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 § 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.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yeda et al. (US 2022/0063436), hereinafter Yeda.
As to claim 1, Yeda discloses in figures 1-4, a method comprising: in response to detecting that a first device [charger device #1; see figure 1] is plugged in to a power adapter [power supply (200); see ¶0023], determining whether the first device is a preferred device [see ¶0043-0044]; if the first device is the preferred device, then allocating power to the first device up to a first value [¶0043-0044]; and in response to detecting that a second device [charger device #2] is plugged in to the power adapter, then re- allocating power to the first device up to a second value and up to a third value to the second device [see ¶0028-0029; ¶0043-0044; ¶0054].
As to claim 16, Yeda discloses in figures 1-2, an integrated circuit of a power adapter to store instructions that are executable to perform operations comprising [see figure 2, ¶0023],: determining whether a first device plugged in to a power adapter is a preferred device [see ¶0043-0044]; if the first device is the preferred device, then allocating power to the first device up to a first value; and in response to detecting a second device plugged in, then re-allocating power to the first device up to a second value and a third value to the second device, wherein a total of the second value and the third value is equal to the first value [see ¶0028-0029, ¶0043-0044, ¶0054; first device #1 and second device #2 are checked and charged with appropriate power allocation and the total power delivered to the devices are equal to the power rated such as 15W].
As to claims 5 and 19, Yada discloses in figures 1-6, in response to detecting that the first device is consuming less power than allocated, then increasing the power allocated to the second device [see ¶0043-0045; sharing power is adjusted based on attached device].
As to claim 8, Yeda discloses in figures 1-2, wherein the re-allocating power to the first device up to the second value is performed by switching on a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor that is associated with a buck converter of the power adapter [noted that the buck converter connected to the switching device 210A and controls the switching device to charge the attached device; see also ¶0023 and figure 2].
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 (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 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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeda in view of Tan (US 2006/0049816).
As to claim 2, Yeda discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein a manufacturer of the preferred device is the manufacturer of the power adapter.
Tan discloses in figure 1, wherein a manufacturer of the preferred device is the manufacturer of the power adapter [Tan suggests that the manufacturer provides power supply adapter or system and for its own device; see ¶003].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to use same charger and electronic devices in Yeda’s charging system in order to avoid overcharging of the electronic device and suitable to power an electronic device.
Claims 3-4 and 17 -18are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeda in view of Stephens et al. (US 5,602,455), hereinafter Stephens.
As to claims 3 and 17, Yeda discloses all of the claim limitations except, providing power to the first device and the second device until a temperature of the power adapter reaches a temperature threshold value.
Stephens discloses in figure 9, providing power to the first device and the second device until a temperature of the power adapter reaches a temperature threshold value [see Col. 6, lines 56-67].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to control charging and discharging apparatus of Yeda based on ambient temperature of the charger as taught by Stephens in order to safely and reliably operate the battery charger.
As to claims 4 and 18, Yada discloses in figures 1-6, if the temperature of the power adapter reaches the temperature threshold value, then re-negotiating power allocation to the first device[ the ambient temperature is used to adjust charging power; see ¶0025 and ¶0029].
Claims 6 -7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeda in view of Yang et al. (US 2015/0069958). Hereinafter Yang.
As to claim 6, Yeda discloses in figures and a buck converter [buck converter (208A)] , wherein the buck converter is connected in series to a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor [element (210A) is semiconductor switch; see ¶0023 ] all of the claim limitations except, wherein the power adapter includes a flyback converter and a buck converter, wherein the buck converter is connected in series to a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor.
Yang discloses in figure 2, wherein the power adapter includes a flyback converter [flyback converter (210)].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use flyback adapter in Yeda’s apparatus as taught by Yang in order to efficiency power conversation with small power loss.
As to claims 7 and 20, Yeda in combination with Yang discloses, wherein the allocating power to the first device up to the first value is performed by switching on a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor that is associated with a flyback converter of the power adapter[ noted that the combination teaches flyback converters and buck converters are electrically connected with semiconductor switch devices and control charging current flows].
Claims 9, 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Yeda.
As to claim 9, Yeda discloses in figures 1-4, a power adapter comprising [see figure 1, element 200]:
a buck converter [see figure 2, buck/boos converters (208A and 208B); see also ¶0023]; and an integrated circuit [element (206); see ¶0023] storing instructions that when executed cause the power adapter to perform operations including:
in response to detecting that a first device is plugged in to the power adapter, determining whether the first device is a preferred device; if the first device is the preferred device, then allocating power to the first device up to a first value [charging an electronic device attached to the first port with predetermined power; see ¶0043-0044]; and in response to detecting that a second device is plugged in, then re-allocating power to the first device up to a second value and up to a third value to the second device, wherein a total of the second value and the third value is up to the first value [changing the delivery of power to the first device when the second device is attached and also allocate charging power ; see ¶0043-0044].
Yeda does not disclose a flyback converter.
Yang discloses in figures 1-2, a flyback converter [ see power Adapter (210) is flyback converter and also buck/boost convert (218) is disclosed; see ¶0029] .
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use flyback adapter in Yeda’s apparatus as taught by Yang in order to efficiency power conversation with small power loss
As to claim 12, Yeda discloses in figure 2, wherein the operations further comprise in response to detecting that the first device is consuming less power than allocated, then increasing power allocated to the second device [see ¶0043-0045; sharing power is adjusted based on attached device].
As to claim 13, Yang discloses in figure 2, wherein the buck converter [see figure 2, element 218] is connected in series to a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor [connected in series with switch (228) ; see ¶0029].
As to claim 14, Yeda in combination with Yang discloses in figure 2, wherein the allocating power to the first device up to the first value is performed by switching on a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor that is associated with the flyback converter of the power adapter [noted that the combination teaches flyback converters and buck converters are electrically connected with semiconductor switch devices and control charging current flows ].
As to claim 15, Yeda discloses in figure 2, wherein the re-allocating power to the first device up to the second value is performed by switching on a metal oxide silicon field effect transistor that is associated with the buck converter of the power adapter [switching device (210A) in series connected with the buck converter; see ¶0023].
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeda in view of Yang, and in view of Stephens..
As to claim 10 Yeda discloses all of the claim limitations except, providing power to the first device and the second device until a temperature of the power adapter reaches a temperature threshold value.
Stephens discloses in figure 9, providing power to the first device and the second device until a temperature of the power adapter reaches a temperature threshold value [see Col. 6, lines 56-67].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to control charging and discharging apparatus of Yeda based on ambient temperature of the charger as taught by Stephens in order to safely and reliably operate the battery charger.
As to claim 11, Yeda discloses in figure 2, wherein the operations further comprise, if the temperature of the power adapter reaches the temperature threshold value, then re-negotiating power allocation to the first device [the ambient temperature is used to adjust charging power; see ¶0025 and ¶0029].
.Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights