Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/22/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
4. Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an Abstract idea without significantly more.
5. Regarding claim 1, the limitation of “upon powering up or upon power reset, determining a voltage type associated with power received at the power receiver from a power transmitter; depending on the voltage type, selecting a power mode among a plurality of power modes that include fault managed power modes at different voltages and at least one non-fault managed power mode” is directed to an abstract idea of using mathematical function/algorithm, idea of “itself” and data processing. The step(s) of “determining a voltage type” using a generic voltage circuit and with use of controller is considered carrying out mathematical algorithm. The step of selecting a power mode based on determining voltage type is considered data processing and a mental process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitation of “entering a selected power mode based on the selecting” is considered post solution activity. The claimed limitations recite computer functions, generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technology (fault management in power area).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because using a transmitter, receiver, controller are recited at a high level of generality in order to facilitate the application of the abstract idea, and is/are recited as performing generic computer function routinely used in computer applications (see prior art of record: Goergen et al. (US 11,258,520), Figures 1-15, Abstract, P(61, 63); Tseng et al. (US 2022/0065933), Figures 1-5; Shea John J (WO 2022081778, provided in the IDS))).
6. Claims 2-9 are also rejected as they further limit claim 1.
7. Regarding claim 10, the limitation of “upon powering up of the power transmitter, determining a type of an input voltage to the power transmitter; depending at least on a type of the input voltage and an operational state of the power transmitter, selecting one of a plurality of power modes that include fault managed power modes at different voltages, at least one non-fault managed power mode and an alternating current (AC) power mode” is directed to an abstract idea of using mathematical function/algorithm, idea of “itself” and data processing. The step(s) of “determining type of an input voltage” using a generic voltage circuit and with use of controller is considered carrying out mathematical algorithm. The step of selecting a power mode based on determining voltage type is considered data processing and a mental process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitation of “transmitting power according to a selected power mode based on the selecting” is considered post solution activity. The claimed limitations recite computer functions, generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technology (fault management in power area).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because using a transmitter, receiver, controller are recited at a high level of generality in order to facilitate the application of the abstract idea, and is/are recited as performing generic computer function routinely used in computer applications (see prior art of record: Goergen et al. (US 11,258,520), Figures 1-15, Abstract, P(61, 63); Tseng et al. (US 2022/0065933), Figures 1-5; Shea John J (WO 2022081778, provided in the IDS))).
8. Claims 11-16 are also rejected as they further limit claim 10.
9. Regarding claim 17, the limitation of “a voltage sense circuit configured to determine a voltage type associated with power received on a cable from a power transmitter; and a controller coupled to the voltage sense circuit, wherein the controller is configured to select a power mode among a plurality of power modes that include fault managed power modes at different voltages and at least one non-fault managed power mode” is directed to an abstract idea of using mathematical function/algorithm, idea of “itself” and data processing. The step(s) of “determining a voltage type” using a generic voltage circuit and with use of controller is considered carrying out mathematical algorithm. The step of selecting a power mode based on determining voltage type is considered data processing and a mental process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitation of “and to cause the power receiver to enter a selected power mode” is considered post solution activity. The claimed limitations recite computer functions, generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technology (fault management in power area).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because using a voltage sense circuit, transmitter, receiver, controller are recited at a high level of generality in order to facilitate the application of the abstract idea, and is/are recited as performing generic computer function routinely used in computer applications (see prior art of record: Goergen et al. (US 11,258,520), Figures 1-15, Abstract, P(61, 63); Tseng et al. (US 2022/0065933), Figures 1-5; Shea John J (WO 2022081778, provided in the IDS))).
10. Claims 18-20 are also rejected as they further limit claim 17.
11. Regarding claim 21, the limitation of “a voltage sense circuit configured to sense an input voltage of input power to the power transmitter; and a controller coupled to the voltage sense circuit, wherein the controller is configured to, depending at least on a type of the input voltage and an operational state of the power transmitter, select one of a plurality of power modes to transmit power to a power receiver, the plurality of power modes including fault managed power modes at different voltages, at least one non-fault managed power mode and an alternating current (AC) power mode, depending at least on a type of the input voltage and an operational state of the power transmitter” is directed to an abstract idea of using mathematical function/algorithm, idea of “itself” and data processing. The step(s) of “determining a voltage type” using a generic voltage circuit and with use of controller is considered carrying out mathematical algorithm. The step of selecting a power mode based on determining voltage type is considered data processing and a mental process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claimed limitations recite computer functions, generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technology (fault management in power area).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because using a voltage sense circuit, transmitter, receiver, controller are recited at a high level of generality in order to facilitate the application of the abstract idea, and is/are recited as performing generic computer function routinely used in computer applications (see prior art of record: Goergen et al. (US 11,258,520), Figures 1-15, Abstract, P(61, 63); Tseng et al. (US 2022/0065933), Figures 1-5; Shea John J (WO 2022081778, provided in the IDS))).
12. Claims 22-25 are also rejected as they further limit claim 21.
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.
13. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
14. Claims 1, 10, 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Georgen et al. (US 11,258,520). (“Georgen”).
15. Regarding claim 1, Georgen teaches A method performed by a power receiver [Figures 1-15, a method performed by a power receiver is taught], comprising: upon powering up or upon power reset, determining a voltage type associated with power received at the power receiver from a power transmitter; depending on the voltage type, selecting a power mode among a plurality of power modes that include fault managed power modes at different voltages and at least one non-fault managed power mode; and entering a selected power mode based on the selecting [Figures 1-15, P(61, 63) teaches a power transmitter, power receiver, control circuit, voltage detection, fault detection and selecting a power mode (low power or high power)].
16. Regarding claim 10, Georgen teaches A method performed by a power transmitter to provide power to a power receiver [Figures 1-15, a method performed by a power transmitter is taught], comprising: upon powering up of the power transmitter, determining a type of an input voltage to the power transmitter; depending at least on a type of the input voltage and an operational state of the power transmitter, selecting one of a plurality of power modes that include fault managed power modes at different voltages, at least one non-fault managed power mode and an alternating current (AC) power mode; and transmitting power according to a selected power mode based on the selecting [Figures 1-15, P(61, 63) teaches a power transmitter, power receiver, control circuit, voltage detection, fault detection and selecting a power mode (low power or high power)].
17. Regarding claim 17, Georgen teaches A power receiver [Figures 1-15, a power receiver is shown] comprising: a voltage sense circuit configured to determine a voltage type associated with power received on a cable from a power transmitter; and a controller coupled to the voltage sense circuit, wherein the controller is configured to select a power mode among a plurality of power modes that include fault managed power modes at different voltages and at least one non-fault managed power mode, and to cause the power receiver to enter a selected power mode [Figures 1-15, P(61, 63) teaches a power transmitter, power receiver, control circuit, voltage detection, fault detection and selecting a power mode (low power or high power)].
18. Regarding claim 21, Georgen teaches A power transmitter [Figures 1-15, a power transmitter is taught] comprising: a voltage sense circuit configured to sense an input voltage of input power to the power transmitter; and a controller coupled to the voltage sense circuit, wherein the controller is configured to, depending at least on a type of the input voltage and an operational state of the power transmitter, select one of a plurality of power modes to transmit power to a power receiver, the plurality of power modes including fault managed power modes at different voltages, at least one non-fault managed power mode and an alternating current (AC) power mode, depending at least on a type of the input voltage and an operational state of the power transmitter [Figures 1-15, P(61, 63) teaches a power transmitter, power receiver, control circuit, voltage detection, fault detection and selecting a power mode (low power or high power)].
Note: no prior art rejection is made for dependent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEEL D SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3766. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-2258. 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.
/NEEL D SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights