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 .
______________________________
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on January 18, 2025 has been considered by the examiner.
______________________________
REFERENCES USED
Reference 1 - Heieis et al., US 2021/0008989 A1.
Reference 2 - Peter, US 2021/0221245 A1.
Reference 3 - Gaul et al., US 2012/0139489 A1.
Reference 4 - Reid et al., US 2016/0033565 A1.
______________________________
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.
______________________________
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim 17
A system comprising:
a collector device configured to be coupled with a powered system, the collector device including separate conductive contacts configured to engage with corresponding contacts of a delivery device coupled with a power source that is outside the powered system; and
a controller configured to switch one or more of the contacts of the collector device from providing one or more of a communication pathway with the power source or a grounding connection in a first mode of operation to conducting additional electric potential between the power source and the powered system in a second mode of operation to increase a power transfer between the power source and the powered system.
Analysis
Reference 1 teaches a collector device configured to be coupled with a powered system. In particular, Reference 1 teaches vehicle-side contact device 58 on the vehicle side and off-board charging contact device 59 on the charging-station side. Vehicle-side contact device 58 includes separate conductive contact surfaces 68, 69, 70, and 71, and charging contact device 59 includes corresponding charging contact surfaces 60, 61, 62, and 63. These contacts engage one another when the vehicle is in the charging position.
Reference 1 further teaches that the separate contacts have different electrical functions. Charging contact surfaces 60 and 61, together with vehicle-side contact surfaces 68 and 69, provide power-transfer contacts for charging current. Charging contact surface 63 and vehicle-side contact surface 70 provide a signal contact. Charging contact surface 62 and vehicle-side contact surface 71 provide a protective-ground contact. Thus, Reference 1 teaches a collector device having separate conductive contacts configured to engage corresponding contacts of a delivery device coupled with a power source outside the powered system, including contacts used for power, communication, and grounding functions.
Reference 2 teaches a controller-driven interlock and switching arrangement for a rail-vehicle charging interface. In the first electrical interlock system 600, Reference 2 teaches rail-side power switches 606 and 614, oscillator 612, rail-side detection circuit 618, LF sensor 620, HF sensor 622, and rail-side controller 621. Reference 2 further teaches vehicle-side shoes 404, vehicle-side detection circuit 626, LF/HF sensor 628, vehicle-side power switches 630 and 632, and vehicle-side controller 634.
Reference 2 teaches that the rail-side power switches 606 and 614 initially hold the fourth rail sections 4 at earth potential E while oscillator 612 and the associated detection circuitry provide a pilot or interlock condition. Once contact and the required interlock condition are detected, rail-side controller 621 switches rail-side power switches 606 and 614 to connect power source 200 to the fourth rail sections 4 and changes oscillator 612 from the low-frequency pilot condition to the high-frequency pilot condition. Vehicle-side controller 634 then switches vehicle-side power switches 630 and 632 so that shoes 404 connect to the vehicle energy storage 22. Thus, Reference 2 teaches a controller and switching arrangement in which a contact or rail section is initially associated with a grounded, non-live, safety/interlock state and is thereafter switched into an energized power-conducting state.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 1 with Reference 2 so that the multi-contact charging interface of Reference 1 uses the controller-driven switching approach of Reference 2 to change the function of one or more auxiliary contacts after the initial safety, grounding, or communication state is satisfied. Reference 1 provides the multi-contact vehicle/off-board charging hardware with separate power, signal, and protective-ground contacts. Reference 2 provides a specific controller, switch, interlock, and rail-contact arrangement for keeping a contact or rail section at earth potential during a safe first state and then switching that contact or rail section into a charging-power state after the interlock is cleared. Combining these teachings would have predictably increased power-transfer capability while preserving the initial communication or grounding safety function before higher-power transfer begins.
Accordingly, References 1 and 2 render obvious claim 17.
______________________________
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and further in view of Reference 3.
Claim 18
The system of claim 17, wherein, prior to switching from the first mode of operation to the second mode of operation, the controller is configured to identify the powered system via conduction of a designated electric potential between the power source and the powered system through at least one of the contacts.
Analysis
Claim 18 depends from claim 17. The limitations of claim 17 are taught or rendered obvious by References 1 and 2 as set forth above.
Reference 3 teaches communication between a vehicle and a charging station through a pilot-contact arrangement before charging power is approved. Reference 3 teaches charging station control device 4, vehicle control device 24, interface 22, pilot signal line 20, pilot signal earth line 18, oscillator voltage source 6, and voltage measurement device 10. Reference 3 further teaches that the vehicle control device 24 provides an identification message 68 to the charging station before full charging supply is approved.
Reference 3 therefore teaches identifying the powered system by conducting a designated electrical pilot potential and associated identification signaling through at least one contact path between the power source side and the vehicle side before the charging state is enabled. Applied to the system of References 1 and 2, this teaches or suggests configuring the controller to identify the powered system via conduction of a designated electric potential through at least one contact prior to switching from the first mode to the second mode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to add the designated-potential identification approach of Reference 3 to the system of References 1 and 2 because the charging source benefits from identifying the connected powered system before switching to the higher-power operating mode. The combination would have predictably allowed the source-side controller to confirm the vehicle identity and select appropriate authorization and charging conditions before increasing power transfer through the switched contact arrangement.
Accordingly, References 1, 2, and 3 render obvious claim 18.
______________________________
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and further in view of Reference 4.
Claim 19
The system of claim 17, wherein the controller is configured to repeatedly measure one or more of the additional electric potential, a current, or an impedance at an interface between the collector device and the delivery device subsequent to switching from the first mode of operation to the second mode of operation.
Analysis
Claim 19 depends from claim 17. The limitations of claim 17 are taught or rendered obvious by References 1 and 2 as set forth above.
Reference 2 teaches continuing supervision of the charging interface after the system switches into the charging state. Reference 2 teaches that the pilot or interlock condition is monitored during charging and that charging continues only so long as the required condition remains satisfied. Reference 2 uses rail-side detection circuit 618, LF sensor 620, HF sensor 622, rail-side controller 621, vehicle-side detection circuit 626, LF/HF sensor 628, vehicle-side controller 634, and power switches 606, 614, 630, and 632 to monitor and control the charging condition.
Reference 4 teaches monitoring electrical conditions at an electric-vehicle charging interface. Reference 4 teaches ground monitor circuit 42, EVSE control pilot circuit 44, EV control pilot circuit 56, trip mechanism 46, grounded conductors 26, 34, and 50, and control pilot conductor 54. Reference 4 teaches monitoring grounding continuity and impedance and interrupting or controlling power transfer when the monitored condition indicates a fault.
The combined teachings of References 1, 2, and 4 render obvious configuring the controller to repeatedly measure electrical conditions, including potential, current, or impedance-related conditions, at the interface between the collector device and the delivery device after the system has switched into the second operating mode. Repeated measurement is consistent with Reference 2's continuing interlock supervision and Reference 4's interface-monitoring and fault-detection circuitry.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to include the repeated interface measurement of Reference 4 in the switched charging system of References 1 and 2 because the second mode carries increased power and therefore benefits from ongoing confirmation that the interface remains properly connected and safe. The combination would have predictably allowed the controller to detect an unsafe potential, current, or impedance condition after switching and to maintain, limit, or interrupt charging based on that condition.
Accordingly, References 1, 2, and 4 render obvious claim 19.
______________________________
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and further in view of Reference 4.
Claim 20
The system of claim 19, wherein the controller is configured to communicate the one or more of the additional electric potential, the current, or the impedance to the power source.
Analysis
Claim 20 depends from claim 19. The limitations of claims 17 and 19 are taught or rendered obvious by References 1, 2, and 4 as set forth above.
Reference 2 teaches source-side and vehicle-side coordination through the interlock and controller arrangement. Rail-side controller 621, oscillator 612, rail-side detection circuit 618, vehicle-side detection circuit 626, vehicle-side controller 634, and power switches 606, 614, 630, and 632 cooperate so that the system transitions into and remains in the charging condition only while the required interlock condition is satisfied. This teaches communication and control coordination with the source side during charging.
Reference 4 further teaches source-side control through EVSE control pilot circuit 44, EV control pilot circuit 56, ground monitor circuit 42, and trip mechanism 46. Reference 4 therefore teaches communicating monitored interface or grounding conditions to the power-source side so that the source-side equipment can continue, limit, or interrupt charging based on those measured conditions.
In the combined system, once the controller repeatedly measures one or more of additional electric potential, current, or impedance at the collector-device/delivery-device interface as set forth in claim 19, it would have been obvious to communicate those measured values, or values representative of those measured values, to the power source so that source-side charging equipment can control the power transfer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to communicate the measured potential, current, or impedance information to the power source because the power source is responsible for providing the charging power and benefits from receiving updated interface-condition information before continuing high-power transfer. The combination would have predictably improved charging safety and control by allowing source-side equipment to respond to the measured interface condition.
Accordingly, References 1, 2, and 4 render obvious claim 20.
______________________________
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 are allowed.
The prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest the specific contact-mode arrangement now recited in independent claims 1 and 9. As amended, claims 1 and 9 require contacts that, in the first mode, separately conduct a first positive potential, a first negative potential, a communication signal, and a ground reference, and that, in the second mode, separately conduct the first positive potential, a second positive potential, the first negative potential, and a second negative potential.
Heieis teaches a vehicle-side contact device 58 and off-board charging contact device 59 with contacts allocated to power, signal, and protective-ground functions. Peter teaches a controller-driven transition from a safe interlock or verification state to a charging state. However, the present record does not establish that Heieis in view of Peter teaches or suggests the particular four-contact conversion required by claims 1 and 9, namely the conversion of the first-mode communication and ground-reference contacts into second-mode positive and negative power-transfer contacts.
Claims 2-8 and 10-16 are allowable at least by virtue of their dependency from allowable independent claims 1 and 9.
______________________________
Withdrawn Rejections
The prior rejections of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn in view of applicant's amendments.
The prior rejections of claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn in view of applicant's amendments and remarks.
______________________________
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks have been fully considered.
Applicant argues that Heieis and Peter fail to teach or suggest the amended limitations of independent claims 1 and 9. In particular, applicant argues that Heieis assigns fixed roles to charging contact surfaces 60, 61, 62, and 63, with charging contact surfaces 60 and 61 transmitting charging current, charging contact surface 63 providing a signal contact, and charging contact surface 62 providing a protective-ground contact. Applicant further argues that Heieis does not describe reconfiguring the signal contact or protective-ground contact to carry additional positive or negative potential in a second mode.
Applicant's arguments are persuasive with respect to the prior rejection of claims 1 and 9. As amended, claims 1 and 9 require a particular four-contact relationship. The claims require contacts that, in the first mode, separately conduct a first positive potential, a first negative potential, a communication signal, and a ground reference, and that, in the second mode, separately conduct the first positive potential, a second positive potential, the first negative potential, and a second negative potential. The present record does not sufficiently establish that Heieis in view of Peter teaches or suggests that specific conversion of the first-mode communication and ground-reference contact functions into second-mode positive and negative power-transfer contact functions. Accordingly, the prior rejection of claims 1-16 is withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments are not persuasive with respect to claim 17 because claim 17 is not commensurate in scope with claims 1 and 9. Claim 17 does not require the specific first positive, second positive, first negative, and second negative four-contact arrangement recited in claims 1 and 9. Claim 17 also does not require that a communication contact and a grounding contact both be converted into separate positive and negative power-transfer contacts. Rather, claim 17 recites switching one or more contacts from providing one or more of a communication pathway with the power source or a grounding connection in a first mode of operation to conducting additional electric potential in a second mode of operation to increase power transfer.
The difference in claim scope is material. Claims 1 and 9 require a specific second-mode distribution of first positive potential, second positive potential, first negative potential, and second negative potential. Claim 17 instead recites the broader concept of switching one or more contacts from a first-mode communication-pathway or grounding-connection function to a second-mode additional-electric-potential function. Thus, a teaching that is insufficient for the more specific four-contact positive/negative arrangement of claims 1 and 9 can still render obvious the broader switching limitation of claim 17.
Applicant also argues that Peter's signal rail sections continue to conduct interlock or handshake signals during charging and therefore do not become power contacts. That argument has been considered, but it does not overcome the rejection of claim 17. The maintained rejection of claim 17 does not depend on Peter's signal rail sections alone becoming the claimed additional power conductor. Peter also teaches rail-side power switches 606 and 614 initially holding the fourth rail sections 4 at earth potential E during the first interlock or safety state. Peter then teaches rail-side controller 621 switching rail-side power switches 606 and 614 so that power source 200 is connected to the fourth rail sections 4 after the required contact/interlock condition is detected. Peter further teaches vehicle-side controller 634 switching vehicle-side power switches 630 and 632 so that vehicle-side shoes 404 connect to energy storage 22. These teachings provide more than a mere continuing signal handshake; they provide a controller-driven transition of a contact/rail path from an initial grounded or non-live safety condition to a later energized charging condition.
The fact that Peter may continue to use separate signal paths for interlock monitoring during charging does not defeat the rejection. Claim 17 does not require that all communication activity stop when the second mode begins. Claim 17 also does not require that every first-mode contact be converted into a power conductor. The claim requires that one or more contacts switch from providing one or more of a communication pathway or a grounding connection in a first mode to conducting additional electric potential in a second mode. Peter's switching of a rail/contact path from earth potential E to connection with power source 200 teaches the type of controller-driven functional change recited in claim 17. When that teaching is applied to the multi-contact collector/delivery-device interface of Heieis, the combined system teaches or suggests using one or more auxiliary contacts initially associated with grounding, safety, or communication functions and then using the switched contact path to conduct additional electric potential in the charging mode.
Applicant's argument that Heieis alone does not disclose reassigning the signal and protective-ground contacts also does not overcome the maintained rejection of claim 17. The rejection is based on the combined teachings of Heieis and Peter, not on Heieis alone. Heieis supplies the relevant collector-device/delivery-device contact hardware with separate power, signal, and protective-ground contacts. Peter supplies the controller-driven switching architecture that changes a contact/rail path from a non-live or grounded first state to an energized charging state after the interlock is satisfied. The combination is therefore relied upon for the claim 17 switching limitation.
Applicant further argues that the additional references applied to dependent claims do not remedy the alleged deficiencies of Heieis and Peter. That argument is not persuasive for claims 18-20 because claims 18-20 depend from claim 17, and claim 17 is properly rejected for the reasons stated above. References 3 and 4 are applied only for the additional identification, measurement, and communication limitations of claims 18-20, and those references are relied upon for those additional limitations in combination with the maintained rejection of claim 17.
______________________________
Claim Disposition
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 9, 11-13, and 17-20 have been amended.
Rejected Claims
Under 35 U.S.C. 103: Claims 17-20.
Allowed Claims
Claims 1-16 are allowed.
Objected To Claims
None.
______________________________
Finality of Action
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
______________________________
Conclusion
The additional references previously cited for narrower ground-testing, resistor-based testing, and wireless-tag identification features are not relied upon in this action because claims 1-16 are allowed and those references do not address the remaining claim 17 issue concerning switching one or more auxiliary contacts from a communication or grounding function to an additional power-transfer function.
Other references considered in the record are not applied because they are cumulative of the maintained teachings or are less pertinent to the remaining limitation of claims 17-20. The present action relies on the references best suited to the remaining rejected claim scope.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights