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 § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jadidian et al. (US 10,418,863) in view of Do Nascimento, Jr. et al. (US 12459392).
Re claim 19:
Jadidian et al. teaches a system that moves underneath a car in a parking space to locate a charging port underneath the car, move horizontal and vertically, and making a charging connection. See figure 1 below.
PNG
media_image1.png
414
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jadidian et al. teaches (column 3, lines 33+):
“Charging device 20 may include wheels 24 or other structures that allow charging device 20 to travel along a surface such as surface 36. Surface 36 may be part of a garage, part of an outdoors roadway, or may be any other suitable path on which target device 14 and charging device 20 can travel. Motors in charging device 20 may be used to rotate and steer wheels 24 to move charging device 20 in a desired direction.
Computer-controlled motors or other actuators such as positioner 26 may be used in positioning structures within charging device 20. For example, positioner 26 may be used in positioning wireless power transfer element 28. Positioner 26 may position element 28 by tilting, raising and lowering, and/or rotating element 28. In configurations in which charging device 20 includes a battery for transferring power to target device 14, a battery loading and unloading device may be used to load and unload fresh batteries from a rack of available pre-charged batteries (as an example). A motor or other actuator may, if desired, be used to control cord management system 22 under control of control circuitry in charging device 20. System 22 may have a motorized rotating reel or other equipment that can be used to retract power cord 18 into charging device 20 or to deploy power cord 18 onto surface 36 (i.e., by feeding cord 18 out of an opening in charging device 20). The motors or other electrically controlled components that rotate and steer wheels 24 and otherwise control the movement of charging device 10 may sometimes be referred to herein as the movement system of charging device 20. Any suitable movement system may be used to control the movement of charging device 20 under the control of control circuitry within charging device 20 (e.g., a movement system based on electric drive motors for wheels 24 and a linear actuator coupled to a steering rack that turns wheels 24 in desired directions, etc.).“
Further (column 1) the system can either have a physical connector or a wireless connection. Thus, there is horizontal and then vertical movement as claimed.
Jadidian et al. is silent on power switching between multiple different power sources.
Do Nascimento, Jr. et al. teaches (column 36, lines 5+):
“FIG. 11 is a block diagram showing an exemplary source selection power distribution unit for a modular, multi-directional, smart EV charging station. The source selection power distribution unit (SS PDU) 1100 controls power routing between a plurality of power sources and one or more charging power distribution units (charging PDUs) 1200. In this embodiment, there are four power sources: a flywheel power smoothing system 1500, a generator interface 910 (which will be connected to an external generator 901 in actual usage), a backup battery system 1400, and a grid interface 920 comprising an AC/DC converter (which will be connected to the electrical grid 902 in actual usage), but in other embodiments there may be fewer power sources (e.g., grid power and battery power only) or more power sources (e.g., the ones shown plus additional generators). The flywheel power smoothing system 1500, backup battery system 1400, and grid interface 920 connected to the grid 902 can act as both power sources (when expending stored energy) and as power sinks (when storing energy from another of the power sources). In this embodiment, there are two charging PDUs, charging PDU B 1200a and charging PDU A 1200b, but in other embodiments there may be more of fewer charging PDUs. In some embodiments, the charging PDUs 1200 may be substituted for additional solid state switches 1121, physical relays 1122, and/or DC-to-DC transformers & isolators 1123 in the ATS 1120 of the SS PDU 1100. In operation, the source selection power distribution unit (SS PDU) 1100 receives power routing instructions from the master control unit 1000 and routes power between the power sources/sinks and the charging PDUs 1200 by operating a plurality of solid state switches and/or physical relays, depending on the power source, the current required, and the power quality requirements. The SS PDU 1100 may have internal algorithms programmed into its hardware, firmware, or a microcontroller to determine the optimal operation of the solid state switches and/or physical relays.”
See figure 11. There is a unit that switches between a wide range of power sources.
The motive for including this switching in Jadidian et al. is to optimize among power reliability, cost, availability, environmental friendliness and so on.
Re claim 20: It is reasonable trivial in software and obvious to allow the driver through their vehicle to choose the power source, because different power sources will likely have different associated costs.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-18 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
On page 8 of the 10/2/2026 communication, the applicant has written in part,
“Nonetheless, the Applicants have amended claim 1 to define that the charge transfer unit includes a stationary housing and that the controller is to adjust a horizontal position of the alignment system within the stationary housing. Neither Garofalo nor Jadidian teach such adjustment. Garofalo teaches adjusting the horizontal position via the articulating arm, which is external to the housing. Jadidian teaching adjusting the horizontal position by adjusting the position of the housing itself; i.e., the housing is not stationary.”
The examiner agrees. Based on these amendments, the rejection is withdrawn. The examiner found no new grounds for rejecting these claims.
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 DANIEL A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2392. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 9 AM to 5 PM.
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, Thomas K. Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/DANIEL A HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
