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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 08/18/2025. Claims 1-14 and 16-18 are pending. Claim 15 has been cancelled. Claim 18 has been added. Claims 1, 6, 7, 8, and 17 have been amended. The specification and drawings have been amended. The objections to the claims, specification, and drawings, the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) rejections have been withdrawn in light of the instant amendments. This action is made final, as necessitated by amendment.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments directed to the amended subject matter has been considered and addressed as detailed below under Claim Rejections.
Regarding the interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), Examiner would like to note that Applicant has stated they removed “information recording apparatus” from claim 17. However, the “information recording apparatus” is still in claim 17 and has not been removed.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location the power transmitter supporting a power receiver for inductive charging” is missing a comma, and should be “a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location, the power transmitter supporting a power receiver for inductive charging”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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) 1-6, 8-9, 12, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moghe (US 20190039470 A1) in view of Yoon (US 20200198489).
Regarding claim 1, Moghe teaches an automated valet parking method, the automated valet parking method comprising:
selecting a parking space based on vehicle information on a specification of a vehicle supporting automated valet parking (par. 38-42, "During operation, vehicle 160 may send data regarding the vehicle characteristics to service 170 and/or RSU 150 for further processing. Example vehicle characteristics 302 may include...Make, model, and/or options of vehicle 160—this information can be used to determine the specific charging capabilities of vehicle 160 from the factory"), wherein a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location (par. 27, "other implementations provide for coils 164 to be embedded into a parking lot, drive-thru, driveway, or any other location at which vehicle 160 may be located."; abstract, the system identifies available charging coils and controls the vehicle to their location), the power transmitter supporting a power receiver for inductive charging, the power receiver for inductive charging being mounted in the vehicle (par. 14, "Each of the one or more autonomous vehicles is equipped with a vehicle-based charging coil configured to receive electrical power from a ground-based charging coil of a wireless power transfer (WPT) system.");
receiving information indicating the predetermined installation location of the power transmitter from the power transmitter installed in the selected parking space (par. 54, “charging information 304 may indicate to vehicle 160 the lane in which coil 164 is situated and potentially the proper position for vehicle 160 within that lane.”; Fig. 3A-3C);
and adjusting a position of the vehicle based on positional misalignment information such that a misalignment amount of an installation position of the power receiver with respect to an installation location of the power transmitter becomes smaller, the vehicle being guided to the predetermined installation location of the power transmitter, the positional misalignment information indicating the misalignment amount of the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation location of the power transmitter (par. 55, "including alignment information in charging information 304 allows vehicle 160 to be directed towards the proper lane and alignment, for maximum charging. For example, charging information 304 may indicate that vehicle 160 should drive ten inches to the right of lane center, to maximize the overlap, if coil 164 is six inches to the right of the center of the lane and coil 162 is four inches to the left of the center of vehicle 160.”).
Although Moghe teaches a system in which the charging coils are places along a travelling road, they do explicitly state that this technology could be used with parking lots as well (par. 27). Additionally, such parking lot systems that facilitate vehicles to charging stations are well known in the art, such as Yoon. Instead of selecting a parking space with a charging, Moghe selects a route that travels along roads with charging capability (par. 98). The alterations necessary for Moghe’s system to be used in a parking lot would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Yoon teaches selecting a parking space (par. 28, target position) based on vehicle information (par. 67, vehicle qualification information) on a specification of a vehicle supporting automated valet parking (par. 35 and Fig. 1, “The autonomous valet parking apparatus 200 refers to a vehicle that can perform autonomous valet parking”), wherein a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location (par. 28, “the “target position” refers to a wireless-rechargeable parking slot equipped with a wireless charging system for wirelessly recharging a power source of a vehicle”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moghe to incorporate the teachings of Yoon in order to lower the risk of a collision in the parking lot while drivers attempt to park in their desired parking space and to lessen the work load on the driver (par. 4).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe further teaches the vehicle information is information on a charging standard for the power receiver (par. 38-42, "During operation, vehicle 160 may send data regarding the vehicle characteristics to service 170 and/or RSU 150 for further processing. Example vehicle characteristics 302 may include...Make, model, and/or options of vehicle 160—this information can be used to determine the specific charging capabilities of vehicle 160 from the factory").
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe further teaches the vehicle information is information on the installation position of the power receiver (par. 43, " Coil information for vehicle 160—this information may include data regarding the physical dimensions of vehicle-based charging coil 162 and/or the location of coil 162 on vehicle 160").
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe further teaches the vehicle information is information on a vehicle height of the vehicle (par. 38-42, "During operation, vehicle 160 may send data regarding the vehicle characteristics to service 170 and/or RSU 150 for further processing. Example vehicle characteristics 302 may include...Make, model, and/or options of vehicle 160—this information can be used to determine the specific charging capabilities of vehicle 160 from the factory"—the type of vehicle would indicate the height of the vehicle; par. 43, "the information regarding coil 162 can also indicate the height of coil 162 relative to the ground").
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe further teaches the vehicle information is information on a size of the vehicle ((par. 38-42, "During operation, vehicle 160 may send data regarding the vehicle characteristics to service 170 and/or RSU 150 for further processing. Example vehicle characteristics 302 may include...Make, model, and/or options of vehicle 160—this information can be used to determine the specific charging capabilities of vehicle 160 from the factory"—the type of vehicle would indicate the size of the vehicle).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe further teaches the vehicle is caused to adjust the position of the vehicle such that the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation location of the power transmitter is within a predetermined range (par. 55, "including alignment information in charging information 304 allows vehicle 160 to be directed towards the proper lane and alignment, for maximum charging. For example, charging information 304 may indicate that vehicle 160 should drive ten inches to the right of lane center, to maximize the overlap, if coil 164 is six inches to the right of the center of the lane and coil 162 is four inches to the left of the center of vehicle 160.").
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe fails to teach based on service information indicating a content of a service, a parking space capable of providing the service is selected as the selected parking space, the service being associated with the automated valet parking and being requested by a user.
However, Yoon teaches based on service information indicating a content of a service, a parking space capable of providing the service is selected as the selected parking space, the service being associated with the automated valet parking and being requested by a user (par. 83, “When the electric vehicle arrives at a drop-off zone, it is determined whether the electrical charging of the electric vehicle is needed or not. The determination is made by the driver of the electric vehicle”; par. 84, “When it is determined that the charging of the electric vehicle is desired, the electric vehicle moves to the wireless charging service zone along a route denoted by (1) in FIG. 8”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to further incorporate the teachings of Yoon in order to lower the risk of a collision in the parking lot while drivers attempt to park in their desired parking space and to lessen the work load on the driver (par. 4).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe further teaches route information indicating a traveling route is generated and transmitted to the vehicle to thereby cause the vehicle to travel along the traveling route in a parking lot, the traveling route being a traveling route between a predetermined position in the parking lot and a position of the parking space having been selected (par. 14, "The device, based on the received vehicle characteristic data, identifies one or more ground-based charging coils of the WPT system available to provide power to the one or more autonomous vehicles. The device determines driving parameters for the one or more vehicles to optimize power transfer from the one or more ground-based charging coils to the one or more vehicles. The device sends the driving parameters to the one or more vehicles to control movement of the one or more vehicles."), the parking lot being a parking lot in which the vehicle is parked (par. 27, "other implementations provide for coils 164 to be embedded into a parking lot, drive-thru, driveway, or any other location at which vehicle 160 may be located.").
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Moghe fails to teach in a case where there is a plurality of the parking spaces, one of the plurality of parking spaces is selected based on fullness/vacancy information including vacancy information on the plurality of parking spaces.
However, Yoon teaches in a case where there is a plurality of the parking spaces, one of the plurality of parking spaces is selected based on fullness/vacancy information including vacancy information on the plurality of parking spaces (par. 49, “the infrastructure searches for empty parking slots among all the parking slots in the parking lot and assigns a suitable empty parking slot among the empty parking slots to the vehicle”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to further incorporate the teachings of Yoon in order to lower the risk of a collision in the parking lot while drivers attempt to park in their desired parking space and to lessen the work load on the driver (par. 4).
Regarding claim 17, Moghe teaches an automated valet parking system, comprising one or more information processing apparatuses (Fig. 2, processor 220) and a memory (Fig. 2, memory 240) that records information for executing an operation in the one or more information processing apparatuses, wherein:
a parking space is selected based on vehicle information on a specification of a vehicle supporting automated valet parking (par. 38-42, "During operation, vehicle 160 may send data regarding the vehicle characteristics to service 170 and/or RSU 150 for further processing. Example vehicle characteristics 302 may include...Make, model, and/or options of vehicle 160—this information can be used to determine the specific charging capabilities of vehicle 160 from the factory"), wherein a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location (par. 27, "other implementations provide for coils 164 to be embedded into a parking lot, drive-thru, driveway, or any other location at which vehicle 160 may be located."; abstract, the system identifies available charging coils and controls the vehicle to their location), the power transmitter supporting a power receiver for inductive charging, the power receiver for inductive charging being mounted in the vehicle (par. 14, "Each of the one or more autonomous vehicles is equipped with a vehicle-based charging coil configured to receive electrical power from a ground-based charging coil of a wireless power transfer (WPT) system."),
information indicating the predetermined installation location of the power transmitter is received from the power transmitter installed in the selected parking space (par. 54, “charging information 304 may indicate to vehicle 160 the lane in which coil 164 is situated and potentially the proper position for vehicle 160 within that lane.”; Fig. 3A-3C);
and a position of the vehicle is adjusted based on positional misalignment information such that a misalignment amount of an installation position of the power receiver with respect to an installation location of the power transmitter becomes smaller, the vehicle being guided to the predetermined installation position of the power transmitter, the positional misalignment information indicating the misalignment amount of the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation location of the power transmitter (par. 55, "including alignment information in charging information 304 allows vehicle 160 to be directed towards the proper lane and alignment, for maximum charging. For example, charging information 304 may indicate that vehicle 160 should drive ten inches to the right of lane center, to maximize the overlap, if coil 164 is six inches to the right of the center of the lane and coil 162 is four inches to the left of the center of vehicle 160.”).
Although Moghe teaches a system in which the charging coils are places along a travelling road, they do explicitly state that this technology could be used with parking lots as well (par. 27). Additionally, such parking lot systems that facilitate vehicles to charging stations are well known in the art, such as Yoon. Instead of selecting a parking space with a charging, Moghe selects a route that travels along roads with charging capability (par. 98). The alterations necessary for Moghe’s system to be used in a parking lot would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Yoon teaches selecting a parking space (par. 28, target position) based on vehicle information (par. 67, vehicle qualification information) on a specification of a vehicle supporting automated valet parking (par. 35 and Fig. 1, “The autonomous valet parking apparatus 200 refers to a vehicle that can perform autonomous valet parking”), wherein a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location (par. 28, “the “target position” refers to a wireless-rechargeable parking slot equipped with a wireless charging system for wirelessly recharging a power source of a vehicle”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moghe to incorporate the teachings of Yoon in order to lower the risk of a collision in the parking lot while drivers attempt to park in their desired parking space and to lessen the work load on the driver (par. 4).
Regarding claim 18, Moghe teaches an automated valet parking system, comprising:
a parking space selection controller (Fig. 2, processor 220) that selects a parking space based on vehicle information on a specification of a vehicle supporting automated valet parking (par. 38-42, "During operation, vehicle 160 may send data regarding the vehicle characteristics to service 170 and/or RSU 150 for further processing. Example vehicle characteristics 302 may include...Make, model, and/or options of vehicle 160—this information can be used to determine the specific charging capabilities of vehicle 160 from the factory");
a power transmitter installed in the selected parking space at a predetermined location (par. 27, "other implementations provide for coils 164 to be embedded into a parking lot, drive-thru, driveway, or any other location at which vehicle 160 may be located."; abstract, the system identifies available charging coils and controls the vehicle to their location);
a power receiver for inductive charging, mounted in the vehicle and configured to receive power from the power transmitter (par. 14, "Each of the one or more autonomous vehicles is equipped with a vehicle-based charging coil configured to receive electrical power from a ground-based charging coil of a wireless power transfer (WPT) system.");
a receiver configured to receive from the power transmitter, information indicating the predetermined installation location of the power transmitter installed in the selected parking space (par. 54, “charging information 304 may indicate to vehicle 160 the lane in which coil 164 is situated and potentially the proper position for vehicle 160 within that lane.”; Fig. 3A-3C);
and a vehicle controller that adjusts a position of the vehicle based on positional misalignment information such that a misalignment amount of an installation position of the power receiver with respect to an installation location of the power transmitter becomes smaller, the vehicle being guided to the predetermined installation location of the power transmitter, the positional misalignment information indicating the misalignment amount of the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation location of the power transmitter (par. 55, "including alignment information in charging information 304 allows vehicle 160 to be directed towards the proper lane and alignment, for maximum charging. For example, charging information 304 may indicate that vehicle 160 should drive ten inches to the right of lane center, to maximize the overlap, if coil 164 is six inches to the right of the center of the lane and coil 162 is four inches to the left of the center of vehicle 160.”).
Although Moghe teaches a system in which the charging coils are places along a travelling road, they do explicitly state that this technology could be used with parking lots as well (par. 27). Additionally, such parking lot systems that facilitate vehicles to charging stations are well known in the art, such as Yoon. Instead of selecting a parking space with a charging, Moghe selects a route that travels along roads with charging capability (par. 98). The alterations necessary for Moghe’s system to be used in a parking lot would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Yoon teaches selecting a parking space (par. 28, target position) based on vehicle information (par. 67, vehicle qualification information) on a specification of a vehicle supporting automated valet parking (par. 35 and Fig. 1, “The autonomous valet parking apparatus 200 refers to a vehicle that can perform autonomous valet parking”), wherein a power transmitter is installed in the parking space at a predetermined location (par. 28, “the “target position” refers to a wireless-rechargeable parking slot equipped with a wireless charging system for wirelessly recharging a power source of a vehicle”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moghe to incorporate the teachings of Yoon in order to lower the risk of a collision in the parking lot while drivers attempt to park in their desired parking space and to lessen the work load on the driver (par. 4).
Claim(s) 10 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moghe in view of Yoon, and further in view of Saito (US 20110127944).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1.
Moghe further teaches the storage battery for traveling being mounted in the vehicle (par. 14, "Each of the one or more autonomous vehicles is equipped with a vehicle-based charging coil configured to receive electrical power from a ground-based charging coil of a wireless power transfer (WPT) system.").
Both Moghe and Yoon fail to teach before charging to the vehicle is started, it is determined, based on state-of-charge configuration information for configuring a target state of charge for a storage battery for traveling, whether a state of charge of the storage battery for traveling reaches the target state of charge until a time at which the vehicle exits the parking space, and in a case where the state of charge does not reach the target state of charge, another parking space instead of the parking space is selected, the other parking space being a parking space at which a charger with a wired system is installed.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Saito teaches before charging to the vehicle is started, it is determined, based on state-of-charge configuration information for configuring a target state of charge for a storage battery for traveling, whether a state of charge of the storage battery for traveling reaches the target state of charge until a time at which the vehicle exits the parking space (par. 105 and Fig. 1, “The parking space instruction means 34 detects that the maximum charging capacity of the on-vehicle battery 41 mounted on the arriving electric vehicle 4X is within which charging capacity maximum range”), and in a case where the state of charge does not reach the target state of charge, another parking space instead of the parking space is selected (par. 106 and Fig. 1, “The parking space instruction means 34 instructs the arriving electric vehicle 4X to move to and to be parked at the empty parking space 21X having the charging capacity maximum range in which the maximum charging capacity of the on-vehicle battery 41 mounted on the arriving electric vehicle 4X is present”), the other parking space being a parking space at which a charger with a wired system is installed.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to incorporate the teachings of Saito to add selecting a parking space with a wired charger installed when it has been determined that the vehicle will not reach the target state of charge. It is obvious that a driver of an electric vehicle would want their vehicle to be adequately charged when they plan to depart from the parking lot. Furthermore, by letting the system determine when faster charging is required, vehicles that do not require a faster charger to be adequately charged will not use parking spaces with faster chargers and free them up for those that do require a faster charger. Saito states, “According to the parking state detection means of the present invention, because the charging devices of the parking spaces have a different charging performance, it is possible to decrease the total maximum capacity of the power source capable of supplying electric power to the charging devices mounted on the parking spaces” (par. 29). Adding this feature of Saito would allow Moghe’s system to work more efficiently. In terms of selecting a parking spot with a wired charger, it is well-known in the art that a wired charger would have the capability of a faster charge than a wireless charger. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to conclude that Saito’s higher ranked parking spaces could be equipped with wired chargers.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon and Saito teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 10. Moghe further teaches a configuration operation of the target state of charge is received from a user (par. 105-109, "the WPT system may offer different options to the driver of vehicle 160 as part of driving parameters 802 that can be selected. These charging options may be based on the specific goal(s) of the driver of vehicle 160 such as, but not limited to, any or all of the following: have at least M % full battery when arriving at a specific destination, assure that the battery of vehicle 160 never falls below B % full level on the entire trip, arrive at the destination by time T and, therefore, drive faster to arrive in time and be willing to pay extra to be able to support the higher speed to arrive in time, stop at a static charging station if needed to charge.").
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moghe in view of Yoon, and further in view of Won (KR 102228950).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1.
Both Moghe and Yoon fail to teach in a case where information indicating that charging using a wired charger is not wished is received, the parking space is selected, and in a case where information indicating that charging using the wired charger is wished is received, a parking space at which the wired charger is installed is selected.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Won teaches in a case where information indicating that charging using a wired charger is not wished is received, the parking space is selected (par. 69, “When the user selects the condition of "Use of the slow charger", route guidance information so that the vehicle can move to the acquired parking spot by obtaining an empty parking spot in the order of identification number among the identification numbers for parking spots where the slow charger can be used”), and in a case where information indicating that charging using the wired charger is wished is received, a parking space at which the wired charger is installed is selected (par. 68, “When the user selects the condition of "Use of the fast charger," route guidance information so that the vehicle can move to the acquired parking spot by acquiring an empty parking spot in the order of identification number among the identification numbers for parking spots where the quick charger can be used”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to incorporate the teachings of Won to add giving the user an option of the type of charger to use. Giving the user the ability to specify certain conditions for a parking space, and then to guide them to that parking space, is for user convenience (par. 1-2). Additionally, as some electric vehicles are only able to charge either wirelessly or wired, but not both, it would be obvious to give the user the ability to specify which kind of charger they require. Users would be able to exercise more freedom by having the choice of which charger to use.
Claim(s) 7 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moghe in view of Yoon, and further in view of Ichikawa (US 20130030615).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Both Moghe and Yoon fail to teach in a case where the installation position of the power receiver is misaligned with the installation location of the power transmitter after the vehicle starts parking toward the installation location of the power transmitter based on alignment information, the vehicle is caused to adjust the position of the vehicle by transmission of the positional misalignment information to the vehicle, the alignment information indicating the installation location of the power transmitter, the positional misalignment information indicating the misalignment amount of the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation location of the power transmitter.
However, Ichikawa teaches in a case where the installation position of the power receiver is misaligned with the installation location of the power transmitter after the vehicle starts parking toward the installation location of the power transmitter based on alignment information (par. 82 and Fig. 8, step S40), the vehicle is caused to adjust the position of the vehicle by transmission of the positional misalignment information to the vehicle (par. 83 and Fig. 8, step S50), the alignment information indicating the installation location of the power transmitter, the positional misalignment information indicating the misalignment amount of the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation location of the power transmitter (par. 67, “vehicle ECU 430 estimates the amount of positional deviation (amount of lateral deviation in the direction horizontal to the road surface) between power transmission unit 220 and power reception unit 110 based on the detected value for voltage VH”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to incorporate the teachings of Ichikawa to add in a case where the installation position of the power receiver is misaligned with the installation position of the power transmitter after the vehicle starts parking toward the installation position of the power transmitter based on alignment information, the vehicle is caused to adjust the position of the vehicle by transmission of the positional misalignment information to the vehicle, the positional misalignment information indicating the misalignment amount of the installation position of the power receiver with respect to the installation position of the power transmitter. Ichikawa states, “when an electric power feeding method of non-contact type such as resonance is used to feed electric power from a power feeding apparatus to a vehicle, parking accuracy of the vehicle with respect to the power feeding apparatus is important in order to improve power feeding efficiency” (par. 9). It would have been obvious for Moghe in view of Yoon to improve their invention by ensuring that driver’s electric vehicles would get the most efficient charge.
Regarding claim 13 The combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 1. Both Moghe and Yoon fail to teach the positional misalignment information is generated by a position adjuster and transmitted to the vehicle, the position adjuster being included in the power transmitter.
However, from the same field of endeavor, Ichikawa teaches the positional misalignment information is generated by a position adjuster and transmitted to the vehicle (par. 53, “Voltage sensor 190 detects a voltage VH between rectifier 140 and DC/DC converter 142, and outputs the detected value to control device 180”; par. 76 and Fig. 4, “Vehicle control unit 470 estimates the amount of positional deviation of power reception unit 110 with respect to power transmission unit 220 based on the power receiving situation (voltage VH) of power reception unit 110”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to incorporate the teachings of Ichikawa to add a position adjuster. Ichikawa states, “when an electric power feeding method of non-contact type such as resonance is used to feed electric power from a power feeding apparatus to a vehicle, parking accuracy of the vehicle with respect to the power feeding apparatus is important in order to improve power feeding efficiency” (par. 9). It would have been obvious for Moghe to improve their invention by ensuring that driver’s electric vehicles would get the most efficient charge.
Moghe as modified by Yoon and Ichikawa does not teach the position adjuster being included in the power transmitter. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have placed the position adjuster on the power transmitter. Doing so would not have changed the function or capability of the position adjuster to guide the vehicle in alignment. Reversal, duplication, or rearrangement of parts are generally not patentably distinguishable from a prior art device with both functioning in the same manner. Ichikawa’s invention relates to adjusting an electric vehicle so that a receiver on the vehicle and a transmitter are aligned, the adjustments being based on the amount of current of the transmitter and receiver (Figures 5-6 illustrate how the voltages are affected by the amount of positional deviation). Changing the location of the position adjuster would not have changed the function or capability of the position adjuster to guide the vehicle in alignment.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon teaches the automated valet parking method according to claim 13. Both Moghe and Yoon fail to teach the positional misalignment information is generated by the position adjuster based on transmission power data and reception power data, the transmission power data being transmitted from the power transmitter, the reception power data being transmitted from the vehicle by radio communication.
However, from the same field of endeavor, Ichikawa teaches the positional misalignment information is generated by the position adjuster based on transmission power data (par. 68 and Fig. 5, output voltage) and reception power data (par. 36, power receiving situation), the transmission power data being transmitted from the power transmitter (par. 68 and Fig. 5, output voltage), the reception power data being transmitted from the vehicle by radio communication (par 53, “Voltage sensor 190 detects a voltage VH between rectifier 140 and DC/DC converter 142, and outputs the detected value to control device 180”). Ichikawa does not explicitly teach the data is transmitted by radio communication. However, it would have been obvious to use a mode such as radio in order to transmit data.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Moghe in view of Yoon to incorporate the teachings of Ichikawa to add the transmission power data and reception power data. Ichikawa states, “when an electric power feeding method of non-contact type such as resonance is used to feed electric power from a power feeding apparatus to a vehicle, parking accuracy of the vehicle with respect to the power feeding apparatus is important in order to improve power feeding efficiency” (par. 9). It would have been obvious for Moghe to improve their invention by ensuring that driver’s electric vehicles would get the most efficient charge.
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 MINATO LEE HORNER whose telephone number is (571)272-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/M.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665