the benefit of giving a user/mechanic physical control of the charging cord that is out of reach and for accessing the vehicles ports for charging and/or maintenance.
Claim(s) 11-12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Labell et al. [US 2022/0055491] as applied above, and further in view of Zhao et al. [US 2019/0061542].
With respect to claim 11, Labell further discloses wherein a first electric vehicle is disposed at the first location and a second electric vehicle is disposed at the second location [Fig. 7] but is not explicitly clear regarding wherein, based on a completion of a charging event for the first electric vehicle at the first location, the unitary structure is configured to move from the first location to the second location, via the support structure, to initiate another charging event for the second electric vehicle located at the second location.
Zhao relates to a power delivery system for electric vehicle charging involving a plurality of charging vehicles and teaches wherein based on a completion of a charging event the unitary structure moves from one vehicle at a first location to another in a second location [Figs 5-7].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Labell such that the system charges multiple vehicles for the benefit of enabling a more efficient system utilizing less parts by allowing one charger to recharging multiple vehicles.
With respect to claim 12, Zhao as applied above further discloses wherein the cable holder and the power supply equipment is separated by a first distance [i.e. charge controller 634 is separate from the cable holder 602/604], and the actuation mechanism is further configured to control the first distance between the cable holder and the power supply equipment [i.e. as the charging cord moves between the vehicles its distance relative to the charging controller 634 changes].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify Label such that the cable holder and charging supply/controller are separate for the benefit of allow for easier access to the charging circuitry, i.e. for maintenance.
With respect to claim 15, Bianco further discloses a plurality of cable holders and a plurality of actuation mechanisms, which are coupled to the power supply equipment, wherein each cable holder of the plurality of cable holders and corresponding actuation mechanism of the plurality of actuation mechanisms is configured to charge each electric vehicle of a plurality of electric vehicles [Fig. 11].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Labell such that the system charges multiple vehicles for the benefit of enabling a more efficient system utilizing less parts by allowing one charger to recharging multiple vehicles.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Labell et al. [US 2022/0055491] as applied above, and further in view of Zimmerman et al. [US 2024/0294081].
With respect to claim 14, Labell fails to explicitly disclose wherein the power supply equipment is configured to be inductively coupled to the support structure, and the actuation mechanism and the cable holder are configured to inductively receive electric power supply from the support structure. However, wireless power transfer is well-known in the art. For example, Zimmerman relates to charging electric vehicles and teaches inductive components coupled to a support structure to receive power [Fig. 1C, par. 0026-0028].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify Label such that the power supply equipment is connected via wireless/inductive power for the benefit of providing a wire-free power transfer method in the moving operation thereby decreasing the complexity/interference of the wiring.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if canceled and incorporated into independent claim 1 including all of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
With respect to claim 13, the prior art of record does not suggest or disclose the claimed combination of elements or steps as recited, most particularly the claimed, wherein a first electric vehicle is disposed at a first location of the floor surface and a second electric vehicle is disposed at a second location of the floor surface, wherein the first location and the second location are separated by a second distance, the actuation mechanism is further configured to control a movement of the cable holder on the support structure from the power supply equipment, such that, the first distance is equal to the second distance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL R PELTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/NATHANIEL R PELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights