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
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 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(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Brown (US3989994) in view of Landis (US6967462).
RE 1, 14, Brown discloses a method and an apparatus, comprising a first control system (64, Fig 3) configured to output a first energy transmission signal (48, Fig 4); a first energy transmission system (50 with 56/60) coupled to the first control system and configured to: receive the first energy transmission signal (34); obtain, based on the first energy transmission signal, a second energy transmission signal; and output the second energy transmission signal (32); and a second energy transmission system (52) coupled to the first energy transmission system and configured to receive the second energy transmission signal (full disclosure describing the cascaded microwave-energy transmission structure).
Brown fails to disclose wherein the first energy transmission system and the second energy transmission system are configured to transmit the first energy transmission signal and the second energy transmission signal to a target device.
However, Landis teaches wireless transmission of microwave energy to an electronic target device (102/230) for charging power from microwave array emitters (106a-c/204) (Fig 1a, 2a, full disclosure).
Given the teachings of Landis, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and apparatus of Brown with employing the cascaded microwave energy transmission systems for transmitting microwave energy towards target device as charging power.
Doing so would provide wireless operating or charging power using known phased microwave energy from the cascaded systems to the target device for conversion into useful electrical power for the target device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-13, 15-20 are 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: none of the cited prior art disclose, teach, suggest at least the first power divider divides the first energy transmission signal into the second energy transmission signal and a third energy transmission signal, wherein the third energy transmission signal supplies power to the target device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christle I. Marshall whose telephone number is (571) 270-3086. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday 7:30AM - 4:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Paik can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Christle I Marshall/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
