DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 2013 March 16, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Airflow S.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: A title that states the inventive concept of this particular Wireless Charging Module, which distinguishes it from other wireless charging modules.
Claim Objections
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim(s) 11, 14 is/are objected to under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form:
Claim 11 recites the limitation " the winding" in the wireless charging module (100) according to Claim 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation " the at least one first electronic component (141) and at least one second electronic component (142)" in the wireless charging module (100) according to claim 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “closely bonded” in claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “closely bonded” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The terms “within a specific range” and “within a certain range” in claim 8 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “within a specific range” and “within a certain range” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degrees, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 4 – 5, 9, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), and further in view of LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1).
In re claim 1, ZOU discloses a wireless charging module (wireless charging device 1), comprising:
a module case (casing 3) defining a first cavity (first accommodation space 361) and a second cavity (second accommodation space 362), and having a first side (top side of casing 3) and a second side (bottom side of casing 3) opposite to the first side, wherein the second side defines an air outlet (outlet 62);
a fan disposed at the first side of the module case configured to form an airflow (FIG. 3, 5: fan 6 disposed at the lower surface of bottom plate 32; inlet 61 draws air from the internal accommodation spaces);
a coil assembly disposed in the first cavity (FIG. 4, 5: transmitter coil assembly 5 disposed in first accommodation space 361) and configured to generate electromagnetic induction (¶[0026]: transmitter coil assembly 5 electromagnetically coupled with receiver coil of mobile device 2) and define a first air channel for the airflow to pass through a first surface of the coil assembly (third gap 51; ¶[0026]: airflow passes through this gap over the first surface of the coil assembly);
a circuit board disposed in the second cavity (FIG. 4, 5: transmitter driving board 4 accommodated in second accommodation space 362) and configured to define a second air channel allowing the airflow to pass through a first surface of the circuit board and a third air channel allowing the airflow to pass through a second surface of the circuit board.
ZOU does not expressly teach a wireless charging module configured to define a second air channel allowing the airflow to pass through a first surface of the circuit board (140) and a third air channel allowing the airflow to pass through a second surface of the circuit board, wherein the airflow passes through the first air channel, the second air channel and the third air channel, and flows out of the wireless charging module from the air outlet.
LI discloses a wireless charging module configured to define a second air channel (first airflow channel 2131) allowing the airflow to pass through a first surface of the circuit board (¶[0026]: airflow passes over the upper surface of main circuit board 22) and a third air channel (second airflow channel 2132) allowing the airflow to pass through a second surface of the circuit board (¶[0026]: airflow passes over the lower surface of main circuit board 22),
wherein the airflow passes through the first air channel, the second air channel and the third air channel, and flows out of the wireless charging module from the air outlet (¶[0026]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) to adopt LI’s dual-channel board cooling geometry into ZOU’s wireless charging device, wherein the airflow passes through the first air channel, the second air channel, and the third air channel, and flows out of the wireless charging module from the air outlet, to optimize heat dissipation.
In re claim 2, ZOU discloses a first air channel (third gap 51).
ZOU is silent to wherein the second air channel is disposed between the first air channel and the third air channel.
LI discloses a second air channel (first airflow channel 2131) and a third air channel (second airflow channel 2132).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to adopt LI’s dual-channel board cooling geometry into ZOU’s wireless charging device, wherein the second air channel is disposed between the first air channel and the third air channel, to optimize heat dissipation.
In re claims 4 – 5, ZOU discloses wherein
the module case comprises an upper cover (top plate 31), a case body (FIG. 1, 4: casing 3, including lateral walls 33 and supporting wall 35) and a lower cover (bottom plate 32),
the case body has a middle partition plate (partition plate 34),
the first air channel is formed between the middle partition plate and the upper cover (FIG. 5: third gap 51 formed between partition plate 34 and top plate 31), and
the distance between the middle partition plate and the circuit board is smaller than distance between the circuit board (140) and the lower cover (¶[0025]: “… the distance formed between the transmitter driving board 4 and the bottom plate 32 is less than the distance formed between the transmitter driving board 4 and the partition plate 34.”).
ZOU is silent to the second air channel is formed between the middle partition plate and the circuit board, and the third air channel is formed between the circuit board and the lower cover.
LI discloses the second air channel is formed between the middle partition plate and the circuit board (Fig. 3(a); ¶[0026]: first airflow channel 2131 between the upper inner wall of casing 21 and the upper surface of main circuit board 22), and
the third air channel is formed between the circuit board and the lower cover (Fig. 3(a); ¶[0026]: second airflow channel 2132 between the lower inner wall of casing 21 and the lower surface of main circuit board 22).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to adopt LI’s dual-channel board cooling geometry into ZOU’s wireless charging device to optimize heat dissipation.
In re claim 9, ZOU discloses wherein
the upper cover is an EMI board (¶[0019]: “… top plate 31 is a plastic plate or a printed circuit board (PCB)”),
the lower cover is a metal plate (¶[0019]: “… bottom plate 32 is made of a metallic material…”),
the module case further comprises a third side (first lateral wall 331) and a fourth side (third lateral wall 333),
the third side is opposite to the fourth side (¶[0021]: “The first lateral wall 331 and the third lateral wall 333 are opposite to each other.”), and both the third side and the fourth side extend between the first side and the second side (¶[0021]).
In re claim 13, ZOU discloses wherein
the material of the module case is made of a metal or a plastic material (¶[0019]: casing 3 includes top plate 31 (plastic or PCB) and bottom plate 32 (metallic material)).
Official notice is hereby taken that stamping, die-casting, injection molding, and machining are well-known manufacturing methods for metallic and plastic electronic enclosures; applying any of these conventional processes to ZOU's module case is an obvious design choice.
Claim(s) 3, 6, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1), and further in view of YANG (US 2021/0218256 A1).
In re claim 3, ZOU is silent to wherein the circuit board comprises at least one first electronic component and at least one second electronic component, the amount of heat generated by the at least one first electronic component is greater than the amount of heat generated by the at least one second electronic component, and the position of the at least one first electronic component on the circuit board is closer to the center of the circuit board than the position of the at least one second electronic component.
YANG discloses wherein
the circuit board (circuit board 300) comprises at least one first electronic component (141) and at least one second electronic component (¶[0057]: plurality of electronic components 310, including a control chip, resistors, capacitors),
the amount of heat generated by the at least one first electronic component is greater than the amount of heat generated by the at least one second electronic component (control chip generates more heat than passive components such as resistors and capacitors; in the context of electronics and PCB design, it is well-known that active components generally generate more heat than passive components, and this is a recognized design consideration.).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to configure ZOU’s circuit board, as taught by YANG, and position the at least one first electronic component on the circuit board closer to the center of the circuit board than the position of the at least one second electronic component, to improve heat dissipation, as arranging higher-heat components toward the board center is a well-known design method.
In re claims 6, 12, ZOU is silent to a ferrite element disposed below the coil assembly, wherein the coil assembly and the ferrite element are closely bonded to the middle partition plate of the module case, the material of the ferrite element comprises at least one magnetic material selected from a group consisting of manganese zinc ferrite, nickel zinc ferrite, ferrite and nanocrystalline, and the ferrite element is formed by sintering or ceramic injection molding (CIM).
YANG discloses a ferrite element (magnetic isolation member 700) disposed below the coil assembly (¶[0055]: “The coil module 200 may be disposed and further stacked on the magnetic isolation member 700”), wherein the coil assembly and the ferrite element are closely bonded to the middle partition plate of the module case (¶[0056]: bracket 800 connects the magnetic isolation member 700 and coil module 200 to the lower shell 120),
the material of the ferrite element comprises at least one magnetic material of ferrite (¶[0055]: magnetic isolation member 700 made of ferrite wave absorbing material).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to add YANG's magnetic isolation member to ZOU's wireless charging module for the benefits of ferrite shielding in wireless charging efficiency and component protection. Sintering and CIM are the two standard fabrication methods for ferrite components in the art.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1), and further in view of ELKHOULY et al. (US 2017/0069421 A1).
In re claim 7, ZOU is silent to wherein the coil assembly comprises: a first coil, a second coil and a third coil, a left side of the first coil covers a right side of the second coil, and a left side of the second coil covers a right side of the third coil.
ELKHOULY discloses wherein
the coil assembly comprises: a first coil, a second coil and a third coil (FIG. 13; ¶[0028]: 1×4 tiled-coil array),
a left side of the first coil covers a right side of the second coil (FIG. 12: first coil 1210 partially overlaps second coil 1220), and a left side of the second coil covers a right side of the third coil (FIG. 13: overlap relationship repeats between adjacent coils).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to incorporate ELKHOULY’s overlapping tiled transmitter coils layout into ZOU’s wireless charging module to extend the active charging area without enlarging the coil footprint or degrading field uniformity.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1), and further in view of LIN et al. (US 2024/0329704 Al).
In re claim 8, ZOU is silent to wherein blades of the fan are made of polymer or metal, and rotating speed of the fan is adjusted by pulse-width modulation (PWM) within a specific range, so as to control noise generated by the wireless charging module within a certain range.
LIN discloses wherein
blades of the fan are made of polymer or metal (¶[0018]: blades 31 made of metal material), and
rotating speed of the fan is adjusted by pulse-width modulation within a specific range, so as to control noise generated by the wireless charging module within a certain range (¶[0018]).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to use metal blades and PWM for the fan, as taught by LIN, for ZOU’s wireless charging module, to maximize airflow and ensures efficient speed control.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1), ELKHOULY et al. (US 2017/0069421 A1), and further in view of LEEM (WO 2019/050157 A1).
In re claim 10, ZOU is silent to wherein the first coil, the second coil and the third coil are windings made of single or multiple enameled twisted wires.
LEEM discloses wherein the first coil, the second coil and the third coil are windings made of single or multiple enameled twisted wires (¶[250], [286]: coated lead wire wound as a coil).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to use wound tiled coils from enameled twisted wire, as taught by LEEM, in ZOU’s wireless charging module, as this is the standard conductor for wireless charging transmitter coils.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1), YANG (US 2021/0218256 A1), and further in view of MAN (CN 111261401 A).
In re claim 11, ZOU is silent to wherein the wire material of the winding comprises a self-adhesive wire with a self-adhesive layer.
MAN discloses wherein the wire material of the winding comprises a self-adhesive wire with a self-adhesive layer (¶[0007]: “… each group of self-adhesive wires being thermally bonded together in pairs;”).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to use self-adhesive wire windings for ZOU’s wireless charging coil in order to produce compact, flat wireless charging coils.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZOU et al. (US 2023/0074957 A1), LI et al. (US 2008/0266792 A1), and further in view of LEEM (WO 2019/050157 A1).
In re claim 14, ZOU is silent to wherein the at least one first electronic component and at least one second electronic component comprise at least one of NFC device, NTC thermistor, 5G antenna, FAKRA connector and EMI shielding patterns.
LEEM discloses wherein
the at least one first electronic component and at least one second electronic component comprise at least one of NFC device, and NTC thermistor, (NFC module 2116, NFC antenna 2114, temperature sensor 16).
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to add NFC and NTC temperature-sensing capability, as taught by LEEM, to ZOU's wireless charging module, to provide device identification and thermal protection.
Prior Art Disclaimer
The prior art applied in this Office Action includes foreign patent documents that were originally published in languages other than English. Machine-generated translations of these documents were utilized to assess their relevance and content.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHANN DJANAL-MANN whose telephone number is (571)272-4697. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 17:00.
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.
/D. JOHANN DJANAL-MANN/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights