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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinya (JP 2016-171613 A, cited on IDS) in view of Chai (CN 107933334 B).
Regarding claim 1, Shinya teaches an electric vehicle charging system (see Fig. 1) configured to perform charging by sending and receiving a power line communication (PLC) signal including a control pilot (CP) signal (see paras. 0003, 0015, 0018, 0022) between an electric vehicle (40) provided with a storage battery (402) and a charging station (10) configured to charge the storage battery (402) via a charging station connector (20), the CP signal being a charging control signal, the electric vehicle (40) charging system comprising: wherein the charging station includes an electronic control unit (control unit 101 & PLC communication unit 103) configured to send and receive the PLC signal via a communication line (see para. 0018); the electric vehicle comprises a charger (see charging circuitry of vehicle 40 shown in Fig. 1) configured to charge the storage battery (402) by sending and receiving the PLC signal via the communication line (see PLC communication unit 403, see paras. 0018-0022), a switch (switch SW1) provided on the communication line (switch SW1 is connected to the communication line via resistor 407), and a charging controller (control unit 401) configured to control the switch; and the charging controller is configured to, allow a peak voltage of the CP signal to transition from a second voltage (9V, see Fig. 2) corresponding to a connected state of the charging station connector to a first voltage (12V, see Fig. 2) corresponding to a disconnected state of the charging station connector by controlling the switch (SW1) to disconnect the communication line (when switch SW1 is off, while switch SW2 is also off, the communication line is effectively disconnected), and then allow the peak voltage of the CP signal to transition from the first voltage (12V) to the second voltage (9V) for CP reset processing by controlling the switch to connect the communication line (switch SW1 is turned on), thereby resuming charging the storage battery of the electric vehicle from the charging station (see paras. 0024-0025 and 0032-0048).
While Shinya states that the control unit 401 can transmit information notifying a user of the mobile terminal when the reset process of Figs. 2 and 3 is executed (see para. 0031), Shinya does not specifically teach: an instruction device with which a user is to instruct the electric vehicle to resume charging; and the charging controller is configured to upon receipt of an instruction to resume charging sent from the instruction device through operation by the user.
Chai teaches an electric vehicle charging system including an instruction device (a terminal, which may be a mobile phone, tablet computer or other device) with which a user is to instruct the electric vehicle (the vehicle is shown on the right side of Fig. 2) to resume charging; and the charging controller (the vehicle includes a charging system & controller, see the first two full paragraphs on page 6 of the attached translation) is configured to upon receipt of an instruction to resume charging sent from the instruction device through operation by the user (see the last three paragraphs on page 7 through the first four paragraphs on page 8, of the attached translation).
In view of the teachings of Chai, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to include with the system of Shinya, an instruction device with which a user is to instruct the electric vehicle to resume charging; and the charging controller is configured to upon receipt of an instruction to resume charging sent from the instruction device through operation by the user, in order to provide the user with prompt information regarding the state of vehicle charging and provide the user control over the charging process through their terminal (see the abstract, the first paragraph on page 5, the paragraph bridging pages 6-7, and the third full paragraph on page 7, of the attached translation).
Regarding claim 2, Shinya as modified by Chai teaches the electric vehicle charging system according to Claim 1, wherein: the charging controller is configured to, when a charging error has occurred, send a first notification to the instruction device that the charging error has occurred (the combination of Chai with Shinya will result in the controller sending a first notification to the terminal that a charging error has occurred, see the last full paragraph on page 6, of Shinya), and the instruction device is configured to, upon the receipt of the notification from the charging controller, notify the user that the charging error has occurred (for example, a prompt message “abnormal charging ending”, see the paragraph bridging pages 6-7, of Shinya).
Regarding claim 3, Shinya as modified by Chai teaches the electric vehicle charging system according to Claim 1, as discussed above.
Shinya as modified by Chai does not specifically teach wherein: the charging controller is configured to, when charging has ended, send a second notification to the instruction device that charging has ended, and the instruction device is configured to, upon receipt of the second notification from the charging controller, notify the user that charging has ended.
However, Chai teaches that when the terminal is a mobile phone, the mobile phone is provided with an application program corresponding to vehicle charging management (see the paragraph bridging pages 6-7, of Shinya). Furthermore, it was old and well known to those of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date, for a charging controller to send a notification to a remote user terminal that charging has ended.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to include with the system as taught by Shinya as modified by Chai, wherein: the charging controller is configured to, when charging has ended, send a second notification to the instruction device that charging has ended, and the instruction device is configured to, upon receipt of the second notification from the charging controller, notify the user that charging has ended, since this would provide the user with an update to the state of vehicle charging.
Regarding claim 5, Shinya as modified by Chai teaches the electric vehicle charging system according to Claim 1, wherein: the charging controller is configured to, when, upon the receipt of the instruction to resume charging sent from the instruction device through operation by the user, no handshake error has occurred in a communication protocol between the charging station and the electric vehicle during immediately preceding charging of the storage battery, perform the CP reset processing to resume charging the storage battery of the electric vehicle from the charging station, without changing the communication protocol (the limitations of claim 5 represent normal operation of the system of Shinya as modified by Chai, during resumption of charging after notification of the charging error and the instruction by the user to resume charging, there is no requirement that a handshake error occurs/is detected or that a protocol is changed).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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:
Regarding claim 4, Shinya as modified by Chai teaches the electric vehicle charging system according to Claim 1, as discussed above.
The prior art of record does not specifically teach wherein: the charging controller is configured to, when, upon the receipt of the instruction to resume charging sent from the instruction device through operation by the user, charging ends due to a handshake error in a communication protocol between the charging station and the electric vehicle during immediately preceding charging of the storage battery, change the communication protocol, and then perform the CP reset processing to resume charging the storage battery of the electric vehicle from the charging station.
Yamakawa (US 2021/0058495 A1, cited on IDS) teaches a vehicle communication system, wherein the vehicle includes multiple ECUs 10 using a CAN protocol. The system can switch between the CAN protocol and CAN-FD protocol, when a predetermined error count is reached (see paras. 0058-0062). It is noted that Yamakawa teaches that the ECUs are communicating with each other within the vehicle. Yamakawa does not appear to teach changing communication protocols used between the vehicle and an electric vehicle charging station.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Earl et al (US 2023/0147695 A1) teaches an electric vehicle charging station including that is operable to communicate with a vehicle using first, second and third protocols, in order to communicate different information to/from the vehicle (see the abstract).
Chen et al (US 11,254,231 B2) teaches a system and method for detecting a control pilot (CP) signal abnormality of a vehicle charging station (see the abstract).
Fong et al (US 10,906,414 B2) is a U.S. Patent equivalent of US 2020/0189407 A1, cited on the IDS.
Zhan et al (CN 209409847 U) teaches an electric vehicle charging protocol control circuit (see the abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jared Fureman whose telephone number is (571)272-2391. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/JARED FUREMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights