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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites , in lines 8-15 “== a controller configured to: switch the first and third legs so that the bidirectional charger outputs a power of the battery to the charge and discharge port when a first battery discharge mode is performed, and switch the second and third legs so that the bidirectional charger outputs the power of the battery to the discharge port when a second battery discharge mode is performed.” It is unclear from the recitation whether the controller turns ON or OFF the switching elements . The status of switches are not clear. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-10 inherit the same deficiencies of the claim it depends upon.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2020/0313441), hereinafter Yang, in view of Sun et al. (2020/0212817), hereinafter Sun.
As to claims 1-2 and 11, Yang discloses in figures 1-7B (see figure 5 below),
PNG
media_image1.png
319
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a battery charging device comprising [see figures 6 and 7A] : a bidirectional charger having a charge and discharge port [the device has discharge connection port that discharges the power of the battery to AC via input filter; see figure 6] and
wherein the bidirectional charger comprises a power factor correction circuit [PFC circuit (520); see figures 6 and 7; see also ¶0011] having a first leg, a second leg, and a third leg [see the legs in figure above]; and
a controller [hybrid control technique/controller is disclosed; see Abstract, ¶0040 and ¶0054[ configured to: switch the first and third legs so that the bidirectional charger outputs a power of the battery to the charge and discharge port when a first battery discharge mode is performed [during the first mode the battery is discharged to the AC power supply],
Yang does not disclose explicitly, a discharge port ad connected to a battery and switch the second and third legs so that the bidirectional charger outputs the power of the battery to the discharge port when a second battery discharge mode is performed.
Sun discloses in figure 6, a discharge port [discharge nodes connected to the battery 9] ad connected to a battery [battery (9)] and switch the second and third legs so that the bidirectional charger outputs the power of the battery to the discharge port when a second battery discharge mode is performed [during discharge mode the battery (8) is discharged to the battery (8)].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to have additional charging port in Yang’s apparatus as taught by Sun in order to extend low voltage battery life, and also optimize the efficiency of the charging/discharging system.
.
As to claim 2, Sun discloses in figure 5, wherein each output voltage of the charge and discharge port and the discharge port is preset to have the same frequency and phase in a simultaneous driving mode in which the first battery discharge mode and the second battery discharge mode are performed simultaneously [noted that Sun discloses using the same signal to charge the power grid and the low battery voltage].
As to claim 11, Yang discloses in figures 1-7, wherein the bidirectional charger further comprises a DC-DC converter [ element (330) DC/DC converter disclosed; see ¶0041] ; located between the power factor correction circuit [PFC Circuit] and the battery to be connected thereto [see figure 3 and also see ¶0041].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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 A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights