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 .
This office action is responsive to the application filed 10/04/2023 which claims 1-12 have been presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/04/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 7-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 7, substitute “can be” with – are – (see page 19, line 6); and “can be” with – is – (see page 19, line 8).
Claim 8 is objected to since it depends from an objected claim.
Re claim 9, insert “plurality of” before “voltage regulators”.
Re claim 10, substitute “all voltage regulators” with -- the plurality of voltage regulators”.
Re claim 11, insert “plurality of” before “voltage regulators”.
Re claim 12, insert “plurality of” before “voltage regulators”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 7-12 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 7 recites the limitation "the power outputs" in lines 6, 9, and 10, respectively on page 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the power outputs" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 9-12 are rejected to since they are dependent upon a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 2, and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2004/0108835) (hereinafter referred to as Kim).
Re claims 1 and 2, Kim discloses a device for charging a battery pack, comprising:
a first battery compartment for accommodating a first battery pack (28);
a second battery compartment for accommodating a second battery pack (29);
a power supply (20) for connecting the device to a service voltage;
a first voltage regulator (21) having a first power output for providing a first maximum charging current;
a second voltage regulator (22) having a second power output for providing a second maximum charging current;
a switch arrangement (23, 24) configured to selectively connect the first battery compartment to only the first power output (21); and
wherein the switch arrangement (23, 24) comprises a plurality of switches. (See fig. 3; and paras. [0012]-[0019])
(Note: Since the details of the switch arrangement is written in an alternative form, the examiner is required to find prior art that meets one of the claim limitations. Therefore, the Kim reference teaches the claimed invention.)
Re claim 4, Kim discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the switch arrangement (23, 24) comprises a plurality of switches (23, 24), and wherein the switch arrangement (23, 24) is connected to a control unit (27), the control unit (27) being configured to control the plurality of switches (23, 24) of the switch arrangement (see fig. 3; and paras. [0012]-[0019]).
Re claim 5, Kim discloses the device according to claim 1,
wherein the switch arrangement (23, 24) comprises a plurality of switches (23, 24),
wherein the switch arrangement (23, 24) is connected to a control unit (27), wherein the control unit (27) is connected to the first battery compartment (28) and to the second battery compartment (292) via a communication connection (25, 26), and
wherein the communication connection (25, 26) is designed to transmit characteristics of the first battery pack (28) to the control unit (27) when the first battery pack is inserted into the first battery compartment (28) and to transmit characteristics of the second battery pack (29) to the control unit (27) when the second battery pack is inserted into the second battery compartment (29) (see fig. 3, para. [0012]).
Re claim 6, Kim discloses the device according to claim 5, wherein the control unit (27) is designed to control the switches (23, 24) of the switch arrangement (5) depending on the characteristics received via the communication connection from the first battery pack or the second battery pack (paras. [0009]-[0017]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is 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: the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach, a third switch that selectively connects the first power output to the second power output.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to the attached PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to APRIL A TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-2403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday between 9am-6pm.
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, STEVEN S PAIK can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/APRIL A TAYLOR/Examiner, Art Unit 2876
/THIEN M LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights